Mckinsey first round

Question

I had mckinsey first round interview. One interviewer, after the prompt, specifically told me not to take time for structure and he mentioned “i do not want a structure” rather tell me about the graph (exhibit). I move on the interview, but kater on i got the feedback that i didn't do structure . How to tackle this type of situation in future.

I know less structure can happen in 2nd round with partner, but in 1 st round that was unexpected, specially the feedback. How to tackle that type of sitiation? Can I say anything to HR?

Answer 1

There are several things here:

If the interviewer says “I don't want a structure”, you should interpret it as “I don't want a structure right now”
Every problem solving when you interact with a consultant should be structured
I think your main issue is that you don't know what it means to be structured. Being structured it is not about laying down some items to talk about at the beginning of the case. Being structured means understanding how to divide the problem into actionable parts in MECE way, planning your next steps, having a clear hypothesis to test, etc
I often do exactly as the interviewer did it with you, asking to do something that is not in line with the usual approach highlighted in Cosentino's useless book; in doing so, most candidates forget to be structured, organized, and top-down. So, I think you need more exercise and more flexibility in your thinking process about case interviews. That should answer the “how to tackle those situations” part of your question
You should not complain to HR or your mum or here. Although it may happen that interviewers are not 100% able to spot great candidates, there is no benefit in complaining or asking for something with HR. Just thank McKinsey for the interview and prepare for other opportunities

Answer 2

Hi there,

indeed sounds a bit like an odd situation - sorry to hear you had an unpleasant experience.

Few thoughts…

Firstly, as Maikol mentioned, take such prompt with a grain of salt. In consulting interviews, you will always be expected to think and communicate in a structured way throughout the case, even if the interviewer does not want to see a framework upfront. In this particular situation, the interviewer wants to see how you deal with an unorthodox / unexpected situation that breaks the rhythm - is the candidate flexible or does he/she candidate panic? will he/she keep the good habits and maintain structured comms? etc etc - Try to make the best out of it and use the unexpected experience to nail the next case.

Secondly, it the feedback on structure may have come from the other interviewer - if so, might not be as much of a conflict as you may think. There is really, no point in speculating and trying to reconcile - essentially, what matters it the perception the interviewers got. They will always evaluate based on that, even if it may not be fair at times.

Finally, there is little value in talking / complaining to HR in this matter - they don't really influence the assessment itself but coordinate the process. Interviewers will always back up their decisions with facts & observations, so there is little room for argumentation. Suggest you don't waste time on it, move on and focus on the next opportunity.

I'm sure you will draw your learnings from this experience and make the best out of it. Wish you all the best of luck!

Regards, Andi

Answer 3

Hi there,

First round interviews should be “by the book” as you rightly suggest, and this doesn't seem quite by the book (taking what you say at face value here).

Opening questions after the prompt are typically something like “What do you think are the factors the client should consider in scenario x?”. This is where you build a structure, which is similar to a framework in a candidate-led case (except you're answering a question and not creating a plan to solve the case).

If instead the interviewer went straight to a graph, which is usually the second question, the first one was literally skipped. As a former McKinsey interviewer, this doesn't smell right. Especially since you were asked not to structure anything, which creates unnecessary stress and confusion.

However, structuring is tested throughout the case, not just in the beginning. You must always be structured when you approach graphs, do math, answer brainstorming questions, etc. Hence, you may have had some deficits here - hard to tell.

Should you raise it with HR? I would! Given the contradiction the interviewer created by telling you not to structure and then faulting you for it, you have a leg to stand on. Recruiting takes this very seriously and interviewers can't just do what they want. Will it lead somewhere? Hard to tell, but I'll cross my fingers for you!

Hope this helps a bit! Best of luck!

Answer 4

Hey there,

That sounds rather odd. Sorry about your experience!

McKinsey interviews can be unstructured, however, if they ask you to do B and explicitly not to do A, then complain later that you did not do A, I would definitely raise that with HR.

However, in general, it is always difficult to judge interview experiences from the sidelines. Maybe there was a misunderstanding on your end as well. Hard to tell!

I would politely explain the situation to HR and ask for their feedback on it.

All the best!

Florian

Answer 5

Hi there,

Maikol said it exactly right! The interviewer did not want a structure right then/there.

Your entire case is structuring!

Framework is not synonymous with structuring. Frameworking is just a type of structuring.

It sounds like the interviewer provided you with an exhibit at the beginning of the prompt/case? If this happens you absolutely do need to process the chart/exhibit first.

However, at every step of the case you need to continue to structure/framework. You are always being tested for this!

Great that you got into the 2nd round, and well done adjusting/being adaptable. But yes, please never stop structuring even if you don't have to do a framework from the very beginning!

Answer 6

Hello!

Sorry to hear about that, sounds like a frustrating situation. However, I wouldn´t raise that to HR.

Instead, I would ask to follow up with the consultant with whom you did the interview. Maybe what she/he meant was that you were not great in the overall structure, which is a different thing than the part of the case where you build the issue tree. However, just a theory, good to clarify.

Hope it helps!

Cheers,

Clara

Answer 7

Hi there,

This does sound confusing indeed.

I can only assume that they didn't want the standard framework, but they still expected you to give a structured answer (even though it wasn't a structure per se). If I were you I would write to HR with the situation you described and see what happens. If it did go down the way you describe it, then you have a reason to be frustrated with it.

Answer 8

It's hard to say without you elaborating but I would just call out the difference between structured thinking vs. structured output. In the specific situation with the exhibit, your interviewer is testing for your conceptual thinking. Therefore, structured thinking is important but they don't want you to take 2-5 mins to have a robust structure. In other words, they want to understand how you process the exhibit from key observations and using that to derive insights.