Case in point vs Case interview secrets(Victor Cheng)

Hi!

Vlad is absolutely right - pick up the phone and reschedule your interview. YOU decide when you interview, not the firm! If you are serious about joining BCG, you prepare properly before walking into the interviews.

Cheers, Sidi

Hi,

I strongly recommend you rescheduling the interview - the chances of preparing in one week are close to 0. Please save you time and the chances of getting an offer. There is absolutely no penalty for rescheduling if it's not the internship / on-campus recruiting!

Take a month or so. You can't imagine how many people have failed just because they didn't take enough prep. Again, there is absolutely no penalty for rescheduling.

Overall, I recommend the following approach:

1) Start with "Case in point" book - It's not the best guide on how you should approach the cases, however, it will give you the basic understanding.

2) Start practicing cases with partners here or find them locally. !!! Find experienced partners or coaches who can provide a good feedback!!!

3) Purchase and read Viktor Cheng Book (Amazon Kindle store) and listen to LOMS (his website).

4) Start with the following cases (in the order of priority, relevant for pwc) and apply some high-level recommendations on structuring:

1. Market sizing - structuring from the supply or demand side. Structuring using a formula or using an issue tree
2. Profitability - basic profitability framework. Remember about different revenue streams and product mix
3. Market context cases (Market Entry, New product, Acquisition, etc). Always start with the big picture "market". Finish with something specific to the case (e.g. How to enter?"). Structure it as if you are defining the work streams for the real project.
4. Operational math problem (e.g. Should we increase the speed of an elevator or just buy a second one? How should we reduce the queues? Etc.) - Structuring as a process / value chain, with inflows, operations, and outflow

Here is a good list of articles regarding the different parts of the case:

1) Start with clarifying questions:

https://www.preplounge.com/en/consulting-forum/clarifying-questions-1786#a3956

2) Communicating while structuring. Here is a long post by me on how to communicate the structure during the case study:

https://www.preplounge.com/en/consulting-forum/how-to-communicate-its-structure-for-the-case-study-1313#a2806

3) Using hypothesis. I made a post about hypothesis here:

https://www.preplounge.com/en/consulting-forum/how-to-state-a-hypothesis-and-match-to-the-structure-1156#a2268

4) Communicating while making calculations: 

• Always tell the interviewer your approach
• Check with the interviewer that your approach is correct
• Come to the interviewer with some preliminary answers
• Check your assumptions with the interviewer

5) Communicating during the analysis of graphs / tables

• Take a minute to look at the graph. Read the graph title. Look at the graph type and define the type (pie chart, line chart, etc). Look at the legend (ask for clarifying questions if necessary). Identify whats going on on the graph. Look for: Trends, % structures. Look for unusual things - correlations, outliers,
• Make 3-4 conclusions from the graph. Think out loud on potential hypothesis on what could be the root cause / what are the consequences
• Prioritize the most important for your current analysis and move forward with the case

6) Communicating while having questions on creativity

• Ask an interview for a minute to think
• Think of several buckets of ideas (e.g. organic growth / non-organic growth / differentiation). Remember to think as big as possible
• Narrow down to each bucket and generate as many ideas as possible
• Present the structure (buckets) and then your ideas

7) Communicating your conclusion. You can find a good example I've posted here:

https://www.preplounge.com/en/consulting-forum/how-much-answer-first-should-the-conclusion-be-1231#a2493

8) Communicating your FIT stories

Use the top-down approach while communicating your stories. "The Pyramid Principle" is the must-read by ex McKinsey on this topic.

I recommend using the STAR framework:

• In Situation, you should briefly provide the context, usually in 1 or 2 sentences
• Task usually includes 2 or 3 sentences describing the problem and your objective.
• Then you provide a list of specific actions you took to achieve the goal. It should take 1 or 2 sentences per action (Usually 3-4 actions). Note that the interviewer can stop you any minute and ask for more details.
• The results part should have 1 or 2 sentences describing the outcomes. This part is finalizing your story - make sure it can impress the interviewer and stay in the memory.

Best!

(edited)

Hi,

First of all - using hypotheses is not mandatory. I would say - use the hypothesis if you are really good at solving the cases. If not - use the basic approach

There are two ways to use the hypothesis

First - presenting a structure using the hypothesis. For example, if you are having a PE (private equity) case, you should do the following:

1) Make classic structure (market, company, competitors, feasibility of exit)

2) Make subpoints (e.g. in market: size, growth rates, profitability, segmentation, etc)

3) Present your 1st level Hypothesis:

• - "In order to understand whether we should invest in Company A, I would like to check that the Market is Attractive, the Company is Attractive, the competition is favorable and we have good opportunities for of exit"

4) Present the main 2nd level Hypothesis:

• "In the market, I would like to make sure that the market is big enough and growing;
• In the company I would like to find additional opportunities for growth;
• In competition I would like to check that the market is fragmented enough;
• Finally, I would like to check if we have potential buyers and can achieve desired exit multiples"

Another way to use hypothesis is using the hypothesis to prioritize your analysis:

1) Make a structure: "Problem in sales may be related to Sales Motivation, Sales Strategy, Sales Coverage, and Sales Process:

2) Prioritize a part of the structure based on your knowledge / common sense / available data: "Taking into account that motivation is the core problem of the sales organization, I would like to prioritize this part of the analysis"

Good luck!

Hi,
Agree with Ian that "exploring different dimension of the problem" and "verify hypothesis" is the same thing. It is both about how you break down a big problem into small pieces and test where the issue lies.
E.g. the problem could be "is it a good idea to enter market A", you can totally rephrase that to hypothesis of "Enter market A is a good idea" or "A bad idea". Then you would look into the same 4 dimension regardless how you state the problem/hypothesis. In the hypothesis approach, you can just rephrase the dimensions, e.g. "I would like to look into the company capability, to see if they have the right capability to enter; once we have that understanding we can prove or disprove the hypothesis from a capability point of view"...Same for other dimension.
It is the same thing, just how you phrase it. But remember to customise the framework according to the specific case context.

Best,

Emily

Hello!

+1 to Francesco, don´t make the mistake at looking at this structures and thinking they would provide you a holistic toolkit, since they won´t.

Is good a pre-read to get up to speed tough.

Hope it helps!

Cheers,

Clara

Hi, I confirm it is a good material to approach your preparation but it's not making you a top performer. 

Best,
Antonello

I confirm the second approach is better.

Best,
Antonello