Practice with Coaches

Hi there, It’s really hard, if not impossible, to tell you exactly how much time you need to be fully prepared without seeing you in action and properly assessing your current level; anyone giving precise timelines is essentially guessing. What I can tell you though is this: you should start networking NOW. Networking takes time and it should happen before you apply, not after. 99% of the value of a referral comes at the CV screening stage, so you need to have those conversations and relationships in place in advance. Also, even in the unlikely scenario where you’re pushed to apply earlier than you’d like, you can usually ask to delay interviews. On prep: keep your current pace of peer cases, and if possible increase it (ideally up to one case per day). Also, if your budget allows, one coaching session per week is probably the most effective way to accelerate, given your starting point. One additional point: I’m not a big fan of isolated drills. In real interviews, skills like structure, math, exhibits, and communication are fully integrated. The real challenge is to connect the numbers and insights back to the core question and drive the case forward. If you train everything in isolation, you risk missing the development of overall case leadership. Keep going; your progress so far is solid, and you’re asking the right questions. Feel free to DM me if you want to discuss further, Best, Franco

Hey! Hope all is well First of all, congratulations on getting back to the interview stage — that's no small achievement, you should feel great about it! Your situation is not uncommon at all. In fact, a much younger version of myself was once there :) I do not think they will generally ask about this much (i.e., this is not a topic they will stress on for a lot of the behavioral portion of the interview). But if they do, I would stick to your first two points  On point #1: I'd focus more on rectifying actions, rather than highlighting the gaps. So be brief on the gaps, and double down on your experience in casing with MBB consultants (even mentioning some names that the interviewer would know may help soften the interview!) Point #2: Aligned on that  On point #3 — I'd leave it out. Sometimes less is more :) Bust most importantly, don't overthink it. The fact that they've invited you back means they already see something in you. Go in confident, trust your prep, and go make the most out of it! Feel free to DM me if you have any questions Best of luck! Karim

Hi, Great that you’re preparing early; that’s exactly the right approach. Here are my 2 cents: 1) Preparation I would rehearse the main types of fit questions directly. You don’t need a different story for each question you can reuse the same 3–4 stories and adapt them slightly depending on the angle. That said, not preparing specific questions is not great advice; the set of questions is actually quite predictable, so you should be ready for them. 2) “What if I don’t have an example?” In most cases fit questions cover very general skills (leadership, teamwork, influencing, failure, ...), and interviewers expect you to have experienced them somewhere; if not at work, then at university or in extracurriculars. That’s why it’s important to prepare your stories in advance rather than improvise. If a truly niche question comes up it’s perfectly fine to say you haven’t faced that exact situation yet; but that’s rare. 3) Difficult questions In theory they can ask anything, but in practice the pool is quite limited. There aren’t really “difficult” questions; what makes them difficult is lack of preparation. A classic one many candidates struggle with is: “What’s your biggest failure?” not because it’s tricky, but because they haven’t thought it through beforehand. 4) Practicing AI can help you generate questions, but it’s limited for actual prep. You should practice answering out loud and get feedback from a real person (friend, coach ...). That’s where most of the improvement comes from. Hope this helps and good luck! Franco

