Cookie and Privacy Settings

This website uses cookies to enable essential functions like the user login and sessions. We also use cookies and third-party tools to improve your surfing experience on preplounge.com. You can choose to activate only essential cookies or all cookies. You can always change your preference in the cookie and privacy settings. This link can also be found in the footer of the site. If you need more information, please visit our privacy policy.

Data processing in the USA: By clicking on "I accept", you also consent, in accordance with article 49 paragraph 1 sentence 1 lit. GDPR, to your data being processed in the USA (by Google LLC, Facebook Inc., LinkedIn Inc., Stripe, Paypal).

Manage settings individually I accept
expert
Expert with best answer

Vlad

97% Recommendation Rate

389 Meetings

8,089 Q&A Upvotes

USD 239 / Coaching

5

How to best conduct an interviewer-led interview (McK-style)

Hi everyone,

Since candidate-led cases very much differ from interviewer-led cases, I am wondering on how to best approach the McKinsey style interviewer-led cases.

Case In Point is very much focused on how to conduct candidate-led interviews (i.e. ask claryifying questions, present structure upfront, make hypothesis), which are more BCG and Bain like.

- How should one approach an interviewer-led case?
- How much initiative shall one take in taking the cases to the next step, i.e. shall one try to turn the case into a candidate-led one?

Responses are highly appreciated.


Best,
Rob

Hi everyone,

Since candidate-led cases very much differ from interviewer-led cases, I am wondering on how to best approach the McKinsey style interviewer-led cases.

Case In Point is very much focused on how to conduct candidate-led interviews (i.e. ask claryifying questions, present structure upfront, make hypothesis), which are more BCG and Bain like.

- How should one approach an interviewer-led case?
- How much initiative shall one take in taking the cases to the next step, i.e. shall one try to turn the case into a candidate-led one?

Responses are highly appreciated.


Best,
Rob

5 answers

  • Upvotes
  • Date ascending
  • Date descending
Best Answer
Book a coaching with Vlad

97% Recommendation Rate

389 Meetings

8,089 Q&A Upvotes

USD 239 / Coaching

Hi,

It may seem for you that these 2 types of cases are different, however, the interviewer-led type is just a simplified version of the interviewee-led case. My advice is to always prepare in interviewee-led format so that you could solve both easily.

What to expect:

  • Engagement managers (1st round interviews if you think of phone interview as round 0) generally use Mck casebooks and most commonly make interviewer-led interviews. In this case they ask you a) To make a structure (issue tree) b) to drill down in some branch of your structure and calculate something. Or they may even ask to analyze smth unrelated to the structure c) question on creativity (e,g, list 10 ways to increase revenues). However, you should be ready for both type of interviews at this point
  • Partners and directors have their own favorite cases and mainly want you to lead. The key difference:
  1. You ask clarifying questions in the beginning and make a structure
  2. You lead the case through the structure you've prepared a) asking questions and trying to identify the root cause of the problem in the branch of your structure b) making a transition to the next branch c) proactively calculating the data and making data-driven conclusion from the data they give you d) Making a conclusion when they ask you to finish a case

Best,

Hi,

It may seem for you that these 2 types of cases are different, however, the interviewer-led type is just a simplified version of the interviewee-led case. My advice is to always prepare in interviewee-led format so that you could solve both easily.

What to expect:

  • Engagement managers (1st round interviews if you think of phone interview as round 0) generally use Mck casebooks and most commonly make interviewer-led interviews. In this case they ask you a) To make a structure (issue tree) b) to drill down in some branch of your structure and calculate something. Or they may even ask to analyze smth unrelated to the structure c) question on creativity (e,g, list 10 ways to increase revenues). However, you should be ready for both type of interviews at this point
  • Partners and directors have their own favorite cases and mainly want you to lead. The key difference:
  1. You ask clarifying questions in the beginning and make a structure
  2. You lead the case through the structure you've prepared a) asking questions and trying to identify the root cause of the problem in the branch of your structure b) making a transition to the next branch c) proactively calculating the data and making data-driven conclusion from the data they give you d) Making a conclusion when they ask you to finish a case

Best,

Hi, you are supposed to led each question during a McK interview. You will have about 4 questions:

The first one will always be "what are the factors to approach the problem" , so you must structure in a MECE way. You can choose one branch to start, but it will be defined by the interviewer.

