Hiển thị các bài đăng có nhãn Aspiring Direct Report. Hiển thị tất cả bài đăng
Hiển thị các bài đăng có nhãn Aspiring Direct Report. Hiển thị tất cả bài đăng

Chủ Nhật, 1 tháng 12, 2013

McKinsey Interviews - December, 2013 Posts for Aspiring Summer Interns

McKinsey's summer internship recruiting season is right around the corner.  So, in an effort to remain timely and relevant, the posts over the next couple of weeks will focus on networking, resume screen, and interview-related topics.

I will try to consolidate those posts into a short period of time so that a) interview candidates can find them easily and b) others can ignore them easily.

As always, I will post articles as I finish editing them, but they will be dated based on when they were first written.  Apologies for any confusion that causes to folks who subscribe to or follow this blog regularly.

To anyone NOT interviewing with McKinsey:

Apologies if you are already a consultant or looking for tips on how to work with a former McKinsey consultant.  We'll return to the typical mix of content after a couple of weeks.

Chủ Nhật, 24 tháng 11, 2013

Top-Down vs. Bottom-Up Problem Solving Approaches at McKinsey

There are typically two primary ways to approach problem-solving - "top-down" and "bottom-up".  In this post I'll explain the differences as well as why the top-down approach is preferred by McKinsey bosses and interviewers...

McKinsey takes a structured approach to solving problems that includes breaking down larger issues into smaller pieces.  Those components of the problem are arranged into an "issue tree" with the biggest, overarching issues at the top.  Those are then supported by additional, increasingly specific, tactical, broader levels of supporting details.  I will devote a future post to these issue trees.

Top-Down Approach

This means the problem solving begins at the "top" or with the highest-level, overarching question or theme, also known as the governing thought.  From there, the problem is broken down, identifying and developing the elements the next level down, with special focus on the critical or vital few drivers of impact.  Only after those key elements have been determined does the focus shift to tactical details.  The process is repeated, adding additional levels down the tree the tree is exhaustive.

Bottom-Up Approach

This is the opposite of the top-down approach and, as the name implies, begins with the tactical, granular, specific details.  In this case, the work focuses on starting with a laundry list of issues, then organizing them into like groups, or "buckets".  Those buckets can often be grouped further, building levels up the tree, until, finally, the key drivers and governing thought are reached.

Top-Down vs. Bottom-Up Thinking

The simplest way to summarize the difference is this:  working at the top is considered strategic, while working at the bottom is tactical.  McKinsey consultants are encouraged to think strategically vs. tactically.  Here are some reasons why...

Why the Top-Down Approach is Preferred

There is a strong bias toward top-down thinking at McKinsey because it a) is logical, with a structured approach and b) starts by defining the most important questions and issues first.  The assumption is that if enough smart, experienced, hard-working consultants and clients align on the governing thought, the rest of the work that follows will be directionally correct.

Working top-down helps ensure that the questions asked and issues raised are completely exhaustive.  Less relevant ones might eventually get trimmed, but they will at least have been considered.  Top-down thinking also limits wasted work because only those topics deemed relevant and important to the governing thought need to be developed in detail.

Why the Bottom-Up Approach is Not Preferred

Starting at the bottom introduces several challenges.  First, it's not immediately clear - and might never be - if important details or areas have been missed or under-represented.  Second, items can be bucketed in a variety of ways that might all seem correct, but could be sub-optimal and/or lead to very different governing thoughts.  Finally, there's just a lot more work to be done at the bottom of the tree where there are countless details that can be considered and developed.

A Common Exception - Excel Modeling

One noteworthy exception when the bottom-up approach is often seen as superior to the top-down approach is in Excel modeling.  While a top-down approach to quantitative questions is helpful at the beginning of an engagement or workstream to get a directional sense of what the final answer will be, using that approach with clients and/or a final answer runs the risk of coming across as naive or just plain wrong.  Instead, a bottom-up model is required to confirm and support the final answer.

Thứ Bảy, 16 tháng 11, 2013

"Laundry Lists" at McKinsey and 3 Ways to Fix Them

Image from rohdesign.com
Your McKinsey boss might give you feedback that your work reads too much like a "laundry list".  This is also a common error during consulting case interviews.  In this post I'll explain what "laundry lists" are and how you can fix them in 3 easy steps...


What is a "laundry list"?

A laundry list is simply a long, disorganized list of items.  At McKinsey and other consulting firms, the term is used pejoratively.  Some common topics that end up as laundry lists include: a) recommended initiatives, b) possible root causes / sources of impact, or c) next steps.

What's wrong with a comprehensive laundry list?

The major downside of a laundry lists is that they tend to overwhelm and/or bore your audience, causing their eyes to glaze over.  There's simply too much random information for it to be compelling and/or actionable.

In addition, putting a list together isn't that difficult - laundry lists don't show a lot of thought or added value beyond simply collecting information and ideas.  Putting a laundry list in front of your client or McKinsey boss might make you look naive, lazy, and/or incompetent.

How do I fix a laundry list?

Laundry lists are often the result of too much focus on being comprehensive and not enough thought given to organization and efficiency.  There are three ways to take the contents of a laundry list and turn them into something more useful.

1.  Edit

In consulting, it is often the case that less is moreTrimming a laundry list will make it more manageable and the next two steps easier.  It's likely that you have included a lot of unimportant items in your effort to be comprehensive.  By applying the 80/20 rule and focusing on the critical or vital few items, you can streamline your list and make it easier to organize and digest.

2.  Bucket

If you look at your list, you will find that you have similar items that you can group together.  Each group goes into its own "bucket".  These buckets are then used to organize clusters of related items rather than having to organize many more individual items. 

3.  Prioritize

No two items will have the same priority.  Each will be different in terms of the factors that often define priority, like:
  • Potential impact
  • Ease of implementation
  • Importance to the project
  • Urgency to get it done
As a result, you can organize buckets - and items within buckets - by priority, with the most critical ones listed first.  This will help your team and the client optimize the investment of time, effort, and resources to maximize impact.

