What Interviewers Want - Management Consulting

What Interviewers Want The business of consulting is all about charging clients large sums of money to tell them what you think. For them to value your services they need to have confidence in what you are telling them and they need to like working with you. Consulting firms therefore are looking for a few key traits in their candidates. They need to know that you are smart Ð but this is pretty much a given for you to get to this point. So beyond this, they want to know that you have the mental ÒhorsepowerÓ to be able to solve client problems quickly with incomplete information. The case is therefore designed to give you a broad, open-ended problem with very little information, forcing you to probe for more information and make rational assumptions where information is lacking. They will ask you both to contemplate expansive concepts through brainstorming, as well as dive into detailed analysis under pressure. Every case is different and case formats differ between firms, but in general they are all trying to see how well you think under pressure. Having mental horsepower still isnÕt enough. For this to be of value to the client, you must be able to communicate your ideas clearly and convincingly. So the interviewer will also be taking careful note of how you approach organizing your questions, presenting and validating your ideas, and formulating a conclusion. You must be confident in your questioning and presentation, and you must proceed through the case following an orderly plan and arriving at a concise conclusion. Imagine that you have been turned loose at a client on your first day and the CEO just stopped by to ask about what you have concluded so far Ð the interviewer wants to be confident that you could handle such a (realistically possible) situation. It is often difficult to get relevant information out of a client. Your interviewer likewise will not spoon feed you any of the information that you need to solve the case. Because of this, it is imperative that you are always driving the case. The interviewer will give you an initial problem to solve, but from then on it is your show. She may ask you specific questions or request a certain analysis from time to time, but do not get distracted from your mission: You are to solve the initial question asked and you only have 20 minutes to do so. You must start the case by asking questions to dig for data. If the interviewer asks you to perform a specific analysis, do so, but always return back to the driverÕs seat; otherwise you will find yourself at the end of the 20 minutes without a conclusion. Imagine the interview is like an Easter egg hunt. When you start, you have no idea where to look for the key information, so you must plan a search path to avoid haphazardly digging for clues in various different places. As the interview progresses, you will gain a clearer and clearer picture of the business problem and will be able to steer your line of questioning towards the key facts of the case. You are looking for the egg in the case Ð a sort of ÒahaÓ moment Ð that puts into focus the key problem faced in the case. Once you finally feel that you have enough information (or if you are within five minutes of running out of time), you need to bring the case to a close by directly answering the question posed and providing logical support for you answer based upon the facts discovered during the case. Let me emphasize: You must answer the problem posed by the case to pass the case interview. During the interview process, each interviewer will see a dozen or more candidates, but will only advance a couple to the next round. You may have been polished, confident, and likeable, crushed the analytics of the case, and answered every question posed by the interviewer with ease, but if you didnÕt address the problem of the case you are not likely to stand out as one of the one or two stars that the interviewer is going to recommend that day. Note that you donÕt necessarily need to have the Òright answer.Ó Often you will be asked to come up with your own assumptions for different facts in the case, and therefore the final answer may vary from candidate to candidate. What is important is that you have made a concise conclusion that is consistent with the facts given and assumptions that you have made. Interviewers like to say that you are exploring a business problem together. If you have a good rapport with the interviewer you may take the case in any number of directions. This is fine Ð just be sure to come to a conclusion. DonÕt be tempted to hedge in your conclusion. Cases generally ask you either for a recommendation (ÒShould company X invest in expanding production?Ó) or for the answer to some problem (ÒWhat is the market for Silly Putty?Ó). Do not say something like ÒExpanding production is good because it will lead to increased market share and will help defend against the strengthening competition. On the other hand, it may increase fixed costs to the point that the firm becomes unprofitable.Ó Take a stand, back up your reasoning with logic and facts, and know when to shut up and finish the case. So you muddled your way through 15 minutes of questioning, managed to formulate a concise and (hopefully) correct conclusion, and fought the urge to keep talking about the case. YouÕre almost done. Not all interviewers will do so, but you should try to get them to give you feedback about the case that you can use for your next case. If you had a good discussion about a real-life case and came to a definite conclusion, it is often easy to ask Òso what actually happened?