Then you'll be handle an exhibit and you should give hypotheses to answer the mains question of the case, and you can say which one would be best or what you would like to calculate.

The third question will be a math problem and you should structure it first, validate with the interviewer and then calculate.

The last question will be or another math question or a creative one, and you should always structure it. Sometimes the last question will be a recomendation for the client.

Good luck! (I am anonymos, but I can tell you I just past for the final round this season.)

Hi, you are supposed to led each question during a McK interview. You will have about 4 questions:

The first one will always be "what are the factors to approach the problem" , so you must structure in a MECE way. You can choose one branch to start, but it will be defined by the interviewer.

Then you'll be handle an exhibit and you should give hypotheses to answer the mains question of the case, and you can say which one would be best or what you would like to calculate.

The third question will be a math problem and you should structure it first, validate with the interviewer and then calculate.

The last question will be or another math question or a creative one, and you should always structure it. Sometimes the last question will be a recomendation for the client.

Good luck! (I am anonymos, but I can tell you I just past for the final round this season.)

I agree with Vlad. Preparing for the interviewee-led format essentially prepares you for both. Expanding on Vlad’s point 2, I would add a few points that are essential to an interviewee-led interview:

  • As you lead the case, be sure to be methodical and talk out loud through every step of all sections of the case regardless of whether it is the structuring section or quantitative section.
  • Remember the interviewer is not going to give you all of the data. It is important on the quantitative section to setup the problem in form of equation. That will make it very clear what variables are missing so that you can ask the interviewer. Partners / Directors love to hold back information and see if you ask for it.
  • When finishing any section of the case, don’t just give a one sentence answer like, “The expected value of the investment is $1.45M.” You want to add depth and creativity to any conclusion in a 60-75 second statement.

I agree with Vlad. Preparing for the interviewee-led format essentially prepares you for both. Expanding on Vlad’s point 2, I would add a few points that are essential to an interviewee-led interview:

  • As you lead the case, be sure to be methodical and talk out loud through every step of all sections of the case regardless of whether it is the structuring section or quantitative section.
  • Remember the interviewer is not going to give you all of the data. It is important on the quantitative section to setup the problem in form of equation. That will make it very clear what variables are missing so that you can ask the interviewer. Partners / Directors love to hold back information and see if you ask for it.
  • When finishing any section of the case, don’t just give a one sentence answer like, “The expected value of the investment is $1.45M.” You want to add depth and creativity to any conclusion in a 60-75 second statement.
Book a coaching with Francesco

100% Recommendation Rate

3,031 Meetings

7,641 Q&A Upvotes

USD 429 / Coaching

Hi Rob,

as mentioned by Vlad, you won't need a completely different approach for interviewer-led cases compared to interviewee-led cases. The main difference between the two is that in interviewer-led cases, the interviewer will lead you though 4 to 6 different areas in the case. On the other hand, in an interviewee-led case, the interviewer may be silent for the whole case and just provide information when asked. As a consequence, the main distinction is related to the communication you have to keep during the case, and not, say, the structure to present initially, the way to interpret graphs or the way to present your final sum up.

More specifically, in an interviewer-led case I would recommend to pay attention to the following communication elements. These elements are also important in an interviewee-led case, although to a lower degree, since, as mentioned, the kind of communication with the interviewer will be different as he/she may simply provide answers to your question.

  1. Repeat all the questions asked. You will move quickly in different areas, potentially not yet structured in your initial framework. It is thus very important that you clarify well the questions before proceeding and be sure you are answering to the right one. Missed clarification of the question is one of the main sources of mistakes I see in interviewer-led cases.
  2. Communicate clearly your structure, articulating in first and second layers, for each question. Many candidates think they can stop to structure in an interviewer-led case after the initial structure and proceed with pure brainstorming when asked, for example, 5 ways to increase revenues. That’s a mistake, as you should always have a MECE first layer for every question asked, and then a second layer to go deeper.
  3. Follow the interviewer’s suggestions. If you are moving though a tangent, or the interviewer simply wants you to focus on a specific point for the next area, it is very likely he/she will try to move you back to the “right” direction. The usual way to do so is asking if you are not forgetting anything, or what do you think about a particular different path. You should take the hint and try to understand what else you should have considered. Some candidates keep focusing on their structure only, thus showing they are not listening to the interviewer, and lose points due to that.