Thứ Sáu, 4 tháng 10, 2013

McKinsey Interviews - What is a McKinsey Case Interview and Why Is It Important?

Image from CPHMMC.com
If you've done any research into getting a job in consulting, you'll know that the case interview is a critical component of the interview process at McKinsey and other top management consulting firms.  Case interviews are also become more common in non-consulting job interviews, especially for Strategy roles and/or positions reporting to former consultants.

If you're just starting your research or it's not yet clear to you what, exactly, a case interview is, in this post I will answer:
  • What is a case interview?
  • Will it be a brain teaser?
  • Why are case interviews important?

What is a case interview?

The case is one of two types of interviews you'll face when applying for a job at McKinsey - the other is the personal experience interview (PEI).

In the case interview, you'll be presented with a business problem (the "case") to solve in about 30 minutes.  They are meant to be representative of real engagements that McKinsey teams are asked to solve for clients and are often based on real-life examples (that have been "sanitized", of course).

As you might expect given the time allotted to the case interview, you're not just being asked for one answer to one problem.  Typically, the case consists of several components that must be identified and solved in order to support your final recommendation(s).

Will it be a brain teaser?

The simple answer is:  NO.

Examples of "brain teasers" include questions like:
  • How much does the empire state building weight?
  • How many golf balls would fit into a 747?
  • How many pay phones are there in New York City?
At McKinsey, we would not consider these to be "case interview" questions, although my understanding is that brain teasers like these might get asked during interviewers for other firms, especially for more junior, Analyst-type positions.

No, but...

Although McKinsey interviews are not brain-teasers, there are elements of McKinsey case interviews - like market sizing - that will require this type of problem solving.  In the absence of data, how well can you come up with a logical approach for estimating something?

In these cases, you're not being assessed on how close you get to the "right" answer - although you will get dinged if your answer doesn't make sense.  Instead, your interviewers will be evaluating your thought process, how logical your approach is, and how well you explain and defend it.

Why are case interviews important?


Case interviews are important to you because they comprise half of your interview assessment score.  Case interviews are important to McKinsey and other firms because they're used as a way to assess your problem solving abilities and how well you can communicate your answer(s).  The reason the case is structured like a client engagement is so your interviewers can understand how you might perform as a teammate on a client team.



Thứ Ba, 1 tháng 10, 2013

McKinsey Interviews - October, 2013 Posts for Aspiring Consultants

To anyone NOT interviewing with McKinsey:

With apologies to folks who are already consultants or looking for tips on how to work with a current or former McKinsey consultant, the posts for the next couple of weeks will focus on getting into the Firm.  But we'll get right back to our regularly scheduled mix of programming after that!

To those of you who ARE interviewing with McKinsey:

For those of you who are Aspiring Consultants, the posts over the next couple of weeks will help you understand what to expect as you pursue a job at McKinsey and/or other top management consulting firms.

I'll try to coordinate the content across posts so I might delay putting content on the blog until other posts are completed.  But I will schedule them so they appear on the day they were originally written.  Apologies if that gets confusing for those of you who subscribe or follow this blog regularly.

Thứ Năm, 31 tháng 1, 2013

Get Feedback From Your 1st Round McKinsey Interview - Why It's Important

To get hired by McKinsey, you typically have to pass two rounds of interviews.  McKinsey's feedback-driven culture doesn't just apply to the job, it applies to interviews as well.  It's also possible that former McKinsey consultants will apply this approach when interviewing candidates for non-consulting jobs.  In this post we'll cover why it's important to get feedback from your 1st round interview...


The best football and basketball teams look at their first-half performance with a critical eye and make adjustments at halftime so they can play better in the second half.  Think of 1st round interview feedback as your coach's halftime locker room speech, only much less inspiring.  Just a reminder - because of McKinsey's tendency to focus on negative feedback or "improvement opportunities", you might come away from your 1st round feedback feeling like you're getting routed at halftime rather than up by 10 points.

Can every candidate get 1st round feedback?

Yes, but you might have to ask for it.

After your 1st round interview, one of your McKinsey interviewers will call you with your decision - you'll be offered a 2nd round interview, get dinged, or, least frequently, informed that a decision is pending.  Regardless of the outcome, you have the option of receiving feedback on your 1st round interview performance.  If it's offered to you, take it.  If it's not, ask for it.  I cannot emphasize this enough.  If you pass up the chance to get feedback from any consulting firm on any interview, you're missing a huge opportunity to improve your performance during future interviews.

What can I expect from 1st round feedback?

Every interviewer rated your performance during the case and personal experience interview (tips for doing well on the PEI) along multiple dimensions.  Good interviewers also take notes on specific things you did well or missed during both parts of the interview.  Diligent ones will also compare notes with the other person who interviewed you and can give you feedback that reflects both interviewers' perspectives - those conversations usually inform the post-interview decision meeting where your outcome was determined.

As with any McKinsey feedback, you should be getting feedback that's specific and actionable, even if it's not framed according to the McKinsey feedback model.  At the very least, you can expect directional feedback like "you need to show better structure in the case", "you should consider a different PEI story", or "your public math needs work".

If your interviewer is good and/or you're being offered a 2nd round interview, your feedback is likely to be more detailed and actionable.  In that case, your feedback might sound like these examples
"Your initial case framework was good, although you missed a key lever.  But, you made up for it by being creative and thorough when you drilled down into each of the levers you did identify".  Or, "even though you fumbled that one calculation, you caught it yourself, which showed good understanding of the case.  And, because you were walking me through your math, I could see that you have a good grasp of numbers and just misplaced a decimal."

Why is this important to me?

If you got dinged:

Your feedback will be helpful if you have other consulting interviews in your future.  If you were interviewing for a summer internship position, I hope you'll try again next year for a full-time position.  In that case, your feedback will be highly relevant.  If you still have upcoming interviews with other firms, McKinsey feedback can still be helpful to you as you course-correct and prepare for them.

If you were offered a 2nd round interview:

It's critical that you receive and apply 1st round interview feedback prior to your 2nd round interview.  Here are a few reasons why...

