Hi there, 

This is a great question!

In short, the answer depends on the firm you are targeting. 

For McKinsey (and in general for interviewer-led cases) they are looking for a structure that is broad, deep and insightful. That means that the target presentation time should rather be 5-6 minutes. 

For BCG, Bain (and most other firms employing candidate-led cases) they are looking for a more hypothesis-driven structure, which can be more targeted and narrow. In that case, the presentation can also be more focused and last somewhere in the range of 3-5 minutes. 

Aside from the actual duration, what is also important during the presentation, is the your delivery. Make sure that you are explaining each of the areas clearly, you are speaking at a pace at which it is easy to follow, and you are maintaining eye contact with the interviewer. Basically, the entire interview is meant to be a conversation and the case is the medium through which this conversation takes place, so steer clear from seeing the framework or any part of the case as a structured brain dump. 

Best,

Cristian

Here's the real issue. It's this:

“add some case specific insights to rather generic buckets”

There's an issue with your midnset when approaching structures. You are going after “areas of investigation” (buckets), and then going deeper to give specific examples of things that may be interesting to analyze or very specific hypothesis on what is going on.

This is a common approach, but not the best one.

Your structure should be around the relevant criteria to make a certain decision, or how to exactly identify the issue. I always suggest structuring around specific questions. Of course, each question actually has a subset of relevant sub-questions. How deep you go depends on you and the interviewer. 

Meaning that you can take 60 seconds to present, or you can take 3 minutes. Both are fine.

But 3 minutes is not fine if it is just buckets + random insights. Then you are just boiling the ocean and trying to make sure you cover every possibility, possibly even without stating how you are going to make a decision.

Should the company invest? 

• Not great approach: let's look at the market, company, competition. In market we're looking for size, growth , segments, etc. In company we're looking at products and margins, etc. This isn't great because I know where you are looking at, but not what you are looking for.
• Better approach: they should invest if the market is big enough and has positive dynamics, profitable, and they can get a relevant piece of the pie. For the first one I need to size the market, understand growth trends and drivers, margins, … 

Can you spot the difference?

If you are following the first approach, it doesn't really make any difference if it is 60 or 180 seconds. More time means only that you'll be adding more buckets and sub-buckets. 

Whereas if it is the second, and you are communicating in a structured way, after the first 30 seconds one already knows the approach. You take a couple more minutes and explain that you know how to break it down and execute it. And you could easily go to a third layer, but it just isn't necessary. You can stop at anytime, and the interviewer knows your approach, it is just a matter of having more or less detail. Take the hints, make it a conversation, and you'll know when to stop.

It's hard to give a super universal answer to this as it depends on what type of case it is in which exact interview setting (e.g. 30 minutes vs. 1 hour, 1-on-1 case vs. presentation to a panel).

I would try to be as pragmatic as possible:

• Make sure that your interviewer knows where your head is so she/he can intervene in case your initial structure is faulty
• Outline the broad steps on how you intend to solve for the question at hand
• Don't waste valuable time stating the obvious or going into too much depth too early
• Read the room - your interviewer will typically indicate where she/he wants you to re-iterate or go deeper after your initial broad strokes - give them the chance to state their preference and take the hint

In my personal experience, I never “timed” a candidate on this part. The more the whole thing felt like a conversation (rather than a test) from early on, the better it usually went.

I hope this helps you in your preparation

Hello,

There's going to be some difference based on the complexity/depth of the case, but generally I would go with a 2-3 minutes benchmark for the initial structuring. So 2.5 minutes sounds like you're generally in the right spot.

Hi there,

Q: How much time to present the initial structure?

There is no strict “exact” time constraint. 

• The soft limit I would recommend to prepare the initial structure (before you present) is around 2 minutes. 
• You will then have to spend a few minutes to present. It is difficult to advise on a specific amount without knowing the question/company. At McKinsey for example, as mentioned by Cristian, given the interviewer-led approach they usually expect more details - more on that here

In any case, even when you prepare the structure it is not necessarily a problem if you take extra time. 

What could happen is that, if you take more time than what the interviewer expects is fair, he/she may ask if you are ready and if you can present what you have. You may ask for a bit of extra time after that if needed (just phrase it correctly).

Overall, if the alternative you have is a weak structure, you should take the additional time. Better to spend a bit more time and have a better structure.

Hope this helps,

Francesco

Take the time that it takes you! I'd recommend somewhere between 1.5-3 minutes - much less and you're probably not at the right level of depth; much longer and you're probably waffling. But if you're at 3.5 minutes it's fine! 

Hi there,

Rather than focusing on how much time, focus on how. You need to be MECE/hollistic, you need to signpost, and you need to stay organized + creative while moving through in an efficient pace.

Some of my frameworks are 60 seconds. Others are 3 minutes. It depends on the prompt (and a bit on the company, like McK who wants more in-depth frameworks).

If you're saying a framework “easily” takes 2.5 minutes, that does tell me that you're not articulating your thoughts effectively. I'd highly recommend getting coaching to figure out how you can be more clear + concise with your language!