This is a story of one of our readers, who wanted to share his experience in a final-round McKinsey interview. They also requested us to not disclose their office location, and to change the precise details of the case.

===

Reader's story:

So, my final interview was with a Managing Partner. On the surface, it was a simple profitability case about a firm losing its revenue.

After giving the case prompt, he let me recap and clarify things as usual, and then casually strolled off to make some tea, saying I should “come up with every possible idea about why this is happening”. That’s the first unusual sign because I ended up having 3-4 minutes for this question.

I then came up with this top-down, MECE structure like I did in my previous interviews. But here's the kicker - when I presented it, he just nodded like “that’s fine but I want all your ideas”.

I was thrown off; I thought they loved structure, and I never really prepared for this. So I defaulted back to the “MECE mode” and this time he’s even more explicit - “forget being MECE, I want to hear your ideas”.

So I conceded and went kind-of bottom up. I even lost a bit of my usual composure there and started to stumble - that was my post-interview feedback.

After the structure, he asked for my hypothesis - “What do you think is happening here?”. So I started to come up with what and how to research but he almost immediately discarded it and repeated his question, “That’s not what I mean. What do you think is the root cause?” with a clear emphasis on the “you”.

That’s the second time he tested me on this brainstorming thing. So I gave him my one main hypothesis about why this company has that revenue problem.

After that came a market-sizing question, which was like normal. But after that question, the final solution question again focused on brainstorming.

By this time though, I learned to dance to his tune, and so this final question went smoothly. Or at least that’s what I thought. I ended up getting a rejection - although I’m not sure it’s because of this one interview.

So it was very abnormal to me. I thought we are supposed to be structured, MECE, top-down in the case interviews, aren’t we? I’m going to apply for [another firm] next year, so I wanted to ask how I should respond if this happens again.”

===

Kim’s comments:

From what information we have it seems like the interviewer was placing an emphasis on business acumen (or intuition as we tend to call it at MCP). He does this by shooting for a volume of ideas and asks for your “bottom-up” hypotheses, or immediate and specific next steps.

If you are unclear whether the interviewer wants volume, you can ask them. That’s what consulting people call “alignment”.

Also I had to put air quotes on “bottom up” because you are still supposed to be structured, even when brainstorming for volume. In fact, brainstorming questions can be used by interviewers to test whether you are “naturally structured”. Interviewers want people who are so proficient at structuring that they can create structures without even deliberately thinking.

The only way to get to this point is to practice. Do a lot of structuring exercises. At first everyone has to deliberate - it’s like learning to drive stick shifts.

Coaches and courses have their own ways of helping you (mine is to learn with a few “universal” frameworks until you are comfortable switching between and customizing them).

You should be able to feel the process getting easier over time and at some point structuring will become so intuitive you can do it without even thinking.

So to everyone out there: practice structuring. And I mean a lot of it.

===

If you want to anonymously share your own stories (an interview, a test, a question, or - for people who have been consultants - your work experience), let us know through our email at support@mconsultingprep.com