Both methods have their merits, but it ultimately depends on your personal style and how well you can handle each approach.

The first method offers a more structured approach. This is generally recommended because it shows your ability to take in information, process it in a systematic manner, and deliver a coherent interpretation. Asking for time to study the chart ensures you have understood it correctly before sharing your findings, which can prevent potential misinterpretations.

The second method is more dynamic but can be risky. If you are very comfortable with on-the-fly thinking and articulation, it can demonstrate an impressive level of analytical agility. However, if not executed well, it can come across as a disorganized thought process.

Overall, I would recommend a hybrid approach:

1. Show appreciation.
2. Give a brief overview of what you observe the exhibit to be about, this aligns the interviewer with your understanding.
3. If necessary, ask any clarifying questions about the exhibit content.
4. Ask for a brief moment to thoroughly understand and analyze the exhibit.
5. Share your structured findings, interpretations, and the implications these have on the case.

This approach allows you to exhibit both your quick thinking and your ability to structure and communicate insights effectively. The most important aspect is to remain flexible and adapt to the needs of the interview.

Best of luck in your case preparations!

Hi there!

Excellent question!

Here is what I recommend:

1. Read the exhibit with the interviewer. Don't interpret it. Just get an understanding of the sort of data it contains and ask clarifying questions so you know everything about the data before taking the time to interpret it.
2. Take time. Try and come up with 3-4 self-standing insights.
3. Get back to the interviewer and present each of the insights. Each insight should mention to a data point, what it means and what the client should do about it. The last part is very important - being prescriptive is what makes an insight, an insight.

Best,
Cristian

Hi Tian,

I would generally advise against “mumuring” in an interview :P.

Option 1, 100%

IF you have a clear insight and don't need time, go ahead!

Finally, remember that there may not be takeaways. If there are, that's your priority. If there are not, your job is now to figure out what else would be needed (Calculations and/or more data/information) in order to draw conclusions.

It's very clear it is option 1. 

Consultants communicate top-down. They start with the conclusion. The conclusion is related to the problem you are trying to solve.

As such, “making observations… on the fly” (option 2) is clearly not what interviewers are looking for.

Adding on to what other coaches said..

• Keep it flexible - usually it's best to take a moment to absorb, but don't do that robotically. If you can address the question immediately (sometimes the case for simple charts), then no need to take too much time
• Address the question at hand, don't just throw out random "insights" for the sake of it. The latter is one of the most common mistakes candidates make.

Hope this helps. Feel free to reach out to me or any of the other coaches, if you'd like to finetune your chart interpretation skills. 

Regards, Andi 

I strongly recommend approach 1. As an interviewer I want to hear about insights you have drawn from the chart not merely repeating what you see. Insights take 30 seconds or so to process, hence taking the time to crystalize your thoughts.