1.  Your feedback is meant to help you get a job offer

During "assessment training", McKinsey interviewers are instructed to help each candidate demonstrate their best possible performance (while being fair to other candidates, of course).  That means the person giving you feedback is on your side and wants you to do as well as possible in the next round.  Their feedback is being given with the best intentions - for you to perform even better in the next round and get a job offer.  Whether the feedback is nitpicky or harsh, take it with an open mind and address it.  Your feedback should help you feel more confident about the areas where you did well and help you focus your time and efforts on improving where you did not perform as well.  In this case, nitpicky feedback is a good sign - it means that in the 1st round you did well enough on the big things that your two interviewers had to think pretty hard for things for you to improve.

2.  Your 2nd round interviewers will also see your feedback

Each of your 2nd round interviewers will have seen your interview assessments from the 1st round.  That means if you performed poorly along a particular dimension, at least one of your 2nd round interviewers will be asked to probe or test you further on that dimension.  If you fumbled the math, you'll likely get at least one 2nd round case with a challenging quantitative element.  If you struggled with PEI, you'll be asked more questions on the same PEI topic.  Remember that in the 2nd round the stakes are higher - the result of a "false positive" assessment is a job offer, not just a follow-up interview - so the bar is also higher.

3.  It's your chance to show that you respond well to feedback

McKinsey is all about feedback - a good consultant has to be able to take a lot of negative feedback but also be able to process it and make the necessary improvements.  In addition to seeing your 1st round interview assessments, your 2nd round interviewers also know that you've received feedback on these points.  So, if your performance on those dimensions doesn't improve significantly, it will a) confirm the initial assessment and b) reflect poorly on your willingness or ability to improve based on feedback. 

In some ways, it's almost better to have a minor stumble (that doesn't get you dinged) on a particular dimension in the 1st round only to crush that same dimension in the 2nd round - you'll be seen as a candidate who learns from mistakes, takes feedback well, and is "coachable".  That said, I wouldn't advise that you tempt fate by trying to do this on purpose!  But I hope you find it reassuring if you made a misstep during your 1st round interviews but still got a 2nd round interview offer.

Thứ Tư, 16 tháng 1, 2013

Cover Letters for non-Consulting jobs - 4 common mistakes

Image from interviewpreparationtraining.com
As I mentioned in a previous post about consulting resume screens, cover letters are not critical when applying for a job at McKinsey.  However, in my pre- and post-McKinsey experience, I've found that non-consulting hiring managers rely heavily on cover letters to differentiate between candidates with similarly impressive resumes.  In this post I'll discuss the most common cover letter mistakes I've seen from candidates for non-Consulting jobs...




Why cover letters don't matter for Consulting resume screens

At McKinsey, there were a couple of factors that allowed us to make our interview invitation decisions without cover letters.  First, we sent an army of consultants to interview at our core schools so we had enough interview slots to invite most of the candidates with compelling resumes.  Second, we had a resume scoring methodology that we felt enabled us to make good assessments of candidates without cover letters.  Finally, we didn't really filter for interest in management consulting or McKinsey.  There was an underlying assumption - right or wrong - that if a candidate was willing to go through the case prep and interview process, that they would seriously considering accepting a job offer from us.

The only exception to this might be for the few "experienced hires" - candidates with significant industry experience who are not applying out of business school, JD, MD, or PhD program.  In those cases, a cover letter would help us assess why you want to go into consulting and what specific skills and expertise you could bring to the Firm.

 

Why cover letters DO matter for non-Consulting resume screens

For most job postings, a hiring manager is reviewing dozens of resumes.  This is especially true during interview season at a top business school.  Some of the resumes are, in McKinsey terms,  "clear turndowns" or "clear passes" - it's easy to see from just the resume that a particular candidate is one of the best or worst applicants.  That leaves a big pile of resumes left that often have similarly impressive credentials.  Cover letters can help candidates stand out as hiring managers try to differentiate between those remaining candidates.

The stakes are higher for the non-consulting resume screen because those companies usually have fewer interview slots available to offer.  A "false positive" (a candidate we think is great but turns out to be a dud) represents proportionally greater opportunity cost for a non-consulting company with 14 interview slots than it would for a consulting firm with hundreds of interview slots.  Furthermore, many non-consulting companies want to know how interested candidates are in their industry or company, something that's usually not readily apparent from just a resume.

Four common cover letter mistakes

1.  Not submitting a cover letter

Without a cover letter, your hiring manager has no way of putting your resume into context.  That might be fine if your academic, volunteer, and/or professional background are tied to the job for which you're applying.  Otherwise, you need a cover letter to help your hiring manager understand why you're a good fit for the job.  If you have an opportunity to submit a cover letter for a non-consulting resume screen, DO IT, especially if you're a career-switcher or you've bounced around between multiple industries.  Unless you do so, you're relying on your resume to tell your entire story.

Many companies use scoring rubrics to assess resumes.  The more information you can convey to the resume screener(s), the greater the likelihood you'll address what they're looking for, and the more opportunities you give them to increase your resume screen score.

Failing to submit a cover letter also forces your resume reviewer to wonder why you didn't while other candidates did.  Even if a cover letter is "optional", you should submit a cover letter.  Otherwise, it might come across like you couldn't be bothered to put one together while your competitors did.  My omission, you will have chosen the option of seeming less interested in the job than other applicants, which brings us to the second point...

2.  Not conveying genuine interest in the job

The hiring manager's goal is to fill open job postings.  The last thing a company wants to do is go through the effort of screening resumes, interviewing candidates (often at great expense), and make an offer, only to have that offer declined.  Therefore, many companies want to understand how likely you might be to accept a job offer, which is hard to tell from just a resume.  At the non-consulting companies where I've worked, we look for genuine interest in the industry, company, and location.

In order to do this well, it's critical to research the company and industry well enough to articulate your interest.  At the very least, this will show your hiring manager that you're diligent and are interested enough in the job to do your homework.  Communicating how excited you are about a job opportunity can help set you apart from other, similarly qualified candidates.  

