Verabrede dich zum Casen über das Meeting-Board, nimm an Diskussionen in unserem Consulting Q&A teil und finde gleichgesinnte Interview-Partner:innen, um dich auszutauschen und gemeinsam zu üben!
Zurück zur Übersicht

Estimate the number of weddings per year - approach problems

Today, my case partner asked me to estimate the number of weddings per year in a given country. Let's arrive to the core of the case in simplified terms. After dividing the population in four age sections, we came up with this situation:

0-20: 0 weddings

21-40: 200 weddings

41-60: 100 weddings

61-80: 20 weddings

Now, in this given population we have 320 potential weddings. I was going to divide 320 weddings by 60 years, but my case partner stopped me and told me that I had to divide by 20 years (200/20 + 100/20 + 20/20 or 320/20). 

The two approach are not equivalent, hence one is wrong. Which one and why?

PS: If dividing by 20 years is correct, I have another doubt. Let's say that we approach the case differently and we segment the population in only one big age cluster (21-80). Now, in order to have the same number of weddings per year (320/20 = 16), the number of potential wedding in the same population should be 16*60 = 960. For this reason, I suspect that dividing by 20 is not the correct option.

Many thanks for the effort! 

1
3,9k
30
Schreibe die erste Antwort!
Bisher hat niemand auf diese Frage reagiert.
Beste Antwort
Gelöschter Nutzer
am 29. Sept. 2020

Tbh I am not convinced this approach works at all - at least it is very unintuitive. It starts with the number of weddings per age bracket. The way you set up the calculation (deviding by size of the bracket later on), this seems to be an absolute number, not one per time interval (e.g. per year). 

But this doesn't make sense, because an absolute definition doesn't seem to make sense. The population in each age bracket changes year on year, so whatever you're calculating is at least highly unintuitive.

In addition, splitting this into age groups introduces unnecessary complication, as you don't care when people marry, only if they marry throughout their lifetime.

A much simpler approach could be to calculate annual birth rate (e.g. total population devided by life expectancy). Then you can estimate the number of weddings per person (probably slightly above 1). Multiplying the number of births per year with the number of weddings in a life time and devided by 2 (takes two persons to marry once), should give you the number of weddings per year.

6
am 29. Sept. 2020
Hi Henning! Thank you for the explanation. That's true, your approach is much simpler. However, isn't an overestimation not to exclude people belonging to the 0-18 age group? I would have used a shorter time frame than life expectancy (e.g. 60 years, approx. the 18-80 range), is that an error? Anyway, the approach I described above was incomplete. I did not start the case by estimating the number of weddings per age bracket. My starting assumption was that only a fraction of the population actually get married in their lifetime and most of them get married when they are in the 21-40 age bracket. So, I divided into age groups to estimate how many people marry in their lifetime within a given population. I divided the total number of people that marry by 2, to calculate the number of weddings. Finally, I divided the total number of weddings by 60 years, assuming that are equally distributed over time.
Gelöschter Nutzer
Coach
am 29. Sept. 2020
Interesting point - thanks for calling me out on this! My approach implicitly assumes that the population is stable. The not-yet in marrying age population only matters if there was a recent increase in birth rate (in the last 18 years). If birth rate is not constant, you should indeed take the birth rate as of [average age at wedding] years ago. I'd still go without the age brackets. This is a good approach when the age actually drives something like consumption behavior. But since the age doesn't matter for the overall consumption here, I'd leave it out to make the case simpler.
am 29. Sept. 2020
Thank you very much for the explanation, really clear!
Ähnliche Fragen
Consulting
Just did the Mckinsey Solve Game (January 2025) - got some questions/insights
am 24. Apr. 2025
Global
5
4,6k
Beste Antwort von
Hagen
Coach
#1 recommended coach | >95% success rate | 8+ years consulting, 8+ years coaching and 7+ years interviewing experience
44
5 Antworten
4,6k Aufrufe
+2
Consulting
Guidance for prep for McKinsey interview in 1 week
am 15. Mai 2025
Europa
9
3,5k
Beste Antwort von
Hagen
Coach
#1 recommended coach | >95% success rate | 8+ years consulting, 8+ years coaching and 7+ years interviewing experience
77
9 Antworten
3,5k Aufrufe
+6
Consulting
McKinsey background check
am 31. Mai 2024
Global
10
3,2k
Beste Antwort von
Ex-McKinsey |5y consulting experience | Specialization in Psychology | Proven holistic mentor
64
10 Antworten
3,2k Aufrufe
+7
Wie wahrscheinlich ist es, dass du uns einem Freund oder Kommilitonen empfiehlst?
0 = Nicht wahrscheinlich
10 = Sehr wahrscheinlich
Vielen Dank für dein Feedback! Deine Meinung hilft uns, PrepLounge noch besser zu machen.