Werde aktiv in unserer Community aus über 463.000 Gleichgesinnten!

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

Say why you include sub buckets in your structure?

communication Structure
Letzte Aktivität am 3. März 2019
3 Antworten
2,5 T. Views
Anonym A fragte am 2. März 2019

Hi!

When I communicate my structure I usually try to say why I have included the different buckets (both top buckets and sub buckets) in my structure. Is this a good thing to do? In some cases it feels kind of mechanical to do for the sub buckets. Further, lets say I have a top bucket called market and that one of the sub buckets is customers. Then I typically say something like: "In order to understand whether this is an attractive market I like to look into 4 things. First I would like to look at the customers to learn more about what they look for in a product as well as what customer segments that are evident." Then when I drill down in the customer sub bucket I typically find out that I also look at it for more things (e.g. to find preferred distribution channels etc.) Do you guys have a better way of approaching this?

Übersicht der Antworten

Upvotes
  • Upvotes
  • Datum aufsteigend
  • Datum absteigend
Beste Antwort
Francesco
Experte
Content Creator
antwortete am 2. März 2019
#1 Coach for Sessions (4.500+) | 1.500+ 5-Star Reviews | Proven Success (➡ interviewoffers.com) | Ex BCG | 10Y+ Coaching

Hi Anonymous,

in general yes, it is a good idea to explain the reason why you considered a specific bucket in your structure; ideally when you do so you should connect with the goal that you verified at the beginning of the case – this will help to personalize the structure for each case and make the presentation less mechanical.

In terms of your second question, if you find you are regularly missing some areas in the sub-buckets (eg distribution) it probably means you should either include them in your initial structure, or you should mention them as a potential reason to explore a particular bucket/sub-bucket when related to that.

Hope this helps,

Francesco

War diese Antwort hilfreich?
Sidi
Experte
antwortete am 3. März 2019
McKinsey Senior EM & BCG Consultant | Interviewer at McK & BCG for 7 years | Coached 350+ candidates secure MBB offers

Hi!

My view is that ou should never concentrate on explaining buckets anyway! This is NOT what a structure should do.

Structuring a case does not mean to explain the interviewer WHAT you want to look into (the "buckets")! Structuring a case means to explain the interviewer HOW you are going to answer the specific question that has been asked!

So your structue needs to be a LOGIC, not a set of qualitative buckets! Such qualitative elements (Customers, Market, Product, Competition, etc.) are nothing more than influencing factos that determine the answer to the question THROUGH the logic that you have outlined. THIS is how you think as a strategy consultant, and THIS is how you work out the approach towards strategic problems on real engagements. And you might not be surprised that this is also by far the best way to approach case questions in a rigorous way.

Cheers, Sidi

War diese Antwort hilfreich?
Vlad
Experte
antwortete am 2. März 2019
McKinsey / Accenture Alum / Got all BIG3 offers / Harvard Business School

Hi,

I believe you should be presenting your buckets and providing a list of things you have in your buckets (e.g. In the market I would like to look at Size, Growth rates, segmentation, growth rates of the segments and regulation)

I do not recommend explaining why you are looking at these things, because you are stealing your own time. Just imagine - you have 4 buckets, 5 bullet points each. Multiply it by the time you need to explain the rationale for each point (please be realistic, since you'll have pauses between sentences, etc). You'll get the total extra 4-5 min waisted out of 25-30 min case. Moreover - the interviewer will get tired and distracted, although you have not even started the case.

Best

War diese Antwort hilfreich?
Francesco gab die beste Antwort

Francesco

Content Creator
#1 Coach for Sessions (4.500+) | 1.500+ 5-Star Reviews | Proven Success (➡ interviewoffers.com) | Ex BCG | 10Y+ Coaching
4.548
Meetings
48.585
Q&A Upvotes
407
Awards
5,0
1625 Bewertungen
Wie wahrscheinlich ist es, dass du uns einem Freund oder Kommilitonen empfiehlst?
0 = Nicht wahrscheinlich
10 = Sehr wahrscheinlich
Danke fürs Beraten! Mit deiner Hilfe können wir PrepLounge verbessern!