You should not transform the case in a candidate led one, as the interviewer will not allow for that anyway; however you can definitely be proactive in your approach. For example, when commenting a graph, you could conclude stating which are the next steps and asking a followup question to proceed, eg:

It seems that the problem relays in the cost of labour of blue collar workers in 50-60 year-old range; it would be interesting to understand if there is any way to make the process more efficient and (i) decrease the number of workers, or (ii) try to find a way to decrease the cost of each worker. Do we have any information whether one of these two things was tried in the past and how we perform compared to competitors on them?”.

The interviewer will very likely bring you to another area, potentially different from the ones you mentioned. That doesn’t mean you have structured incorrectly, and you will score points for being proactive; you should then follow the path presented from the interviewer to proceed.

Hope this helps,

Francesco

Hi Rob,

as mentioned by Vlad, you won't need a completely different approach for interviewer-led cases compared to interviewee-led cases. The main difference between the two is that in interviewer-led cases, the interviewer will lead you though 4 to 6 different areas in the case. On the other hand, in an interviewee-led case, the interviewer may be silent for the whole case and just provide information when asked. As a consequence, the main distinction is related to the communication you have to keep during the case, and not, say, the structure to present initially, the way to interpret graphs or the way to present your final sum up.

More specifically, in an interviewer-led case I would recommend to pay attention to the following communication elements. These elements are also important in an interviewee-led case, although to a lower degree, since, as mentioned, the kind of communication with the interviewer will be different as he/she may simply provide answers to your question.

  1. Repeat all the questions asked. You will move quickly in different areas, potentially not yet structured in your initial framework. It is thus very important that you clarify well the questions before proceeding and be sure you are answering to the right one. Missed clarification of the question is one of the main sources of mistakes I see in interviewer-led cases.
  2. Communicate clearly your structure, articulating in first and second layers, for each question. Many candidates think they can stop to structure in an interviewer-led case after the initial structure and proceed with pure brainstorming when asked, for example, 5 ways to increase revenues. That’s a mistake, as you should always have a MECE first layer for every question asked, and then a second layer to go deeper.
  3. Follow the interviewer’s suggestions. If you are moving though a tangent, or the interviewer simply wants you to focus on a specific point for the next area, it is very likely he/she will try to move you back to the “right” direction. The usual way to do so is asking if you are not forgetting anything, or what do you think about a particular different path. You should take the hint and try to understand what else you should have considered. Some candidates keep focusing on their structure only, thus showing they are not listening to the interviewer, and lose points due to that.

You should not transform the case in a candidate led one, as the interviewer will not allow for that anyway; however you can definitely be proactive in your approach. For example, when commenting a graph, you could conclude stating which are the next steps and asking a followup question to proceed, eg:

It seems that the problem relays in the cost of labour of blue collar workers in 50-60 year-old range; it would be interesting to understand if there is any way to make the process more efficient and (i) decrease the number of workers, or (ii) try to find a way to decrease the cost of each worker. Do we have any information whether one of these two things was tried in the past and how we perform compared to competitors on them?”.

The interviewer will very likely bring you to another area, potentially different from the ones you mentioned. That doesn’t mean you have structured incorrectly, and you will score points for being proactive; you should then follow the path presented from the interviewer to proceed.

Hope this helps,

Francesco

(edited)

Great, thank you very much everyone for you answers. Highly appreciated!

Best,
Rob

Great, thank you very much everyone for you answers. Highly appreciated!

Best,
Rob

Related BootCamp article(s)

Interviewer-Led vs Candidate-Led cases

Case Interviews can be led by the candidate or by the interviewer: In Candidate-led cases the main challenge is the structure. In Interviewer-led cases the main challenge is to adapt quickly

Related case(s)

McKinsey Questions

Solved 37.8k times
McKinsey Questions Tell me of a situation where you had an opinion and no one seemed to agree with you. What was your goal when you decided to join university / work / clubs / a sports team? Did you have a goal that you were not able to reach? What did you do? What do you want to be remembered for and how are you achieving it? What is your typical way of dealing with conflict?
4.5 5 860
| Rating: (4.5 / 5.0) |
Difficulty: Intermediate | Style: Fit Interview | Topics: Personal fit

Tell me of a situation where you had an opinion and no one seemed to agree with you. What was your goal when you decided to join university / work / clubs / a sports team? Did you have a goal that you were not able to reach? What did you do? What do you want to be remembered for and how are you ... Open whole case