Hey, This is not an easy market sizing, so you have to always consider the context: the interviewer is not looking for a precise answer (not even in terms of a ballpark number), but they want to see a consistent, MECE logic.  Two things to keep in mind before diving in (vs. a more standard market-sizing): Frame everything as "this is my thinking, let me know if this makes sense to you, I am not an Oil&Gas expert" -- especially since this is a technical, O&G-specific topic Before jumping into Price × Quantity, take a step back and propose your approaches first Step 1: Proposed Approaches I would manage this first step by setting the market context (30-40 seconds) to avoid costly misunderstandings.  "Sure! I am not an expert of the O&G sector, but I assume we are talking about Oil & Gas pipelines that bring these materials from Uzbekistan to its border, and that we are trying to size the market for the manufacturing of the pipeline itself -- not maintenance or anything else, but please redirect me if my assumptions are not aligned with yours" I would take 1-2 minutes to think. Then, I'dquickly propose two approaches (max 1 min).  "I can think of two main approaches, I'll describe them in general terms to see if we are aligned.  The first is Bottom-up, starting from the number of sources / extraction locations, where:  Price is the cost per km of pipeline Quantity is the annual kms of pipeline built: number of extraction sites × avg kms of pipeline per extraction site × replacement rate (e.g. every 20–25 years). Of course, this can be adjusted based on how many sites are active, expanding, sharing the same pipeline, etc.  The second is Top-down, where: Price is the same as above. Quantity could be derived as: (Total yearly volumes exported by Uzbekistan / Capacity per pipeline) × avg km per pipeline × replacement rate.  [Note for you: the parentheses give us the number of pipelines from a top-down perspective!] I would go with bottom-up because it seems easier in terms of data requirements, but I would like to actually understand if we have data on extraction sites and avg kms of pipeline." Many interviewers will stop you at this point and say something like "We have data on X, Y, Z". They have a solution already in their mind, and will redirect you to adapt your strategy to their logic. In a purely interviewee-led setting, with a very hands-off interviewer, you might not get a hint and have to proceed with your own proposal. Step 2: Recommended Approach & Calculation Either case (assuming Bottom-up works for the interviewer), I would then quickly get deeper and start discussing numbers.  "I'd go with Bottom-up since we have some estimates on the number of extraction sites. Let me start setting the P*Q equation. Price -- cost per km of pipeline.  [Note: most interviewers will give you a price at this point; if they don't, my intuition would be the one below   Steel quantity: I am thinking we might need around 1000 tons per km (roughly one ton per meter -- numbers are directional, not the point here) I will assume $2,000 per ton for raw material, getting me to $2M per km in raw material. We can estimate, for sake of time, an uplift that considers labor, installation, and engineering -- I think this is roughly 1x the raw material.  --> This way, total price gets to 1,000 tons/km * ($2,000/ton *2) = $4M/km] For Quantity, I can estimate around: 25 active extraction sites in Uzbekistan An avg km of pipeline per site of ~200 km, if this makes sense to you. This would give us a total network of ~5,000 km. Lastly, we apply a replacement rate of 1/20 years = 5%. --> This way, Q gets to 250km (25 * 200km * 5%) of annual pipeline built. If the market is growing, we might revise this upwards Market size: 250 km/year × $4M = ~$1B/year." Takeaways Focus on the process, not on the numbers -- nonetheless, always check that your result makes sense. Such a complex market could not have, say, a $1M size, that's smaller than a local supermarket! To reduce risk, propose two approaches Try to make this conversational, so you can get hints/tips from your interviewer. They'll help you much more in these cases vs. a standard "tell me how much money Netflix makes in a year" Hope this helps! PS: I'll be brutally honest: I have no "real-life" clue about the O&G market in Uzbekistan, so I built the answer above first and then messaged a friend (former consultant) who works for a global O&G leader.  He told me that their market sizing exercises work roughly like this, but the real complexity is the pipeline requirement/design, which determines factors such as (i) the avg km you need from your extraction site to the border, (ii) the existing pipeline infrastructure you can leverage -- you might just need to build a few kms to get to a shared pipeline. I had briefly mentioned (ii), but I didn't fully integrate in the answer because it would over-complicate the structure. Does this matter? No!

