Questions regarding note-taking, if anyone is familiar:
Admittedly I got confused by my own notes in "normal" "interviwee led" cases too. E.g. Had three seperate categories of papers (1. Note taking notes=initial + follow up info, 2. calculations, and 3. structure/isue tree to show the interviewer). Often mixed them up in the end, e.g. did calcs in the "notes"-paper, and vice versa when things got stressed, wrote down extra info on the "structure paper", etc. Watched so many youtubes on this and read Cheng's responses in a thread, but still struggling. If anyone has found a "super formula" on how to do this that has really worked for consistency, feel free to share. To what paper do you transfer "mini-conclusions", etc. to not be messy? However, now the even bigger problem is this:
Note-taking in a MCKINSEY STYLE-case. The structure becomes even more bewildering. First, you take your Structure/Issue tree paper when the interviewer asks you for the initial "how would you set this up"-question. That is fine. But often-times (depending on case) it might progress and you might not even work with that structure. So question is, do you transfer subsequent "anwers" to this paper? Or do you just ignore it. Do you take one paper each now for each question that will follow and label them Q2), Q3) etc.? Or should this too contain some division on info/notes, calcs, mini-conclusions. And, of course, where the "hypothesis" and revised hypothesis fit into this type of interview style and where to write them down if applicable.
I also believe the issue might be amplified if you are asked to write everything up on a white board. Since there could be a logical division for half of the board notes and half calcs, but if the case progresses with Q2, Q3 etc. I'm not sure what to do
Feel free to inbox or write here! Many thank you!
Thank you thank you! Makes sense. Also, so one can probably transfer small "mini-conclusions" to the master sheet in order to know what the conclusion/synthesis should be in order to avoid confusion then