Hi there,

First of all, congratulations on passing the first McKinsey interview round!

This is indeed an interesting question which is probably relevant for quite a lot of users, so I am happy to provide my perspective on it:

• Generally speaking, I would advise you to talk about different situations so that you never repeat the same situation for the same dimension. Especially since interviewers occasionally note your situations to avoid being told the same situation again, you might risk being asked to provide another situation.
• However, given that you pointed out these are your top-priority situations, you might still try to reuse them. If it is solely a matter of laziness or creativity to think about other situations where you displayed the given dimensions, I would advise you to do the additional efforts since it might be worth it.

In case you want a more detailed discussion on how to best prepare your final McKinsey interview round, please feel free to contact me directly.

I hope this helps,

Hagen

Hey there.

For most offices, you are required to come up with new PEI stories for the 2nd round. 

I would generally always advise having 2 stories for each dimension at hand since

• you should have a different story for the 2nd round
• sometimes interviewers reject stories right away (wrong context, mismatch with dimension,…) and then you need a new story on the spot.

Have a look at the detailed article I wrote on the PEI. It covers

1. what content the stories should contain
2. how to communicate it most effectively

You might be able to draft new stories with the help of the article: https://www.preplounge.com/en/mckinsey-pei

Cheers,

Florian

Hello!

To me, the key thing of your post is that you mention “that you cannot think of better ones”. If that is the case, if these are the stories that really give you the best chance to get hired, 100% go for it. 

Usually, it´s preferable to have a variety of stories, since this also gives you the chance to let the interviewer know about multiple sides of you. However, I agree that there are stories that are a must of you, and in those cases it´s worth recycling. 

If you want to deep dive on the topic, the "Integrated FIT guide for MBB" has been recently published in PrepLounge´s shop (https://www.preplounge.com/en/shop/tests-2/integrated-fit-guide-for-mbb-34)

It provides an end-to-end preparation for all three MBB interviews, tackling each firms particularities and combining key concepts review and a hands-on methodology. Following the book, the candidate will prepare his/her stories by practicing with over 50 real questions and leveraging special frameworks and worksheets that guide step-by-step, developed by the author and her experience as a Master in Management professor and coach. Finally, as further guidance, the guide encompasses over 20 examples from real candidates.

Furthermore, you can find a Expert Article on PreLounge fully dedicated to Behavioural questions, one of the key building blocks of FIT: 

https://www.preplounge.com/en/behavioral-interview-questions

In adition to that, you can find 2 free cases in the PrepL case regarding FIT preparation (motivational quesitons and Intro & CV questions:

Intro and CV questions > https://www.preplounge.com/en/management-consulting-cases/fit-interview/intermediate/introduction-and-cv-questions-fit-interview-preparation-200

Motivational questions > https://www.preplounge.com/en/management-consulting-cases/fit-interview/intermediate/motivational-questions-fit-interview-preparation-201

Feel free to PM me for disccount codes for the Integrated FIT Guide, since we still have some left from the launch

Hi there,

Ultimately, if you don't have any better stories, you should use your original ones - you don't have a choice! It isn't the end of the world, even if it is preferred to have some variety/diversity across your stories.

You don't need better ones. You need other ones that are still good. 

The same story used twice loses some of it's value. So it's better to have a not so good answer but different that using the same twice.