I have an assessment centre for a Consultant role with a firm that works closely alongside engineering and product teams, focusing on operational diagnostics, data quality, and improving how complex product development processes run in practice. I have noticed so far in the process that questions are focused on product development, data, and operational diagnostics, rather than on strategy, with a delivery-focused approach. During the day, I have a group problem‑solving task and a technical assessment focused (from what I have gathered) on synthesising complex information (not high-level Excel skills or market sizing). The assessment centre is also hiring for Data Analyst roles, if that’s any more insight. I wondered if anyone had advice on which case frameworks, data interpretation approaches, or practice resources would best prepare me for this style of operational, implementation‑focused consulting? This will also be my very first assessment centre.
Thank you!
Back to overview
0
Global
What types of case frameworks, data interpretation approaches, or practice resources would best prepare me for operational, implementation‑focused consulting
1
< 100
Be the first to answer!
Nobody has responded to this question yet.
Drop strategy-first frameworks like Porter's Five Forces or market entry. This firm wants delivery-side thinking.
you could use
- Process flow decomposition - map the product development lifecycle step by step, find where delays, rework, or quality issues happen
- Root cause analysis (5 Whys / fishbone) - trace a symptom (e.g. bad data, missed deadlines) back to its real cause across people, process, tools, and data
- Input-process-output (IPO) - ask: what goes in, what happens to it, and what comes out? Useful for diagnosing any engineering or product workflow
- always MECE issue trees - structure problems around four buckets: speed, quality, cost, capability
The test is about reading messy information and telling a story from it, not calculating. Focus on:
- Spot what is wrong and why it matters - is the data incomplete? Inconsistent? Out of date? Then link it to a real business consequence
- Lead with the insight, not the observation - say "the handoff between teams is causing rework" before you say "I noticed the error rate rises at stage 3"
Contribution style matters as much as content:
- Suggest a shared structure before the group dives in
- Signal when you are building on someone or challenging an assumption
- If the group gets stuck, step in to summarise and reframe - that is process leadership, and assessors value it
