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.

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.

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

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:

• How McKinsey teams think about MBTI types
• MBTI types over- and under-represented at McKinsey
• How MBTI types deal with stress differently.

How to impress your McKinsey boss - Consulting rock stars are five-tool players

In this post I'll review the five consulting skills we look for and provide examples of how to demonstrate excellence in each of them.  The best consultants are good at all five and are distinctive, or "have a spike" in at least one.

Image from mensfitness.com

Knowing what a McKinsey person is looking for can help you make the right impression on your former McKinsey boss, your current Engagement Manager, or the management consultant who is interviewing you for a job.

This post is about the abilities of a great management consultant.  To learn more about the behaviors of a great consultant (or direct report to a former consultant), check out this earlier post on the 3 things you can do to keep your McKinsey boss happy.

WHAT IS A ROCK STAR AT MCKINSEY AND HOW CAN I BE ONE?

The highest compliment a McKinsey consultant can receive is to be referred to as a "rock star" by their colleagues.  There's no specific definition for the term, but it's generally accepted to mean someone who is a top performer across every dimension that you'd look for in a great consultant.  Considering how selective the Firm is in hiring and how effective it is at developing talent, being called a rock star is high praise, indeed.  To be truly distinctive, you must be the consulting version of a five-tool player.

WHAT IS A FIVE-TOOL PLAYER?

The concept comes from the sport of baseball and refers to the five most important skills for position players (everyone other than pitchers) - 1. fielding skills, 2. throwing arm strength, 3. running speed, 4. batting for average, and 5. hitting for power.  To be referred to as a "five-tool player", an athlete has to be exceptional along all of those dimensions.  Most Major Leaguers excel in at least one of the five tools.  All-Stars might be outstanding in three or four.  Five-tool players are rare and can often transcend the sport of baseball - examples include Willie Mays, Mickey Mantle, and Ken Griffey, Jr.

THE FIVE TOOLS OF CONSULTING

Based on my experience, there is an equivalent list of five tools that any good management consultant must have.  Rock star consultants will outshine even their most talented colleagues along every one of these dimension.  The more you understand how your McKinsey boss evaluates talent, the better you can focus on becoming truly distinctive in your strengths and address your weaknesses.

ANALYTICS

Why it's important:  Building a credible fact-base often requires analyzing and making sense out of a large amount of data.  Also, deliverables often include models that the client will use after the study is over.
What excellence looks like:

• High level of comfort working with numbers and understanding implications of data on the problem at hand
• Ability to prioritize and focus on the areas, data, and analyses that will generate the greatest impact
• Excel skills to build models that functional, error-free, and easy to hand-off to clients

STORYTELLING

Why it's important:  Consulting recommendations and insights are only helpful to clients if they can communicated in a clear and compelling way.
What excellence looks like:

• Understanding of stakeholder needs and how to make topics relevant to them
• Ability to synthesize large amounts of information and highlight the key takeaways
• Crafting storylines that drive understanding and acceptance

COLLABORATIVE PROBLEM-SOLVING

Why it's important:  Help in solving their most pressing business issues is ultimately why clients hire management consultants.  Collaboration - both with the client and McKinsey leadership - ensure we consider the greatest range of and most applicable solutions.
What excellence looks like:

• Extensive creativity, insight, and content knowledge to inform the best possible answers
• Ability to work collaboratively with colleagues and clients to generate buy-in
• Leveraging all available resources and expertise and incorporating them into solutions

RELATIONSHIP BUILDING

Why it's important:  Our goal is to become the trusted advisor to our clients, not just deliver impact on individual engagements.  Getting clients actively engaged in our work increases the likelihood of buy-in, impact, and success.  It's also important that your McKinsey boss know that you're "client ready" and can trust you to lead client meetings on your own.
What excellence looks like: 

• High emotional IQ and ability to empathize with and relate to clients at all levels of an organization
• Genuine interest and investment in clients' long-term success
• Professionalism, confidence, and poise that build credibility

PRODUCTIVITY

Why it's important:  Consultants are expected to drive a large amount of impact in a short amount of time.  Timelines are often compressed so
What excellence looks like:

• Talent for multitasking and driving impact across multiple workstreams
• Efficiency and able to prioritize and focus on the highest-value tasks
• Commitment to getting the job done, no matter how difficult or how long it takes

What's with all these Appendix pages in our decks?

I was just asked by a friend why the former McKinsey Partner to whom she reports wants PowerPoint decks with detailed Appendix pages, so that's the topic addressed in this post. I'll go over...

1. Definition of Appendix or back-up pages
2. Why McKinsey consultants use Appendix pages

• In team and client discussion documents
• In client deliverable documents

What are Appendix or back-up pages?

Consultants spend a lot of time working in Microsoft PowerPoint (PPT) creating pages that are assembled into decks.  Most McKinsey decks are comprised of two primary sections, the main deck and the Appendix, also referred to as back-up pages.  It's not uncommon for the Appendix to be significantly longer than the main deck.  If the main deck tells the story, the Appendix contains all of the supporting evidence.

Why do we use Appendix or back-up pages?

Appendix pages take as much time and effort to make - sometimes even more - as the pages in the main deck.  The reason for including Appendix pages often depends on the reason for the document.  Generally speaking, McKinsey engagement teams create two types of decks: 

DISCUSSION DOCUMENTS

These are decks used to drive client or team discussions - examples include progress updates and collaborative problem solving sessions.  In these cases the main deck is often light, featuring just enough thought starters and information to keep the conversation moving in the right direction.  In these decks, Appendices are often used to include data or evidence that could contribute to the discussion.  They might not be included in the main deck if they might be too leading or controversial, but teams might want to have data in their back pocket in case facts or hypotheses are called into question.

CLIENT DELIVERABLES

There are usually more substantial decks - sometimes hundreds of pages long - that are given to the client at major milestones (e.g., Steering Committee meetings) and/or at the conclusion of an engagement.  These extensive, detailed documents contain all of the data, findings, and insights generated over the course of the study.  I've heard several reasons why these decks contain so many Appendix pages:

• Keep the storyline of the main deck crisp and clear by moving the supporting documentation and details to the Appendix where they will be out of the way but available for reference.  Trackers (I'll address these in a future post) can be used to link sections of the main deck to their corresponding Appendix pages

• You never know when a certain piece of information will be helpful so we might as well hand it off to the client.  Sometimes the data comes in handy during the meeting.  In most cases the material in these documents is pre-wired or syndicated with key clients prior to the meeting to ensure everyone is aligned with the content.  But, questions still come up, in which case supporting evidence and analyses in the Appendix can be referenced to help answer difficult questions or resolve disagreements

• Giving the client their money's worth is the most cynical reason I've heard for why we pack the Appendix full of lots of data, exhibits, and analyses.  The rationale is that clients pay high fees for the engagement so they're expecting a large volume of work product along with the insights and recommendations contained within the main deck.  I don't necessarily agree with this thinking, but I have heard it mentioned