Ó Interviewers often use their own cases and are happy to talk about what they did. This is an excellent way to gauge how well you did and to find out what areas of questioning you might have missed. Finally, remember that the interview isnÕt over until you are out the door. Collapsing in despair after the case is over does not convey the sense of confidence and poise that you are going for. No matter how poorly you thought it went, stay upbeat and act as though you had a challenging but enjoyable experience and thank your interviewer for his time. Types of Cases As you interview with different firms, you will likely encounter a number of different variations of the case interview. ItÕs a good idea to know beforehand what types of cases you might encounter. Below are a number of different case styles that companies used in the 2004-2005 recruiting season. Standard Case Ð Most case interviews will be of the style contained in this book and in the David Ohrvall casebook. These cases generally ask you to consider a broad business problem and come up with a recommendation for responding to it. In some cases, the interviewer may provide a substantial amount of data either verbally or in the form of charts or graphs. Other times, the interviewer will provide no facts whatsoever and ask you to make reasonable assumptions for all case facts. These cases will always require you to drive to a conclusion. Market Sizing Case Ð Market Sizing cases are not common in MBA interviews, though you may encounter one. In these cases, you are simply asked to estimate some unknowable amount. This could be estimating the market for Silly Putty in the US. It could be estimating the number of ping-pong balls that would fit in a football stadium. Solving these cases is all about coming up with reasonable assumptions, approaching the problem clearly and logically, and crunching the math correctly. Command and Control Case Ð McKinsey has begun using cases in which the interviewer takes substantial control over the interview, essentially incorporating Market Sizing type questions into a broader Standard Case. These cases can be difficult because you must maintain control over the case in order to reach a reasonable conclusion, yet the interviewer will periodically derail your questioning to have you solve a particular problem. The key here is to keep moving quickly, addressing the problems they pose and then moving on in your questioning. Crunch and Interpret Ð Some cases will be simply about the numbers. You may be given a graph, a chart, or even a set of equations and be asked to analyze the data to answer a particular question. ZS used this format for their first-round interviews with a series of slides, starting with a graph, then a table of data, and finally an equation. Candidates were asked to analyze the data presented in each slide and then reach a final conclusion that synthesized all of the data provided. In these cases, you donÕt need to worry about driving the case because the interviewer will be doing that. Instead, focus on getting the math right and trying to pull insight from the data provided. Be ready to provide a concise conclusion that pulls together everything that you have discovered. Read and Discuss Ð Monitor used a case format for their first rounds that involved reading a three-page case in a short period of time and then discussing the case with the interviewer. The interviewer asked questions about the case that required both synthesizing information from the overall reading, as well as pulling specific numbers and performing analysis. These cases are difficult because you will have very little time to read the case, but must still be able to pull the case facts from memory and analyze them. Take a deep breath and read the case quickly but carefully, underlining or noting key facts in the case so that you can more easily find them when you need them. You still need to drive these cases, but doing so is more difficult since the interviewer will be asking a number of specific questions. Try to put the case into an overall question that needs to be answered (e.g. ÒIs this a business we should enter?Ó) and then approach the analysis of the interviewerÕs question in this light. Present to the Board Ð A variation of the Read and Discuss case was used by ZS and Monitor in second round interviews. Candidates were given a larger amount of case and other supporting materials to read and had 40 minutes to read them and then prepare a presentation to the board of a fictional company. At the end of the 40 minutes, the candidate was asked to come into a room where 4-5 interviewers were playing the role of the board. The candidate then had to present their findings and answer (sometimes aggressive) questions from the board. To ace this case, you must be able to maintain composure and present well. Because you will not have a chance to ask questions while you are formulating your recommendation, the dynamics of the case analysis are a bit different. Make assumptions, draw clear conclusions, and stick to you guns in the presentation. IT Case Ð DiamondCluster and the Booz Allen Hamilton IT practice perform IT-specific interviews which will combine a Standard Case with a deep dive into associated IT technology. In first-round DiamondCluster interviews, candidates were asked to solve a business problem relating to poor automation of sales force activities. Once the candidate diagnosed the problem, they were then asked to describe an IT solution that would solve the problem. You will not get these interviews if you have no IT background, but if you do, definitely expect to be tested on your knowledge. HR Case Ð KPL conducted its case interviews in a manner fitting with their focus on the organization aspects of strategic implementation. Candidates were asked to start solving a Standard Case. After about five minutes of a typical case when the overall problem had been diagnosed and some solutions posed, the interviewer then stopped the case and switched gears, asking how the solutions would be implemented from an HR perspective. The recommended solution would have created significant impact on morale and answering the case well required a display of empathy in the solution. Stress Case Ð While not different in format from a Standard Case, these cases are distinguished in that the interviewer attempts to throw you off your game by creating an environment of high stress. Often, the problem will be fairly straightforward but the interviewer will give little or no information and then be stone-faced or even combative in response to the candidateÕs questions. In one interview last year, a candidate was given a graph and no information and asked to interpret the situation. The interviewer would not provide any more information, so the candidate postulated different scenarios that might account for the graph. The interviewerÕs response to each incorrect hypothesis was a curt ÒNo, thatÕs wrong.