3

What final recommendation structure would you recommend for McKinsey interviews?

I'd like to get your thoughts of what is the best final recommendation structure is for McKinsey. Thanks!

I'd like to get your thoughts of what is the best final recommendation structure is for McKinsey. Thanks!

3 answers

  • Upvotes
  • Date ascending
  • Date descending
Best Answer

For McKinsey:

1. Recommendation first, in clear and exact terms. E.g. "I recommend the client shut down shut down their china factories to return capacity to US."

2. Follow up with reasoning next: E.g. "There are three reasons (edit: MBB loves the "threes") for this: 1) we immediately save xxM in costs, which is yy% of overall revenue, thus improving margins by zz% which was our original goal 2) we reduce negative PR around our chinese mfg 3) long-term benefit from new US-friendly mfg policies" -- these reasons are just hypotheticals btw.

3. Follow up with 2-3 risks (risks == things that are not fully understood/known): E.g. "1) US capacity is more difficult to grow in face of unknown demand projections 2) difficult to serve APAC demand from US due to unknown political climate 3) heavy up-front divestiture costs"

4. Finally, if applicable - you may want to "upsell" a bit by saying: as next steps, we'd love to work with the client to offer the best divestiture plan, and look into the ideal capacity expansion scenarios in the US.. etc etc.

Hope this helps

Hemant

For McKinsey:

1. Recommendation first, in clear and exact terms. E.g. "I recommend the client shut down shut down their china factories to return capacity to US."

2. Follow up with reasoning next: E.g. "There are three reasons (edit: MBB loves the "threes") for this: 1) we immediately save xxM in costs, which is yy% of overall revenue, thus improving margins by zz% which was our original goal 2) we reduce negative PR around our chinese mfg 3) long-term benefit from new US-friendly mfg policies" -- these reasons are just hypotheticals btw.

3. Follow up with 2-3 risks (risks == things that are not fully understood/known): E.g. "1) US capacity is more difficult to grow in face of unknown demand projections 2) difficult to serve APAC demand from US due to unknown political climate 3) heavy up-front divestiture costs"

4. Finally, if applicable - you may want to "upsell" a bit by saying: as next steps, we'd love to work with the client to offer the best divestiture plan, and look into the ideal capacity expansion scenarios in the US.. etc etc.

Hope this helps

Hemant

If I follow this structure, often times I'd be given feedback saying "it's too long". Should I still follow conclusion-supporting facts-next steps-risks even though it seems too long, or drop some info? — June on Jul 26, 2017

June - "it's too long" typically refers not to the number of areas you cover but rather how succintly you can cover it. With practice, you can cover 1-3 within 30 seconds and end with, "if it is of interest, I will be happy to discuss next steps specifically around divestitures and capacity planning". — Anonymous on Jul 26, 2017

Book a coaching with Francesco

100% Recommendation Rate

2,870 Meetings

5,848 Q&A Upvotes

USD 349 / Coaching

Hi Anonymous,

the previous answers are all fine; however they do not cover the biggest mistake I see in final recommendation: not repeating the objective.

Many candidates forget part of the objective when providing the answer, in particular when there is a time constraint on the final sum up. They thus do not provide the correct answer to the interviewer due to that.

Also, you should not feel constrained to provide three reasons. If there are two reasons supporting your conclusion, don’t try to put a third one – it will be very awkward and the interviewer will notice that you are making up the third reason. I saw that several times from candidates: “There are three reasons for that: (i) We would increase sales by XYZ; (ii) we could keep a competitor out and …ehm.. [silence – making up incorrect answer]”.

Thus my suggestion for your final sum up would be the following:

  1. Repeat the objective: “Dear Mr CEO, you asked us to find why profits are going down and a way to increase them by $5M in 2 years” – This allows you to be 100% sure you are fully answering the case. More than 50% of the people don’t do this, so you will be already above average with this step
  2. Provide an answer-first conclusion: “After a quick analysis we found the main reason for the profit decline is increasing labour cost abroad. We also found a way to increase profits by $3.5M. This is coming from two sources: (i) relocating part of the production in Mexico and (ii) starting our own website.” Again, if there are only two areas you found to increase profits, you have to mention two. Of course, if you found a third one, would be good to add it.
  3. Provide next steps – including risks: “As additional steps, we would propose the following: (i) There may be some issues with the relocation in Mexico due to potential layoffs in the US which would be worth to be investigated. (ii) We would be also happy to continue the analysis to identify additional $1.5M in profits. To do so, as we saw it could make sense to investigate the launch of a new product in the market. We would like to provide a full analysis on this in a couple of days”.

Best,
Francesco

Hi Anonymous,

the previous answers are all fine; however they do not cover the biggest mistake I see in final recommendation: not repeating the objective.

Many candidates forget part of the objective when providing the answer, in particular when there is a time constraint on the final sum up. They thus do not provide the correct answer to the interviewer due to that.

