Hi there,
- When I hear the prompt of a case I repeat the situation including the question.
- After that I typically ask some clarification questions.
- And as a final step I say somethhing like: ok then we have the problem XYZ - correct? If the interveiwer says yes, then I say, ok let me write it down.
- Then I say can I take a minute to structure the problem.
So what I am essentially doing is to mention the problem statement twice. After summarizing the prompt and after the clarification question before I jump into the structuring. I do that to make sure I am still aligned with the client/interviewer as the clarification questions may lead to a more specific problem statement or a slightly different one compared to the case prompt.
Does that make sense? Or would you recommend not doing it as it could be wired repeating the problem statement twice in a short time?
Cheers
And if I understand you correctly, you say that I should not mention the problem statement twice resp. directly before I start structuring the case - correct?
When should I say the problem statement to align with the interviewer/client?
E.g., "Ok, let me see if I understood this correctly: the Customer is a product X manufacturer that wants to understand if they should sell to market Y, knowing X and Z. Can I now take 2 minutes to structure my approach?"
(2) When you explain your structure, you should re-state the problem to solve and link it to the approach. This is essentially being hypothesis driven.
In the above example: "In order to determine if it's a good idea for Customer to sell into market X, we would need to assess 3 areas: is the market attractive, can they be competitive in the market and are the barriers to entry significant".
As you can see, the problem to solve is repeated within the approach, you would not say verbatim "the question you asked me is this".