I could be reading too much into this, but wanted some perspective. Had a first round interview with BCG two weeks ago Friday, which I passed and was invited to second round last week Friday. Feedback from the first round was overwhelmingly positive, with no strong development areas.
For the first interview (newly promoted partner), I made a couple of errors (structure and market sizing). Not sure if it was intentional, but the partner didnt seem amused, and would quickly point out the error as soon as I made it (i.e. not questioning, but just 'you are missing this in your structure').
Second interview went much better, after brainstorming the partner didnt ask for a conclusion and just said we can stop here, I asked if he wanted a conclusion and he just said 'no I think you have the solution'.
Given these two varied experiences, how good does each of the four have to be to receive an offer, or does the fact that I blew the first partner interview mean that I am dead in the water? Do the first two hold weight in the overall decision, or is the offer decision based solely on the final round performance?