Should I only focus on interviewer-led case practice for McKinsey interviews?

Hi!

1. Regarding your precise question:

Let me be very clear here: 

It is impossible to properly learn how to solve cases in the purely interviewer-led format!

You HAVE to build your case solving muscle in the candidate-led way - learning how to rigorously approach the question, narrow it down to its answer-criterion, breaking down the criterion, and running the required analyses to test the criterion. Once you master this, solving interviewer-led cases in the McKinsey style is not a problem anymore and, in fact, much much easier!

2. Additional Context:

Now you might wonder why there is a difference at all in the styles employed e.g., McKinsey and BCG. From my experience in doing recruiting for both McKinsey and BCG, and having interviewed many applicants in both styles, I believe I can give a comment here. :) The difference is essentially rooted in two different philosophies.

Candidate-led case style (BCG et. al): Here, the candidate's conceptual thinking ability, his ability to hypothesize and prioritize, as well as his leadership capacity to drive problem solving forward are under scrutiny. The interviewer will try to get a holistic picture of the candidate! And over the course of 4-6 interviews, consistency of the candidate's process rigour is verified. Most firms have adopted this style.

Interviewer-led case style (McKinsey): McKinsey believes that a defined and limited set of qualities and abilities determine a consultant's success within the Firm. Hence, interviewers double down on these abilities in order to test them in a very focused way. This leads to the interviewer-led case style, which sometimes feels like multiple mini-cases under a common thematic umbrella. You can also see this philosphy in how McKinsey runs the fit part, which is much more focused compared to other firms: the Personal Experience Interview (PEI) at McK scrutinizes 3 defined dimensions in extreme detail (vs. more open discussion formats at other firms like BCG).

That being said, the difference between the interviewing styles of both firms is not that clear! Also at McKinsey, you might encounter candidate-led cases - especially in later rounds with more senior interviewers who often do not adhere to a "script" but prefer to open the conversation after the basic problem solving boxes have been "ticked" in previous rounds.

Cheers, Sidi

Hi,

Absolutely not. This is one of the biggest mistakes candidates are making. McKinsey has both candidate and interviewer led cases:

• Manager interviewers will most likely lead the cases
• Partners are usually lazy and will ask candidate to lead

Best

Hi Anonymous,

tl;dr: If you are able to solve candidate-led cases, you will be also able to solve interviewer-led cases (actually perceived a bit easier for most candidates, although there are slightly different challenges involved at the same time).

In slightly more detail:

Candidates in general worry too much about the differentiation between interviewer-led and candidate-led cases.

Why?

1. Also at interviewer-led cases you typcically begin with an overall structure for your case > so no big difference here.
2. At interviewer-led cases, you are also required the 4-6 smaller chunks inside the case > so no big difference here as well.

Therefore, even if candidates interview at McKinsey, I do more candidate-led cases in the first coaching sessions, before slowly moving to interviewer-led case format. It's essential to be able to navigate through a whole case yourself in the first place, and once you master this skill, you can do that 'easily' inside the smaller chunks of a typical McKinsey interviewer-led case. But yes, it's definitely helpful to also (!) practive interviewer-led cases to feel and better understand the different dynamics involved!

Btw., the typical interviewer-led case format shows up in all rounds, but even more in first rounds since those are mostly pre-defined cases following that structure. Final rounds with partners can be similar but they tend to do whatever brings the most value and insights for them, so don't be surprised if that feels different.

Hope that helps - if so, please be so kind to give it a thumbs-up with the green upvote button below!

Robert

Dear A,

To be honest, if you want to crack McKinsey interviw, you have to practice with both type of cases. It's like to see the both sides of the coin. I agree with other experts, if you can solve the candidate-led case, you can solve the interview led case. 

If you need any help, feel free to reach out. 

Best,
André

No, even in McKinsey candidate-led case happen (I would say with a frequency of more than 25%, depending on the office)

Best,
Antonello

Hello,

Don't do this mistake. First of all, it's a myth that in McKinsey you find only interviewer-led cases. Secondly, most of the time you won't even notice at the beginning if it's an interviewer-led or a candidate-led case, you will write down your structure as you did in standard cases.

The only difference is that the interviewer could decide to "guide" you, asking specific questions or requiring specific analyses. On the one hand you will be a bit more under pressure, since you have a specific question that you have to answer in a sort time, but on the other hand you are guided towards the solution and you don't have to worry of missing the fundamental steps for resolution. 

Best,
Luca

You should not focus on interview-led cases!

No matter the company, you need to practice candidate-led cases. this is because it is absolutley invaluable to know where you are in the case, have a view as to where it should go, where it has been, and why. Even if you're "being led" you need to know where you are!

Absolutely focus on candidate-led cases.

It's like learning guitar...if you learn on steel string, you'll play nylon like a champ. If you learn on nylon, you'll never be able to jump onto steel.