Hiring managers for very attractive jobs are flooded with applications so any means of differentiation is helpful.  They also want to know that you actually want to do the job, not just something prestigious on your resume.  Hiring managers for less attractive jobs might want to know that you're not just using them as a back-up plan or the professional version of a "safety school".  Other hiring managers might be concerned that candidates aren't interested in working in a certain geography or a specific role.  For example, if you've always lived and worked big, coastal cities, you might want to let the hiring manager for that job in an industrial town in the midwest know why you're truly open to moving there.

3.  Insufficiently customizing your form letter

Hiring managers are not naive - we understand that you're applying for a lot of jobs.  It's also inefficient to write a letter from scratch for every potential interview, and efficiency is something we like in our employees.  That said, there are plenty of things you can do that don't take that much time or effort to make your form letter feel less generic.

The worst-disguised form letters are the "insert company name here" variety.  Nothing about the letter is specific to the job other than the company name.  The second least-disguised form letters are those with the "company specific paragraph".  It's very apparent when one paragraph is highly specific to the job and everything else is completely generic.

The letters that come across best, from the perspective of feeling company-specific, are those where the customization is peppered throughout the document.  This is especially powerful when it's done in parts of the cover letter where most candidates cut-and-paste.  A good example is the bullet point list of relevant skills or experiences that many candidates use.  These are often highly applicable across a number of jobs, so it makes sense to recycle this text.  However, candidates who explain how each item relates to the specific company or job might stand out as having tailored their cover letters.

When I was applying for jobs, I did this by having several different cover letters and resumes, with a boilerplate set written specifically for each industry I was considering.  Then, I would heavily customize for each company and job.  I felt it gave me the right balance of being customized and efficient.

4.  Poor attention to detail

Your cover letter and resume are often the first impression you make on a company, so the stakes are high.  If you can't be bothered to get the details right on such important documents, your hiring manager will have to wonder how much attention to detail you'll exhibit once you're in the job.  You have plenty of time to get your cover letter and resume right - if you screw that up, what will your hiring manager think of your ability to execute on last-minute issues or against tight deadlines?

Common mistakes here include:

  • Wrong company name
  • Typos
  • Misspellings - especially of the company or your interviewer's name
  • Addressing to the wrong gender
Proofread with these things in mind.  Better yet, get someone else to do it for you.  If you're the right kind of candidate, it's likely you've been writing and refining your cover letter and resume countless times.

This recruiting season, a candidate emailed us a resume and cover letter that was addressed to the wrong company.  We thought about forwarding the email and attachments to the other company with a note saying "we think this meant for you" and cc'ing the candidate, but decided to not torpedo the candidate's chances at a second company.  But not all hiring managers will be so forgiving!

Thứ Bảy, 12 tháng 1, 2013

T-shaped Problem-Solving at McKinsey and 3 Reasons Why It's Preferred

At McKinsey, there's a strong preference for T-shaped problem solving - making sure you've considered all of the applicable topics before going too deep on any of them.  This applies to problem solving a client engagement, case interviews, and working for a former McKinsey boss.




What is T-shaped problem solving?

Business is usually more about identifying better answers than finding a single, "right" answer.  So, it pays to make sure you've considered a wide range of solutions when problem-solving.

The universe of potential answers can typically be organized as topics or "buckets" of more detailed ideas or options.  Think of BREADTH as considering multiple topics and DEPTH as going into greater detail on specific topics.

T-shaped problem solving requires being diligent and exhaustive across all relevant topics BEFORE going deep and committing to going into detail on a specific topic.

Why is that the preferred approach?

1.  It has structure

The T-shaped approach provides a clear, logical means for looking for the best answers and is superior to any UNSTRUCTURED response.  You will get almost on credit for a "laundry list" of answers, even if they are among the best answers because a) there's no way to know if the list is thorough, b) you might over-invest time pursuing suboptimal answers, and c) you lack the ability to walk clients through the logic used to get to the answers helps increases your credibility and client buy-in to the answers.

2.  It enables collaborative problem solving

The T-shaped approach requires building and considering a list of all of the potentially relevant topics or buckets of answers.  This allows others to help you consider a) is your list comprehensive and b) are you choosing the right topics to investigate further?

3.  It focuses your time and resources on the most promising areas

Going deep on a particular topic or bucket of potential answers takes a lot of time and effort.  By being thoughtful about where to go deep, you can prioritize and apply your resources more wisely.  Not doing this and trying to go deep everywhere is viewed negatively and referred to as "boiling the ocean".  Even worse is going deep in the wrong places.  When your time is precious, there's nothing worse than exhausting an avenue of thought only to find nothing of value at the end.

 

What's wrong with I-shaped problem solving?

The alternative to T-shaped problem solving is an I-shaped approach.  This is when you begin by going deep on one or two topics.  The concern with I-shaped problem solving is that it's inferior to the T-shaped approach on each of the 3 points listed above.
  1. It's only structured vertically - your sub-list(s) of details might be structured and thorough, but your list of topics is not.
  2. It only allows vertical collaboration - others can see and understand your approach to building your sub-list(s) of details, but it's too late for them to contribute to choosing on which topics you go deep
  3. You might waste a lot of time and effort - If you've selected the wrong topics on which to go deep, you won't get the right answers and will have to start again elsewhere.  Even worse, you might not realize that you missed an important area of investigation and deliver poor solutions.

Why is this important to me?

Whether you're a) on a McKinsey team, b) working for a former McKinsey consultant, or c) are being interviewed by a current or former consultant, structured problem solving is critical to success.  T-shaped problem solving can help ensure that the structured approach you use is a good one.

Caveat

As far as I know, the term "T-shaped problem solving" isn't an established term, but it's how I like to describe it.  My apologies if this terminology already exists - I'm not trying to take credit for someone else's framework or phrase.  My internet search for the term did turn up references to T-shaped careers and expertise, but not to T-shaped problem solving.

Chủ Nhật, 6 tháng 1, 2013

Interviewing with former McKinsey consultants - 5 tips for case-type questions

Image from about.com
Even if you're interviewing for a non-consulting job, there's a chance you'll be asked case questions similar to those used in consulting interviews.  In this post I'll share some tips on how to do well on those case-type questions...