Also, you should not feel constrained to provide three reasons. If there are two reasons supporting your conclusion, don’t try to put a third one – it will be very awkward and the interviewer will notice that you are making up the third reason. I saw that several times from candidates: “There are three reasons for that: (i) We would increase sales by XYZ; (ii) we could keep a competitor out and …ehm.. [silence – making up incorrect answer]”.

Thus my suggestion for your final sum up would be the following:

  1. Repeat the objective: “Dear Mr CEO, you asked us to find why profits are going down and a way to increase them by $5M in 2 years” – This allows you to be 100% sure you are fully answering the case. More than 50% of the people don’t do this, so you will be already above average with this step
  2. Provide an answer-first conclusion: “After a quick analysis we found the main reason for the profit decline is increasing labour cost abroad. We also found a way to increase profits by $3.5M. This is coming from two sources: (i) relocating part of the production in Mexico and (ii) starting our own website.” Again, if there are only two areas you found to increase profits, you have to mention two. Of course, if you found a third one, would be good to add it.
  3. Provide next steps – including risks: “As additional steps, we would propose the following: (i) There may be some issues with the relocation in Mexico due to potential layoffs in the US which would be worth to be investigated. (ii) We would be also happy to continue the analysis to identify additional $1.5M in profits. To do so, as we saw it could make sense to investigate the launch of a new product in the market. We would like to provide a full analysis on this in a couple of days”.

Best,
Francesco

Hi,
The best structure is to start with your answer first, support it with data (3 main insights of your case), precise the next step if needed and repeat your answer.

The key to your recommendation is to be data-driven and client-friendly. This a general consulting thing. I am really not sure there are different recommendations structure depending on the firm you are interviewing with.

The only specific to McK is that they really apply 'the Pyramid Principle' (book written by a McK consultant, B. Minto). The core idea is to 'start with the answer first'. However, most of the firms apply it. Why ? It is client-friendly.

I have seen many people preparing for cases, and explaining me what they have been doing chronologically for the last 30 min.
If I am the CEO of Fortiune 500 company, i meet you in the elevator,I don't wanna lose a minute with you. I don't pay you to know what you have been doing. I pay you to get answers, know they are solid (data-driven), and that i can build my strategy on it. That is what is tested when you're asked to conclude. Will you be able to perform well if you meet a CEO in the elevator or will you fuck up ?

Here is an example :
Regarding the profitability issue we have been working on, the best solution seems so far to target the new segment XXX with new product YYY to boost revenues with a marketing campaign because :
1. We have no levers to reduce costs of current products, revenue is the issue
2. Other segments are not growing, this segments grows 20% a year
3. We have all the capabilities and channels to address it.
I am on my way to check potential logistics issues with the Operations department, but with the available data, our recommendation is to target new segment XXX.

Whatever you're doing, always wonder what is the most-client friendly. Regarding conclusions, it consists in (maybe repharsing the problem/question in 1 sentence and) starting with your answer first, supporting it with data, and repeating your main conclusion.

Cheers,
Florian

Hi,
The best structure is to start with your answer first, support it with data (3 main insights of your case), precise the next step if needed and repeat your answer.

The key to your recommendation is to be data-driven and client-friendly. This a general consulting thing. I am really not sure there are different recommendations structure depending on the firm you are interviewing with.

The only specific to McK is that they really apply 'the Pyramid Principle' (book written by a McK consultant, B. Minto). The core idea is to 'start with the answer first'. However, most of the firms apply it. Why ? It is client-friendly.

I have seen many people preparing for cases, and explaining me what they have been doing chronologically for the last 30 min.
If I am the CEO of Fortiune 500 company, i meet you in the elevator,I don't wanna lose a minute with you. I don't pay you to know what you have been doing. I pay you to get answers, know they are solid (data-driven), and that i can build my strategy on it. That is what is tested when you're asked to conclude. Will you be able to perform well if you meet a CEO in the elevator or will you fuck up ?

Here is an example :
Regarding the profitability issue we have been working on, the best solution seems so far to target the new segment XXX with new product YYY to boost revenues with a marketing campaign because :
1. We have no levers to reduce costs of current products, revenue is the issue
2. Other segments are not growing, this segments grows 20% a year
3. We have all the capabilities and channels to address it.
I am on my way to check potential logistics issues with the Operations department, but with the available data, our recommendation is to target new segment XXX.

Whatever you're doing, always wonder what is the most-client friendly. Regarding conclusions, it consists in (maybe repharsing the problem/question in 1 sentence and) starting with your answer first, supporting it with data, and repeating your main conclusion.

