It really depends on whether you have anything else to explore, that is more important than risks. The typical structure is the following:
- What was the objective
- Your recommendation
- Arguments why the recommendation is valid (2-4 arguments) with the supporting numbers
- Additional things you would like to explore. In the order of priority:
- Things you still need to explore / data you need to get in order to provide a valid recommendation (Very typical for McKinsey cases where the interviewer guides you and interrupts in the middle of the case to provide a conclusion
- Things you've slightly covered during the case but have not come to a particular measurable solution or were not the part of the original objective (e.g. alternative growth options or some questions on creativity)
- Next steps
In my view, the last part (4th) of your recommendation should not be bigger than the rest of the recommendation (1-3), thus I will talk about risks if I have perfectly covered everything else in the case.
- Our objectives were to understand why the profit is declining by X and how to bring the profit back within one year (Don't forget that your objective should be measurable in terms of money / other metric and time)
- According to the analysis we've done so far, my recommendation is to shut down the division A and to concentrate on the divisions b/c if we want to increase the profit, and there is a number of reasons for that.. (Remember that your arguments should include numbers).
- You provide the arguments a) First of all, problems in Division A are the major driver of the decline in profits - 90% of the decline in profits refer to Division A. b) Secondly, the decline is driven by the contracting market size that is shrinking at xx percent and is not expected to improve in the near future. c) Finally....
- Additionally, I would like to check the option of seeling the division A products abroad. We have discussed several potential markets to enter but still have to check whether it will be feasible for us financially