Hey! Ah yes. We've all been there unfortunately - the pre-final round interview blues; it is definitely a struggle What I always tell my friends who are going through the process - if you've reached this stage, don't use your final day reviewing your case notes. Go out (but don't go wild - be responsible :) ), and enjoy yourself - de-stress The mere fact that you are in an MBB final round means that you have done every thing right. You've already passed two R1 interviews; you have exactly what it takes to win and get the offer Go out, breathe some fresh air, enjoy yourself, and take your mind off the interview that's coming up - you will be fine One thing I always kept in mind while going through the process, is that regardless of seniority, the individual on the other side of the camera, was once in my shoes :) That same concept applies in your case Trust yourself, and you will be more than fine, and please keep us in the loop with how you did Best of luck, and go conquer it Best, Karim

Hi there, Timing after HR screening / Solve Typically you’ll hear back within 1–2 weeks, but it can be faster (a few days) or slower depending on the office and volume. If it’s been ~10–14 days, it’s reasonable to follow up. Order of the process The most common flow is Solve first, then HR screening, but it’s not fixed. Some candidates are contacted by HR before or in parallel. There’s no real implication in terms of your chances — it’s just process variation across offices. If you did badly on Solve It’s not always an automatic rejection, but Solve is an important filter. A weaker performance can make it harder to progress unless the rest of your profile is very strong. That said, outcomes aren’t always black and white — some candidates still move forward. At this stage, a bit of waiting is normal — no need to read too much into timing. Happy to help you think through next steps if useful Best Evelina

Hi there, For a Knowledge Analyst role in procurement, the case is typically closer to the domain rather than a classic McKinsey consulting case. You’re unlikely to get a broad “should we enter this market” type of case. Instead, expect something more focused on procurement/supply chain topics, such as cost reduction, supplier strategy, category management, or process optimization. That said, it will still test core consulting skills: Structured thinking Breaking down a problem logically Interpreting data or exhibits Communicating clear recommendations So think of it as a hybrid: domain-relevant problem + consulting-style thinking. In practice, preparation should focus on: Basic procurement concepts (cost drivers, sourcing levers, supplier dynamics) Simple, clear structuring (don’t overcomplicate) Being practical and actionable in your recommendations You don’t need full MBB-style case prep, but being comfortable with structured problem solving will definitely help. Happy to help you prep specifically for this type of case if useful Best Evelina

Hey there! I agree with you: the risk of being very generic is clearly there. Imho, there are three layers to a better "why firm X" answer: The basics: the raison d'être of each Firm. Bain is perceived as more innovative, BCG as a first mover on ESG topics, McKinsey as the most rigorous, etc.  --> This is what the top-90% of candidates (basically anyone) mention The office specifics: you are not just applying to a Firm, but (almost always) to a specific office. A few chats with MBB friends, alumni, etc will give you a perspective on the strengths of that office -- either by function (e.g., marketing, org strategy, corp finance) or by industry (e.g., banking, industrials, CPG).  --> This needs a bit more digging, so only a top-20% candidate typically mentions this -- e.g., "A friend at your firm mentioned that this company serves the top-5 industrial companies in France and most CSTs (Client Serving Teams) are based in this office. I feel this is a unique opportunity to apply my Mech Eng expertise and follow my passion". Notice how this can sound much more tailored to your profile! The thought leadership of key firm leaders: every firm has thought leadership on specific aspects. The official websites of all MBB firms have a lot of content (articles, reports, even podcasts) where typically Senior Partners give their perspective on the challenges/opportunities for an industry or function.  --> This is something that very few candidates mention -- e.g., "I am really interested in the disruption happening in Private Equity, and your 2026 State of PE report was very exhaustive in explaining the three main risks looming over this industry. I know that Anne Doe leads the PE function and is considered a global thought leader on PE, and I would love to grow under her leadership". If you link this nicely to your resume and your preferred office/country, you can show you are someone who does their research. If you lack details or don't have contacts at your target firms, keep in mind that coaches can help a lot! We have worked in this industry and we know how to create a bullet-proof story for your specific experience/interests :) Hope this helps, feel free to DM me to continue our conversation!

Hi, The key is linking your results back to the core business question, and from there deriving clear business or strategic insights. That’s what turns analysis into something useful. Then you take it one step further and drive the discussion forward through concrete next steps. So instead of focusing on the analysis itself, the flow becomes: analysis → insight → implication → next steps That’s really where influence comes from. Hope it helps, Franco