Cheers,
Florian

(edited)

Although the answer is very extensive already, I would like to add a thing that I learned from the case interviews with McKinsey. I was been told that ideally I should end up my recommendations with a mention of potential risks, e.g. there is a risk that the introduction of the new product will fail due to high competition. To address this issue, I recommend to take additional time in analysing customer demands and competitor products. — Anonymous on Jul 26, 2017

Related BootCamp article(s)

Interviewer-Led vs Candidate-Led cases

Case Interviews can be led by the candidate or by the interviewer: In Candidate-led cases the main challenge is the structure. In Interviewer-led cases the main challenge is to adapt quickly

Related case(s)

McKinsey Questions

Solved 36.5k times
McKinsey Questions Tell me of a situation where you had an opinion and no one seemed to agree with you. What was your goal when you decided to join university / work / clubs / a sports team? Did you have a goal that you were not able to reach? What did you do? What do you want to be remembered for and how are you achieving it? What is your typical way of dealing with conflict?
4.5 5 849
| Rating: (4.5 / 5.0) |
Difficulty: Intermediate | Style: Fit interview | Topics: Personal fit

Tell me of a situation where you had an opinion and no one seemed to agree with you. What was your goal when you decided to join university / work / clubs / a sports team? Did you have a goal that you were not able to reach? What did you do? What do you want to be remembered for and how are you ... Open whole case

MBB Final Round Case - Smart Education

Solved 2.2k times
MBB Final Round Case - Smart Education Our client is SmartBridge, a nonprofit educational institution offering face-to-face tutoring services. The client operates in the US. The mission of SmartBridge is to help as many students as possible to complete studies and prevent that they drop from the school system, in particular in disadvantaged areas. The client is considering starting operations for its services in the Chicago area. They hired us to understand if that makes sense. Due to the nonprofit regulation, SmartBridge should operate on its own in the market, without any partnership. How would you help our client?
4.6 5 81
| Rating: (4.6 / 5.0)

Our client is SmartBridge, a nonprofit educational institution offering face-to-face tutoring services. The client operates in the US. The mission of SmartBridge is to help as many students as possible to complete studies and prevent that they drop from the school system, in particular in disadvant ... Open whole case

Introduction and CV questions – FIT interview preparation

Solved 500+ times
Introduction and CV questions – FIT interview preparation During this exercise, we will deep-dive in 3 of the most common Intro & CV questions asked in FIT interviews:  1. Walk me through your CV 2. Tell me about yourself 3. Tell me about the thing that makes you most proud on your CV   *box-open green* *See Graph 1 – Note: "Intro & CV questions" are one of the 4 types of questions you can find in FIT interviews. *box-close* ➥ Graphs from the Integrated FIT Guide for MBB    
4.6 5 25
| Rating: (4.6 / 5.0)
Difficulty: Intermediate | Style: Fit interview | Topics: Personal fit

During this exercise, we will deep-dive in 3 of the most common Intro & CV questions asked in FIT interviews: 1. Walk me through your CV 2. Tell me about yourself 3. Tell me about the thing that makes you most proud on your CV *See Graph 1 – Note: "Intro & CV questions" are one of the 4 ty ... Open whole case

Motivational questions – FIT interview preparation

Solved 500+ times
Motivational questions – FIT interview preparation During this exercise, we will deep-dive in 4 of the most common Motivational questions asked in FIT interviews:   Why Consulting? Why this particular company? (McKinsey, Bain, BCG, others) Why this particular location? *Particularly relevant to people re-locating or choosing an office not in their region Why this particular specialized business function *Only relevant when not applying for a general role (e.g., McKinsey Advanced Analytics, BCG Gamma, etc.) *box-open green* *See Graph 1 – Note: "Motivational" are one of the 4 types of questions you can find in FIT interviews. *box-close* ➥ Graphs from the Integrated FIT Guide for MBB
4.8 5 22
| Rating: (4.8 / 5.0)
Difficulty: Intermediate | Style: Fit interview | Topics: Personal fit

During this exercise, we will deep-dive in 4 of the most common Motivational questions asked in FIT interviews: Why Consulting? Why this particular company? (McKinsey, Bain, BCG, others) Why this particular location? *Particularly relevant to people re-locating or choosing an office not ... Open whole case

McKinsey Digital / BCG Platinion: Oil & Gas Upstream Technology

Solved 400+ times
McKinsey Digital / BCG Platinion: Oil & Gas Upstream Technology [PLEASE NOTE: This is a technically difficult case and should only be completed by those coming in as a Technology specialist, i.e. recruiting for McKinsey Digital, BCG Platinion, etc.] Our client is a multinational oil and gas company. While they are vertically integrated and have upstream, midstream, and downstream divisions, they have recently been experiencing competitivity issues in the upstream gas division, which brings in $1B in profits annually. Our client’s upstream division has offices in Australia and Indonesia. Their work is highly dependent on their IT systems, as they have to constantly monitor wells and pipes (pressure, hydrocarbon count, fluid makeup, etc.) The upstream division has two large legacy IT systems that are primarily used for downstream operations but have been modified for upstream purposes. These systems are managed by a central team in the US which is responsible for all IT issues across the business. They triage issues/enhancements and then manage development teams in India and Finland who complete the work.
4.3 5 12
| Rating: (4.3 / 5.0)

[PLEASE NOTE: This is a technically difficult case and should only be completed by those coming in as a Technology specialist, i.e. recruiting for McKinsey Digital, BCG Platinion, etc.] Our client is a multinational oil and gas company. While they are vertically integrated and have upstream, midstr ... Open whole case