MBB Final Round Case - Smart Education

Solved 9.1k times
MBB Final Round Case - Smart Education Our client is SmartBridge, a nonprofit educational institution offering face-to-face tutoring services. The client operates in the US. The mission of SmartBridge is to help as many students as possible to complete studies and prevent that they drop from the school system, in particular in disadvantaged areas. The client is considering starting operations for its services in the Chicago area. They hired us to understand if that makes sense. Due to the nonprofit regulation, SmartBridge should operate on its own in the market, without any partnership. How would you help our client?
4.6 5 370
| Rating: (4.6 / 5.0)

Our client is SmartBridge, a nonprofit educational institution offering face-to-face tutoring services. The client operates in the US. The mission of SmartBridge is to help as many students as possible to complete studies and prevent that they drop from the school system, in particular in disadvant ... Open whole case

Motivational questions – FIT interview preparation

Solved 2.0k times
Motivational questions – FIT interview preparation During this exercise, we will deep-dive in 4 of the most common Motivational questions asked in FIT interviews:   Why Consulting? Why this particular company? (McKinsey, Bain, BCG, others) Why this particular location? *Particularly relevant to people re-locating or choosing an office not in their region Why this particular specialized business function *Only relevant when not applying for a general role (e.g., McKinsey Advanced Analytics, BCG Gamma, etc.) *box-open green* *See Graph 1 – Note: "Motivational" are one of the 4 types of questions you can find in FIT interviews. *box-close* ➥ Graphs from the Integrated FIT Guide for MBB
4.5 5 50
| Rating: (4.5 / 5.0)
Difficulty: Intermediate | Style: Fit Interview | Topics: Personal fit

During this exercise, we will deep-dive in 4 of the most common Motivational questions asked in FIT interviews: Why Consulting? Why this particular company? (McKinsey, Bain, BCG, others) Why this particular location? *Particularly relevant to people re-locating or choosing an office not ... Open whole case

Introduction and CV questions – FIT interview preparation

Solved 1.6k times
Introduction and CV questions – FIT interview preparation During this exercise, we will deep-dive in 3 of the most common Intro & CV questions asked in FIT interviews:  1. Walk me through your CV 2. Tell me about yourself 3. Tell me about the thing that makes you most proud on your CV   *box-open green* *See Graph 1 – Note: "Intro & CV questions" are one of the 4 types of questions you can find in FIT interviews. *box-close* ➥ Graphs from the Integrated FIT Guide for MBB    
4.5 5 53
| Rating: (4.5 / 5.0)
Difficulty: Intermediate | Style: Fit Interview | Topics: Personal fit

During this exercise, we will deep-dive in 3 of the most common Intro & CV questions asked in FIT interviews: 1. Walk me through your CV 2. Tell me about yourself 3. Tell me about the thing that makes you most proud on your CV *See Graph 1 – Note: "Intro & CV questions" are one of the 4 ty ... Open whole case

McKinsey Digital / BCG Platinion: Oil & Gas Upstream Technology

Solved 1.5k times
McKinsey Digital / BCG Platinion: Oil & Gas Upstream Technology [PLEASE NOTE: This is a technically difficult case and should only be completed by those coming in as a Technology specialist, i.e. recruiting for McKinsey Digital, BCG Platinion, etc.] Our client is a multinational oil and gas company. While they are vertically integrated and have upstream, midstream, and downstream divisions, they have recently been experiencing competitivity issues in the upstream gas division, which brings in $1B in profits annually. Our client’s upstream division has offices in Australia and Indonesia. Their work is highly dependent on their IT systems, as they have to constantly monitor wells and pipes (pressure, hydrocarbon count, fluid makeup, etc.) The upstream division has two large legacy IT systems that are primarily used for downstream operations but have been modified for upstream purposes. These systems are managed by a central team in the US which is responsible for all IT issues across the business. They triage issues/enhancements and then manage development teams in India and Finland who complete the work.
4.6 5 35
| Rating: (4.6 / 5.0)

[PLEASE NOTE: This is a technically difficult case and should only be completed by those coming in as a Technology specialist, i.e. recruiting for McKinsey Digital, BCG Platinion, etc.] Our client is a multinational oil and gas company. While they are vertically integrated and have upstream, midstr ... Open whole case