WHY SHOULD I CARE ABOUT CASE INTERVIEWS?

There are many former McKinsey (and other) consultants in management and executive roles who are accustomed to using case interviews to evaluate job candidates.  Doing well on case interviews usually requires the "consulting toolkit" that many employers value.  You'll often be competing with former consultants - who know how to do well on case interviews - for jobs so preparing for case-type interviews can help level the playing field.

WHAT ARE NON-CONSULTING, CASE-TYPE INTERVIEW QUESTIONS LIKE?

Non-consulting case interviews (I'll refer to them as "case-type" interviews) are similar to consulting case interviews in that they're used to assess a candidate's ability to think through and solve a business problem.  Typically, you'll be presented with a business situation and asked how you would deal with certain issues or answer specific questions related to the case.

EXAMPLES OF NON-CONSULTING, CASE-TYPE INTERVIEW QUESTIONS

  • Suppose we're considering launching a loyalty card program - what are some of the things we should think about as we make the decision?
  • Suppose we find that our employee turnover has suddenly increased during the past year - how would you go about figuring out how to reverse the trend?
  • Suppose we have the opportunity to acquire our largest competitor - what would you want to know before going through with the transaction?

HOW TO PREPARE FOR NON-CONSULTING, CASE-TYPE INTERVIEW QUESTIONS


1.  Know your interviewer's business

Consulting case interviews assume that you have no knowledge of the case topic.  In fact, if I saw that a McKinsey candidate had professional or personal experience with the case topic, I would switch to my back-up case on a completely different industry.  That was to make the process fair to both a) other candidates who didn't have similar familiarity and b) the candidate who might try to apply incorrect, external information, assumptions, or knowledge to the case.  In consulting, we were testing candidates' ability to reason through business problems, not their knowledge of the subject matter.

Non-consulting interviews apply cases differently.  In these, in addition to seeing how you think through a business problem, the interviewer usually wants to see that you a) have a working knowledge of their industry or company and b) are passionate about or at least interested in what they do.  So, make sure you:
  • Understand the company's business model and what they do
  • Familiarize yourself with your interviewers' area(s) of responsibility
  • Acquaint yourself with their competitive landscape and current events in their industry

2.  Be aware of general business issues and trends

On the one hand, McKinsey cases take place in self-contained universes.  For the most part, all of the information you need to solve the case is given to you verbally or in exhibits like tables or graphs.  In general, consulting case interviews focus on how you work with the information you're given - while you're expected to know and apply consulting frameworks, creative problem solving, and general business dynamics, there's no expectation that you apply extraneous facts or knowledge to a case.  If you do apply them, you would typically do so as additional thoughts, next steps, or caveats to your primary answer.

On the other hand, non-consulting, case-type interviewers will expect you to put your answers into the context of the current business envinronment.  If there are macro issues that will impact your answer, you'll be expected to understand and explain those implications.  Examples that might be applicable to some cases would include: the state of the US or global economy, unrest in certain international markets, the cost of fuel or natural resources, and the increasing use of mobile devices.


3.  Answer the question that's asked

This is important for any interview question - case or otherwise - but seems to be especially challenging during case interviews.  Candidates get so wrapped up in trying to solve a particular part of the case that they'll deliver an answer that doesn't directly address the question asked.  A helpful suggestion is to write down the question.  Then, as you work through the case, take a peek at the question and make sure that your response is going to answer it.

4.  Demonstrate structured problem-solving

Often, the case interview is less about getting the right answer than it is about letting your interviewer see that you're able to tackle problems in a thoughtful, logical, structured way.  To be clear, "structured" doesn't mean that you're expected to memorize and apply canned business frameworks.  It means that your problem-solving approach is organized, thorough, and easy-to-follow.  Adopting a T-shaped approach - making sure you've gone broadly across relevant topics before going deep on one or two - is a good way to do this.  Both during and after my time at McKinsey, I'm much more impressed with candidates who can set up and explain a thoughtful approach to solving a problem that gets to an "incorrect" (I like to think of it as "different from what I was expecting") answer than someone who guesses or happens to have extraneous knowledge, and just blurts out the "correct" answer.

5.  Cover the basics of consulting case prep

Ultimately, a case-type interview is still a case interview, so you should understand the basics of consulting case prep.  There are plenty of online resources - including this blog - that can help.  If you're in business school you can also leverage your consulting club - many have tutorials, case books, and other useful resources - or ask your consulting classmates for help and advice.  If you're not currently in school, find friends, colleagues, and people in your network with consulting experience and ask for their help.  In particular, look for cases that have lots of exhibits - graphs, tables, and data - to interpret since it's likely that your ability to draw conclusions from them will be evaluated.

Although it's far less common in non-consulting interviews, your case might require math - and most interviewers will not let you use a calculator.  So, just in case, brush up on your arithmetic, practice doing public math (working through calculations on paper and explaining the steps you're taking out loud), and avoid common case math errors.

Finally, be prepared to synthesize your answer in a clear, concise manner, similar to how you would deliver a 30-second elevator pitch.

Thứ Sáu, 4 tháng 1, 2013

McKinsey Case Interviews and Unit Conversions - An Easy, 3-step Method

One of the most common causes of math errors during case interviews is unit conversions.  Here's a method I learned as an engineering undergrad that helped me get through all of my case prep and interviews without making any unit conversion errors.  I've also used this method countless times at McKinsey and even after leaving the Firm...



There are three critical elements for getting your unit conversions right during case interviews.  The method I'm suggesting to make unit conversions foolproof will be introduced in Step 2, with visual examples.

STEP 1 - Gather all of the relevant information

The "quant" part of any case test both a) your ability to perform mathematical calculations and b) understanding the implications of the numbers on the case.

Let's suppose this case interview is about agriculture and you're being asked "how much revenue can be generated by Supplier X's average seed?"  During the interview, you ask the right questions and have the following information:

  • For every 10 seeds planted, 3 plants typically grow  (Fact A)
  • It typically takes 14 plants to produce 1 pound of fruit  (Fact B)
  • For every 100 pounds of fruit, 10 pounds are usually not suitable for sale  (Fact C)
  • Every pound of fruit can be sold for $7  (Fact D)
Keep in mind that you might get some extraneous data.  If you find that you're missing a piece of data, you can always ask questions to get it.  Just don't ask something like "do I have everything I need to know?" because figuring that out is part of your job.

