Journaling while preparing

Hi Rafic,

It is indeed a good idea to write down the main mistakes you make in a document.

You should keep details of all the areas you could improve. Some examples include:

• Initial structure
• Graph interpretation
• Math structure
• Math mistakes
• Conclusion
• Communication

For each area, you may recognize your own mistakes or receive feedback by peers pointing out what you could improve. Ideally you want to find peers able to provide detailed and relevant feedback – the more detailed the better.

Hope this helps,
Francesco

Hi,

I suggest that you should start using mind mapping tools (like Xmind) for structuring feedback from cases, different structures that you want to keep in mind as well as Fit questions/ answers.

This is how it works. XMind has five topic types:

Central Topic: Every map just has one central topic, which is built automatically with the map. You can call it’s “consulting prep”.

Main Topic: Main Topics are the first level around the Central Topic. You can note the direct ideas here. In your case you can call them Cases, Fit, other

Subtopic: Subtopics are added to main topics and main floating topics. You can record the details about ideas as this. So for cases you can have the following subtopics: structures, analytics/ maths, recommendations. And then you can map all other ideas and feedback against each of your subtopics.

Best,

Anton

Hi Rafic,

Absolutely agree - the specifics of a case documented might help you to remember the circumstances/scenario in which an issue occured. But you need to derive the root cause of that and have a clear picture of those to tackle!

Good basic framework I oftenly use for my candidates - just to cover the basics, even though my feedback in coachings goes far beyond that and takes usually way longer than the case itself:

1. Planning and Logic
   1. Candidate had a plan to tackle the case
   2. The plan was MECE
   3. Trusted the plan and referred to it regularly
2. Communication and Composure
   1. Candidate was calm and collected
   2. Good discussion on topics
   3. Candidate was driving the case
3. Analytics
   1. Good data analysis piece-by-piece
   2. Good integration of data into overall picture and derived good insights
4. Recommendation
   1. Final recommendiation to the point, top-down, data-driven and specific
   2. Persuasive wrap-up communications, trusting own analysis

Hope that helps - if so, please be so kind and give it a thumbs-up with the green upvote button below!

Robert

(edited)

Hello!

I would not try to leverage a recipie here, but better think of what would be the best tool for you to keep track of your key learnings.

For me, for example, would be an Excel with different tabs and a summary, but this is very personal!

Hope it helps!

Cheers,

Clara

Hi,

So, the first thing is: It's very very hard to evaluate yourself.

Ideally when you case with other preploungers or a coach, they are the ones providing this feedback. Then, you make sure to save it and/or reformat it to review later.

Personally, when reviewing canditates, I lay out my feedback like in the image below, specifically. I include a final "Summary" page of all pros/cons, which is the general feedback to which you're referring.

Of course, I do this across the key criteria of:

• Structure
• Judgement/Insights
• Creativity
• Math/Quantitative
• Case leadership (hypothesis-driven)
• Synthesis
• Presence
• Communication
• etc.

Form example, there could be 3 instances where math was a problem. I would write down all 3 instances according to where they occured in the case...this would be specific. In my summary page, I would write down, in general, what was wrong with the math (i.e. forgot numbers, didn't do math properly, need to understand context of numbers, ask to round, etc.)

Dear Rafic,

Actually ou can put there as a bullet points anything that you think valuable and help you better reflect on your preparation:

- your reflections

- ideas

-feedback from your partner or coach

Hope, it helps,

André