#1 Expert for coaching sessions (1800+) | Ex BCG | 900+ reviews with 100% recommendation rate
Book a coaching

Question regarding initial structure


Hi All,

So, I was wondering, after you have clarified the intial introduction of the case and you create your structure, is it worthwhile to give your interviewer a quick breakdown of the case?

For example, if you were doing a market entry case and you decided to look at the Market, the Company and the Competitor, which of the below should you tell your interviwer:

  1. I'd like to look at the Market, Company and Competitor
  2. I'd like to look at the Market, which I'll like to look at the customers, market size and trends. Then the company, to see our existing capabilities and feasability. Lastly, the competitor, in which I'd like to look at barriers or entry and exsiting market segment etc.

(This is just a rough structure for illustrative purposes)

The reasoning behind this question is say that for a case, you want to be as MECE as possible, but should you justify your structure to your interviewer before you start drilling down?

  • Upvotes
  • Date ascending
  • Date descending
Francesco replied on 09/05/2017
#1 Expert for coaching sessions (1800+) | Ex BCG | 900+ reviews with 100% recommendation rate

Hi Nish,

my suggested approach would be to present something in between the two options. You can first mention the marco areas of the case, then provide details for each of them, in two steps:

  • STEP 1: mention first the macro areas of your framework. “In order to help our client, I would like to focus on three main areas. Number 1 we may work on [FIRST TOPIC], Number 2 on [SECOND TOPIC], Number 3 on [THIRD TOPIC]. If this is fine for you, let me go deeper in each of them”
  • STEP 2: provide details for each macro point. “In area Number 1, this is what I would analyse. First, I would like to cover [FIRST STEP OF FIRST TOPIC]; second, I would like to focus on [SECOND STEP OF FIRST TOPIC]; next, I would like to work on [THIRD STEP OF FIRST TOPIC]. In area Number 2, this is what I would analyse. First,(…)”

In this way you can give an immediate idea to the interviewer of what is your overall structure, and at the same time make it clear you have a plan to approach in details each step.

Hope this helps,


Vlad replied on 09/11/2017
McKinsey / Accenture / Got all BIG3 offers / More than 300 real MBB cases / Harvard Business School


It's exactly right! I would also add that you can formulate subpoints as 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 look at: Market attractiveness, Company Attractiveness, Competition Intensity, Feasibility of exit"
  1. 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"

Good luck!

Related BootCamp article(s)

Getting Up to Speed

In order to repeatedly demonstrate prerequisite skills under the pressure of a real case interview, you need to learn the basics and practice cases.

4 Comment(s)