STEP 2 - Set up the calculation

As you can see from this example, even if each piece of data is straightforward, how to manipulate them to get to the final answer can be challenging.  The technique I'm recommending is powerful because it makes it easy to organize your information and clarifies how to apply each number (e.g., should you be multiplying or dividing?).

First, set up what looks like a "+" sign that has a longer horizontal line.  In the top left, enter in your starting point.  In this case, "1" and the units, "seed"




Then, to the right of the vertical line, start adding the data elements that will help you cancel out the "seed" unit and get you closer to the desired "$" unit.  Thinking about your unit cancellation goals will help you see which numbers go above or below the line.


 

 

 

STEP 3 - Cancel units and do the math

After you've set up the problem, cancel out the units one at a time.  When you finish, the remaining unit(s) should align with the the answer you're seeking - in this case, "$" (of revenue per seed purchased).  If the units don't cancel out the way you intended, you've either made an error in the set-up or are missing information.  In either case, you've laid out your thinking clearly so you and your interviewer can discuss next steps.

Now, you can begin reducing to make the math easier.  Look for numbers above the line that are easily divide into numbers below the line.  Often, cases are designed so that the arithmetic becomes easy - we're looking for problem-solvers who are comfortable with numbers, not human calculators.




Finally, multiply the numerators, multiply the denominators, and divide.  You now have a numerical answer in the correct units.

 

 

 

 




Throughout the case math, keep these additional tips from a previous post in mind.

 

 

REMEMBER - It's not just about getting the right number

I've seen plenty of candidates forget about the implications of the final answer.  They're so amped up about the case and relieved that they got the calculation right, that they don't think about what this number might mean to the case.  Always remember the context - that's why I encourage people I case coach to write the question down at the top of the paper.

In this example, you now know that the average seed from Supplier X will yield about 13.5 cents of revenue.  Can you tie that to other facts you might know about the case?

For example, on the one hand, suppose you learned earlier that your client is a farming cooperative and Supplier X wants to charge $200 for every 1,000 seeds, or 20 cents per seed.  At this point you might mention that each seed generates less revenue than it costs to buy the seed.

On the other hand, suppose you were told previously that your client is Supplier X and they are thinking about selling every 1,000 seeds for $70, or 7 cents per seed.  You might want to mention that farmers are going to generate a lot more revenue (13.5 cents) than they're paying per seed (7 cents) so there might be opportunity for Supplier X to raise the price.  You would get bonus points if you added the caveat that your simple calculation has not yet taken into account costs - other than seeds - that farmers might incur (e.g., planting, growing, harvesting) that would be taken out of the revenue, impacting how much more Supplier X might be able to charge for their seeds.

 

WHY THIS IS IMPORTANT:

While this method can't protect you from errors in arithmetic, it will reduce the likelihood that you'll make a math mistake by:
  • Increasing the likelihood of setting up the calculations correctly
  • Ensuring your answer is in the correct units
  • Simplifying the arithmetic by giving you chances to reduce some of the numbers

Thứ Tư, 2 tháng 1, 2013

MBTI - 3 ways McKinsey teams think about and (mis)use personality types

McKinsey teams use MBTI personality types as a short-hand for understanding individual preferences and team dynamics.  In this post I'll review a few ways McKinsey consultant typically think about MBTI.  These are not necessarily how an expert on MBTI would apply this framework, but the McKinsey person in your life still might think in some of these ways




CAVEAT

As in many of my posts, I'm going to make some broad generalizations, but they are based on behaviors I've seen across many consultants and partners on many client engagement teams.  Not everyone at McKinsey thinks this way about MBTI or uses the framework in this way, but these tendencies are certainly not rare.

McKinsey consultants will also talk in terms of being "a strong X" or "barely Y" where X and Y are MBTI preference like I, E, N, S, T, F, J, or P, often based on their MBTI scores (e.g., "I'm a strong E", "I'm a slight F").  However, this, also, is not necessarily an appropriate application of the framework.

MBTI and the Team Kickoff or "Team Ready" meetings

Many McKinsey teams will start a client engagement by having a meeting to discuss how everyone prefers to work and align on what the team's working style will be.  At these kickoff, or "Team Ready" meetings, each of the team members will typically share what their strengths are, what opportunity areas they're working on, what their working style preferences are, and their MBTI personality type.  The MBTI personality types are used as a shortcut to understand how team members like to work and how they can best work with each other.

How some people and teams interpret MBTI preferences...

1.  N vs. S

Consultants with a preference for iNtuition are often considered more strategic, "big picture" problem solvers who are able to "think 80/20".  This is generally perceived to be a positive trait at a firm where we work on a lot of top-down, strategic issues.  It is sometimes assumed that Ns are better at pattern recognition, out-of-the-box thinking, and drawing conclusions from larges sets of information.  The downside is that someone who is a "strong N" might be thought of as being too far removed from the critical nuts and bolts of a problem or lacking attention to detail.

Those with a preference for Sensing are in the opposite situation.  Teams will assume great attention to detail - as a result, a "strong S" is more likely to be trusted to own the primary Excel model for a client engagement.  Common negative perceptions of the "strong S" are that they think too tactically, can't see the forest for the trees, and miss "big picture" connections and solutions.

2.  T vs. F

McKinsey consultants overindex on the preference for Thinking.  This makes sense for a Firm that encourages logical thinking and structured problem-solving.  As a result, many Ts will assume they will get along better and can rely more on other Ts.