Ó The key to mastering a Stress Case is realizing that you are in one and keeping your composure. A Case Framework Having a framework memorized and at your fingertips is essential to doing well in cases. The framework allows you to quickly pull up areas for questioning and exploration without having to think. You should use a framework that you can remember and that makes sense to you. It is essentially a starting point for your planning that you can use to help you through the initial moments of panic as you start the case. A framework is not, however, a map of how to solve any particular case. It seems that many people get caught up trying to fit a framework to a case and completely miss the point of the case. You need to practice using the framework as a guide throughout your practice cases, so that when you get to the real thing, it is second nature. There is a framework presented in the Ohrvall casebook that is quite complete and that many people use. If it works for you, then by all means use it. I, for one, found it to be somewhat overcomplicated and found that I had a hard time mentally navigating through it in order to come up with my plan for a case. As a result, I developed a simplified framework that still covered same overall elements, but in a more linear fashion. This framework is described below. And what about the 4 CÕs, 5 PÕs, Growth-Share Matrix, or PorterÕs Five Forces? DonÕt get confused between business analysis frameworks and a framework for approaching case interviews. Trying to analyze a case based on the 4 CÕs is a recipe for failure. These types of frameworks are useful for analyzing aspects of a case and will definitely add to your credibility if you can appropriately pull them out. For instance, if your plan is to investigate profit drivers first, then customer segments, supplier relations, and finally competition, using PorterÕs Five Forces as a way to synthesize your findings into an analysis of the attractiveness of the industry would be completely appropriate. But using PorterÕs alone would completely miss the profit drivers and thus might miss the key to cracking the case. So how do you use the framework? After the interviewer has given you the introduction to the case, you will want to ask for a minute to plan your approach. In this time, you must quickly develop a set of three to five major areas of the business to investigate, such as drivers of profitability and/or cost, sources of competition, changes in customer needs, etc. You are trying to figure out some problem or opportunity for the company in question, and these investigative areas are your first best guess as to where these problems lie. You will not know at this point exactly where to look, but if the interviewer says that profit margins have been declining, itÕs a good bet that either revenues have been hurt or costs have increased. These would be two very good areas to begin questioning about. Think of the framework, then, as a mental checklist that you can run down to be sure that you are covering all of the bases. You will want to pick the 3 to 5 most likely areas for exploration based on your initial assessment of the problem. Some of them will likely be unimportant. You also may discover other areas that are important once you get into questioning. Your initial plan is therefore not set in stone and your interviewer will not think less of you because you included an irrelevant topic. But if you leave out an important area for investigation, it is likely that you will miss the point of the case and not be able to come to a conclusion. The WCC framework breaks down into 8 major topics. These are the topics that you must memorize and be able to recall easily under pressure. Each of these topics then has a number of sub-topics that you can use to direct you exploration. It is less critical to memorize these topics than to be able to come up with drivers for each topic that are relevant to your case. With a little practice, you should be able to quickly write down 3 to 5 major topics and then 2 to 4 subtopics for each case you encounter. This forms your plan for attacking the case. Major Topic Revenue Cost Competition Customers Supply Chain Processes Company Macro Possible Drivers Volume Price Product Variable Costs Fixed Costs Rivals New Entrants Substitutes Market Size Segments Needs Suppliers Distributions Manufacturing Marketing Sales Distribution Customer Service Core Competencies Cost of Capital Brand Organization / Incentives Controls Legislation Unions Technology Economy International Issues So letÕs see an example of using the framework for a case. Imaging the interviewer has just asked you the following: ÒACME Gloves is the leading manufacturer of latex surgical gloves. Recently, they have seen significant price erosion and are losing share in their market. The CEO believes that there are still significant growth opportunities for his product and has asked you to develop a strategy to exploit them.Ó Now you will need to develop a plan for attacking the case. Here is where we pull out the framework and look for major topics that may be relevant to the case. Take a moment before you read on to come up with you own list of relevant topics. Here is what I come up with: 1. 2. 3. 4. Competition Customers Supply Chain Revenue You might come up with a different list, but here is my reasoning: Clearly we are looking for ways to grow the business, probably by repositioning the company in a new market as a response to a competitive threat. So understanding the competition and possible customer segments will be critical to understanding where we might reposition the company. If we are investigating entering a different market, we clearly must understand how our distribution network (as part of our Supply Chain) may provide a competitive advantage (or lack thereof). Finally, we will need to know how much of a growth opportunity any new market positioning may provide. You might also include an investigation of cost position relative to competitors, or question the impact of regulation given that this is a medical product. I left these out, however, because they seem like secondary issues (at least at first blush) and I can always investigate them further if it becomes clear that they are important. Now within each of these major topics, what drivers would want to investigate? Here are mine: 1. Competition a. Rivals Ð Who are they? What is their relative share? How are they positioned relative to us? b. New Entrants Ð Is there a credible threat of new entrants? c. Substitutes Ð Are we worried about other products serving as substitutes? 2. Customers a. