How to structure a case and be more MECE

Case structure and frameworks MECE
Letzte Aktivität am 31. Aug. 2022
4 Antworten
2,6 T. Views
Anonym A fragte am 15. Jan. 2020

Dear all, I'd like to seek advice on the case structuring and MECE concept.

1. How strict should I stick to MECE concept? Should the topics in case structure be in same category and all in noun (or verb)?

2. In Victor Cheng's book, business framework is MECE (client, company, product, competition). But can the topics of the framework be "steps" instead? (for example: 1. Company 2. Competition 3. Financial Assessment of the M&A result) 4. Risk & Next Step)

3. If considering "should the US manufacturer outsource production to Vietnam" question, is this structure MECE? (1. Cost Savings 2. Customer 3.Effect on Current Production Capabilities)

Thank you so much!

Übersicht der Antworten

Upvotes
  • Upvotes
  • Datum aufsteigend
  • Datum absteigend
Beste Antwort
Vlad
Experte
antwortete am 15. Jan. 2020
McKinsey / Accenture Alum / Got all BIG3 offers / Harvard Business School

Hi,

Only pure mathematical structures (e.g. profitability) can be 100% MECE. But MECE is not a requirement and it can not always be applied.

You should build a structure using your previous experience, based on:

  • Objective (Should have a metric and time-frame)
  • Context
  • Type of the case

E.g market entry cases can have completely different objectives:

  • Should we enter the market?
  • Which top 3 markets out of 10 we should enter?
  • Can we get xx% market share on the new market?
  • Can we get xx ROI if we enter this market?
  • etc

Depending on the Objective and the Context you should come up with a proper structure to address the problem. Of course, you may use the patterns that you've learned while solving the other cases.

There is a number of ways how you can approach the structure:

  1. Mathematical issue tree (e.g. Total time spent on cleaning operation = # of people x Frequency x Hours per cleaning per person) or formula (e.g. output rate = total number of people being served / time to serve one person) or common industry drivers (e.g. revenues = # of customers x av. check) (e.g Passengers on the plane = capacity x Load Factor) or the industry revenue streams (Fuel revenues / non-fuel revenues for the gas station)
  2. Drivers (e.g. drivers influencing the birth rate in a country)
  3. Buckets structures (e.g. for the problems in sales : Sales strategy / sales people and allocation / motivation / sales process). Very often it's a real framework used by the consultants (e.g. the famous Bain Cap framework for PE due dills: Market / Competitors / Company / Feasibility of exit)
  4. Frameworks (e.g. People / Process / Technology) (e.g. The famous McKinsey framework - People don't want to do smth / they can't do smth / smth prevents them from doing that). Even academical frameworks in the rare cases (e.g. Product / Distribution / Price / Marketing (Also known as 4P))
  5. Value chains / Customer Journey / Process steps
  6. Consecutive Steps of the project (Analyzing cost structure / Benchmarking to calculate the cost savings potential / Analyzing the processes to reach the potential / Calculating costs and benefits)
  7. Etc

There is no magic pill to learn building the MECE issue trees. It comes with a lot of Practice and reflection and building proper industry and functional knowledge.

Best!

War diese Antwort hilfreich?
Antonello
Experte
Content Creator
antwortete am 15. Jan. 2020
McKinsey | NASA | top 10 FT MBA professor for consulting interviews | 6+ years of coaching

Hi,
1. Only for market sizing and numerical questions
2. I consider neither that framework MECE (e.g. both product and customers impact the company aspects, therefore they are not mutually exclusive; it is not considering macro-economic aspects, therefore it's not collectively exhaustive)
3. It's a case where a MECE structure is not strictly requested. I would use as 3rd bullet the risks and include in this aspect the related effects on capabilities etc.

Hope it helps,
Antonello

War diese Antwort hilfreich?
Simon
Experte
Content Creator
antwortete am 31. Aug. 2022
50+ successful coachings / Ex-Mckinsey JEM & Interviewer / Industry + Engineering background

Dear A,

in general a good structure can be evaluated by a certain depth and breadth. The “depth” should be at least 3-4 levels while the “breadth” should cover the entire solution space. You can cross-check this with the MECE principles (For details see respective article on Preplounge), but the CE (collectively exhaustive) part is basically defining your breadth.

Finally, make sure to check for inter-linkages in your structure and point them out.

Simon

War diese Antwort hilfreich?
Clara
Experte
Content Creator
bearbeitete eine Antwort am 16. Jan. 2020
McKinsey | Awarded professor at Master in Management @ IE | MBA at MIT |+180 students coached | Integrated FIT Guide aut

Hello!

1. It´s not strict, given that you can only achieve pure MECE in a very theorical or matematical context

2. That framework is not MECE at all!

3. What actually distinguishes a good candidate from a great one with this prompt is not the MECE comcept, but the ability to be holistic (e.g., not only looking at the obvious economic factors, but also social and political risks)

Hope it helps!

Cheers,

Clara

(editiert)

War diese Antwort hilfreich?

Vlad

McKinsey / Accenture Alum / Got all BIG3 offers / Harvard Business School
429
Meetings
12.224
Q&A Upvotes
127
Awards
4,9
186 Bewertungen
Wie wahrscheinlich ist es, dass du uns einem Freund oder Kommilitonen empfiehlst?
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
0 = Nicht wahrscheinlich
10 = Sehr wahrscheinlich