However, Ts are also assumed to be more transactional, less tactful, and less thoughtful of the feelings of others.  As a result, many McKinsey consultants believe there is value in having at least one F around to "keep the team honest" when it comes to interpersonal interactions, especially with clients.  If you are an F, it might help you to understand that McKinsey colleagues might value or even rely on your gentle reminders to consider the feelings of others.  Examples of how Fs can contribute to teams include:
  • Engage with others before getting down to business (e.g., ask about someone's weekend before asking them for some data)
  • Be genuine with engaging with others (e.g., avoid coming across like you're "checking the box" when you ask about someone's weekend)
  • Consider how your audience will react to information (e.g., think about how to word bad news to make it more palatable)
  • Give positive feedback, especially to clients (e.g., give a client credit for a great analysis in front of their boss) because not everyone is used to a steady diet of negative feedback
  • Remember that not everyone works for McKinsey (e.g., don't expect a client to work over the weekend)

 

3.  J vs. P

People with a Judging preference are assume to be more organized and better at planning both in their personal and professional lives.  If you have a clean desk and keep your notes and files well-organized, your team will assume you're a J.  Because of these associations, Js are assumed to be superior to Ps when it comes to process and structured problem solving.  Conversely, Ps are assumed to be less organized and structured.  As a result, Js will be more trusted when it comes to tasks like workplanning.

Unfortunately, there are plenty of negative connotations that come with a preference for Perceiving.  Ps are assumed to be messy, disorganized, and unstructured.  I also can't come up with any positive assumptions McKinsey teams make about Ps.  If you're a P, at best, rather than getting angry with you when you forget to do something, your teammates will simply chalk it up to your Perceiving nature.  The good news is that your team will be less likely to ask you to make dinner reservations, call in the team's lunch order, or organize team events.

This brings to mind an infamous quote regarding Ps.  Supposedly, a female McKinsey Partner once told an especially sloppy, disorganized male Business Associate that "your P-ness is really starting to become a problem for me."  Apparently it took her a few beats to realize how that sounded!

WHY THESE PERCEPTIONS ARE IMPORTANT

The better you understand how McKinsey consultants view your MBTI personality type, the more effectively you can work with them.  If you know they're inclined to trust you more with certain types of work, you can leverage that into more opportunities or responsibilities.  If you understand what reservations they might have about your abilities, you can proactively address their concerns and show them that they can rely on you.

To learn more about your own MBTI personality type and MBTI in general, please see my earlier post on the topic


    Thứ Hai, 10 tháng 12, 2012

    MBTI - How your McKinsey colleague thinks of you in 4 letters (an introduction)

    McKinsey consultants change teams frequently and must quickly understand new colleagues' and clients' personalities, working styles, and preferences.  MBTI is a 4-letter shortcut that the McKinsey consultant in your life uses to do just that.

    In this post I'll give you a brief overview of how to figure out your own MBTI type and understand what they're talking about




    WHAT IS MBTI?

    MBTI is short for the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator.  The MBTI reflects your personal preferences along four dimensions.  Each dimension is expressed as one of two choices or dichotomies, so there are 16 possible MBTI types.  Each type is summarized by a combination of 4 letters based on your preferences across the following dichotomies:
      • (E) Extraversion vs. (I) Intraversion
      • (S) Sensing vs. (N) Intuition
      • (T) Thinking vs. (F) Feeling
      • (J) Judging vs. (P) Perception
    A person's MBTI type consists of one letter for each of the dichotomies (e.g., ENTJ, ISFP).  There is no shortage of great online resources for learning more about MBTI and its roots in Jung's theory of personality types.

    WHY IS IT IMPORTANT?

    Right or wrong, MBTI is frequently used at McKinsey as a shortcut for understanding and communicating working styles.  The more familiar you are with this alphabet soup, the better equipped you'll be to make the best of it.

    Even if you don't know your MBTI type, your McKinsey consultant has already guessed what it might be and is likely adapting their working style accordingly.  It might also influence the type of work they assign to you or how frequently and in what ways they interact with you.  The more you understand your own and your McKinsey colleague's MBTI, the better you can work together.

    HOW DO I FIGURE OUT MY MBTI?

    There are plenty of great, free, online resources to help with this.  I find this one in particular to be a quick, easy way to get to a preliminary assessment of one's MBTI type.  Before you begin, please consider these...

    3 CAVEATS ABOUT YOUR MBTI ASSESSMENT

    Please keep in mind that neither I, nor any of my McKinsey colleagues were MBTI experts.  This information is based on my exposure to MBTI at McKinsey, business school, previous employers who also used it, and psychology classes during undergrad.  But based on those experiences, I can offer you some tips about MBTI assessments:
    1. Take it with a grain of salt - like anything you find for free, online (like this blog!) consider your results unofficial.  My understanding is that a true MBTI assessment requires an extensive questionnaire followed by an interview with a trained professional.  That said, in general, I've found these results to be directionally accurate.
    2. Be honest with yourself - don't answer based on the personality type you aspire to be or think that you should be.  To get the most accurate assessment of your MBTI type, you must answer based on your current, actual self.
    3. This is about preferences - for both answering questions and interpreting the results, remember, this is all about what you prefer to do, not necessarily what you do.  So, for example, if a question is about how you spend time by yourself, answer based how you want to spend that time, not necessarily how circumstances are forcing you to.  Similarly, when interpreting your results, remember that MBTI is assessing your preferences.

    16 MBTI TYPES, NEATLY SUMMARIZED

    One helpful method I've seen help those new to MBTI understand what each type represents is the one-word descriptor.  Here's how each type is often viewed or described:
    • ISTJ - Inspector or Detective
    • ISFJ - Protector
    • INFJ - Counselor
    • INTJ - Mastermind
    • ISTP - Artisan
    • ISFP - Composer or Artist
    • INFP - Healer
    • INTP - Architect
    • ESTP - Dynamo or Doer
    • ESFP - Performer
    • ENFP - Champion or Inspirer
    • ENTP - Visionary or Inventor
    • ESTJ - Supervisor
    • ESFJ - Caregiver or Provider
    • ENFJ - Teacher
    • ENTJ - General or Commander

    WHAT YOUR RESULTS MEAN

    You are a unique, complex, interesting person.  Everything about you is not going to fit neatly into one of 16 MBTI buckets.  But, this could prove to be a helpful tool in helping you understand how to work better with others and how others can work better with you.

