Cookie and Privacy Settings

This website uses cookies to enable essential functions like the user login and sessions. We also use cookies and third-party tools to improve your surfing experience on preplounge.com. You can choose to activate only essential cookies or all cookies. You can always change your preference in the cookie and privacy settings. This link can also be found in the footer of the site. If you need more information, please visit our privacy policy.

Data processing in the USA: By clicking on "I accept", you also consent, in accordance with article 49 paragraph 1 sentence 1 lit. GDPR, to your data being processed in the USA (by Google LLC, Facebook Inc., LinkedIn Inc., Stripe, Paypal).

Manage settings individually I accept
expert
Expert with best answer

Vlad

97% Recommendation Rate

413 Meetings

11,459 Q&A Upvotes

USD 239 / Coaching

2

Would you hypothesis that the PST requirement changes?

I know that McKinsey state there is a set benchmark score, and people believe this is around 70%...However...

Is there likely some type of flexibility around the score? Of course McKinsey would never admit this but would smaller offices, different teams (implementation/digital etc) have their own scores? If there is only 3 candidates sitting the PST and one achieves 60% and the others achieve 30%, Would HR have the discretion to progress the candidate with only 60% through to interviews (assuming they like their CV etc). Surely for a company who prides themselves on efficiency etc, they would find it much easier to be flexible to save time and resources in the process.

Just a shower thought...

Thanks

I know that McKinsey state there is a set benchmark score, and people believe this is around 70%...However...

Is there likely some type of flexibility around the score? Of course McKinsey would never admit this but would smaller offices, different teams (implementation/digital etc) have their own scores? If there is only 3 candidates sitting the PST and one achieves 60% and the others achieve 30%, Would HR have the discretion to progress the candidate with only 60% through to interviews (assuming they like their CV etc). Surely for a company who prides themselves on efficiency etc, they would find it much easier to be flexible to save time and resources in the process.

Just a shower thought...

Thanks

2 answers

  • Upvotes
  • Date ascending
  • Date descending
Best Answer
Book a coaching with Vlad

97% Recommendation Rate

413 Meetings

11,459 Q&A Upvotes

USD 239 / Coaching

Hi,

There is a certain bar that you have to achieve (e.g. 22 correct out of 26)

The bar may vary between the office and in different periods of time. In other words, the bar is set depending on the current demand for particular roles in the office. Thus in a bad economic cycle / issues with the pyramid and analysts / associates ratio in a particular office, I would assume the bar to be higher.

Best!

Hi,

There is a certain bar that you have to achieve (e.g. 22 correct out of 26)

The bar may vary between the office and in different periods of time. In other words, the bar is set depending on the current demand for particular roles in the office. Thus in a bad economic cycle / issues with the pyramid and analysts / associates ratio in a particular office, I would assume the bar to be higher.

Best!

Hey,

McKinsey doesn’t hire based on numerus clausus (ie, they need to get X people nor are getting the best out of Y that apply). It’s based on being above a certain bar (which is obviously calibrated over the years)... só don’t think you have a strong point on it

Best

Bruno

Hey,

McKinsey doesn’t hire based on numerus clausus (ie, they need to get X people nor are getting the best out of Y that apply). It’s based on being above a certain bar (which is obviously calibrated over the years)... só don’t think you have a strong point on it

Best

Bruno