This case is designed to address the need for cases that:
1) Mimic higher-level interviews that are less structured (Project Lead, Engagement Manager, Principal, Director, specialist/expert hire track, etc.)
2) Relate to Tech/IT
This is a brainstorming or unstructured case based on a real company. This case could be seen across a range of consultancies, but particularly those focused in Tech (i.e. EY, IBM, Deloitte, BCG Platinion, McKinsey Digital).
Scoring Criteria: Use the following grading system for each skill area:
a. Structured Thinking (Frameworking):
1 = Lacked a coherent structure
5 = Pinpointed the appropriate issue, segmented it into a complete set of non-overlapping components (e.g., MECE), presented a plan to tackle the case, and offered valuable insights.
1 = Committed numerous errors and required assistance in setting up equations
5 = Performed calculations accurately and with confidence, identified implications, designed a clear and efficient approach, and demonstrated exceptional speed.
c. Judgement and Insights (Charts & Exhibits): 1 = Missed basic insights 5 = Connected findings to develop practical recommendations, made reasonable hypotheses, shared impressive insights, and flagged far-reaching implications.
1 = Overlooked fundamental insights
5 = Linked observations to devise actionable recommendations, formulated plausible hypotheses, conveyed strong, objective-driven insights, and highlighted impact.
d. Case Leadership (unless interviewer-led):
1 = Frequently disoriented and dependent on guidance
5 = Advanced autonomously and maintained focus on the question and the client's objective.
1 = Had difficulty generating original ideas
5 = Offered a variety of strong and diverse ideas, tailored to the industry and business context.
1 = Not client-ready
5 = Exhibited professionalism, charisma, enthusiasm, and self-assurance.
1 = Unclear and disorganized
5 = Demonstrated active listening, spoke precisely, and communicated concisely.
h. Synthesis (Final Recommendation):
1 = Failed to provide a coherent and well-founded recommendation
5 = Justified recommendation with key considerations, potential risks, and subsequent steps to address those risks.
During the Interview: As the candidate progresses through the case, take notes on their performance in each skill area. Be prepared to provide feedback at the end of the interview.
Post-Interview: After the interview, grade the candidate's performance in each skill area based on your notes and the scoring criteria. Share the scores and any specific feedback with the candidate to help them understand their level of readiness for the actual interview.
Improvement: Encourage the candidate to focus on areas where their performance was weak and provide guidance on how they can improve in those areas.
Let’s say we’re working with a large Tech company (i.e. FB, Apple, Microsoft etc.). They are interested in getting into the low-code iBPMS space. This is a space where pseudo-code is used to deploy large-scale process-based IT applications rapidly (in months, not years).
In particular, they’re looking at a company called Roma, which is one of the leaders in the space.
What are your thoughts here?
You can clarify the following (if asked)
The candidate should, naturally, proceed with the biggest question: Is this a market we even want to be involved in?
The candidate should then recognize that the next order of business is to evaluate the company itself.
At this point in the case, the candidate’s brainstorming abilities, as well as real-world IT knowledge, are to be truly tested.