    In future posts, I'll address:

    Thứ Tư, 5 tháng 12, 2012

    McKinsey case interviews - 6 common math mistakes and how to prevent them



    Everyone applying to McKinsey knows case prep, but I’m always surprised to see how poorly some of them prepare to do math during their interviews.  In this post, I’ll go over the six most common quant errors I’ve seen and some tips on how to avoid them







    WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT?

    Quantitative skills are table stakes during case interviews – the scoring rubric used to evaluate your interview performance does not allow candidates to “spike” on the case based on math alone.  That means you can’t get passed to the next round or offered a job on the strength of your quant skills alone.  But, you can get dinged if you screw them up. 

    SIX COMMON MATH MISTAKES AND HOW TO PREVENT THEM

     

    1.  Fumbling mathematical calculations

    We realize that almost any time you would be asked to do calculations at McKinsey you would have access to Excel and don’t need to do math.  We also know that it’s probably been years since you had to multiply or do long division on paper.  Fair or not, being able to do arithmetic is part of how your quantitative abilities will be assessed during the case interview.  If you've done practice cases, you should know you have to do math - yet every interview cycle, I watch candidates fumble these basic calculations.  One candidate even asked me if he could use a calculator... in case you're wondering, the answer was "no"!

     

    How to prevent this mistake:

    Now that you know you'll be expected to add, subtract, multiply, and perform long division, you have no excuse to not practice.  Your ability to do math is like a muscle - if you have to exercise it or it will atrophy.

    Make sure you can add several numbers together, including reminding yourself how to carry digits.  Practice subtracting and remember how to borrow a oneMultiply large numbers together.  Practice long division.  Based on my experience, long division is the one that gives candidates the most trouble.  It's obvious to me when I'm interviewing someone who has forgotten how to divide and it's interesting to see what methods they invent on the spot to try to get around it.  Don't be that candidate.  Practice.

     

    2.  Descending the Spiral of Death

    This sometimes happens after a candidate fumbles a math calculation.  Some candidates who know they've screwed up the math will start to get flustered.  When the next calculation comes up, they want to make up for their earlier mistake, psych themselves out, and make another mistake.  This leads to a vicious cycle and it's not a pretty sight.

     

    How to avoid this mistake:

    In the event that you make a miscalculation, relax.  One math error will not get you dinged, especially if you have the presence of mind to catch your mistake, ask for a moment to go over your work, find your error, and correct yourself.  Even if you miss your chance to correct yourself, shake it off, and move on to the next part of the case.

    3.  Doing math in your head

    On its own, doing math in your head is not a mistake.  But if you happen to make a miscalculation, having done the math in your head is a big problem for several reasons.  First, you can't go back and find your mistake because there's no record of your calculations.  Second, we can't help you by letting you know if or where you went off track.  Finally, we can't give you credit for the parts of the calculation you did correctly, because you never showed them.

    How to avoid this mistake:
    This is probably the easiest of the errors to avoid - show your work.  No one is going to be impressed because you were able to do some calculations in your head - in fact, it might cause us to wonder if you were able to set up the numbers properly or just got lucky.  Do what's called "public math" - explain and write out each and every step of the calculation.  Turn your paper to face your interviewer so he or she can follow along and help you, if necessary.  You'll need to do your public math quickly to avoid running out of time to finish the case, so you should practice this in advance.

     

    4.  Losing units

    Keeping track of the units of the numbers you're using is important for two reasons.  First, the units make the answer meaningful.  If you ask me how fast I run and I say "6", what does that mean?  Am I fast or slow?  Do I run 6 miles per hour, or do I run a 6-minute mile (10 miles per hour)?  Clearly the units associated with the 6 are important.  Second, working with units can help you realize if you're making a mistake.  If you find yourself multiplying $/unit by miles per hour, chances are you've made an error somewhere along the line. 

     

    How to avoid this mistake:

    Keeping your public math clearly labeled and well organized will prevent you from losing track of your units.  Make sure each number in your calculation is labeled, then carry or cancel out the units as you work with them.  When you finish your calculation, present your answer with the appropriate units.  Be sure to refer to this post on unit conversions in case studies.

     

    5.  Not relating the numbers to the business case

    Your McKinsey interviewer is never going to ask you to do math for the sake of doing math.  Calculations performed during a case are always part of solving of business problem.  Unfortunately, many candidates get wrapped up in the math, get an answer, but have no idea what the answer means

    One practice case I liked to give required candidates to determine the value of a company they were selling.  Once they got the relevant facts and figures from me, they were off to the races, setting up their calculations, doing the math, and telling me they'd sell the company for no less than $50 million.  Unfortunately, the $50 million figure they had calculated was the annual profit from the company's product.  They lost sight of the goal and offered to sell me their company for about 1/10 of its value.

    How to avoid this mistake:

    The key here is to remember the significance of the numbers you're calculating in the context of the business case you're discussing.  One tactical way to do this is to write the question being asked at the top of your sheet of paper.  As you go through your math and as you prepare to present your solution, continue to remind yourself of the question at hand and ask yourself if you're answering it.  Then when you present your answer, do so in a way that shows you understand what your number means.  One way to do this is to explain the implications of the answer on the case you're cracking.

    6.  Giving an incorrect answer that makes no sense

    As I mentioned before, it's perfectly acceptable to make a math error.  What's not acceptable is to not catch your math error even though the answer you got makes no sense in the context of the case.  Now you've added poor judgment to your miscalculation.

    One example of this is the candidate who told me, during an education case, that in this district, there were 30 classrooms per student.  Clearly, this candidate lost track of units - the correct answer was 30 students per classroom.  It didn't matter to me that the math had been done right - any candidate who thought 30 classrooms per student was a reasonable answer was either not paying enough attention to detail or lacked common sense.

    How to avoid this mistake:

    Every time you reach the end of a calculation, perform a "sense test" or "sniff test".  This means taking a moment to ask yourself:  "does this answer make sense?"

    Some examples of questions you might want to ask yourself, depending on the nature of the question:  Is it the right order of magnitude given the other numbers and facts in the case?  Should it be positive or negative?  Should a ratio be greater than or less than one?  Should a cash flow be positive or negative?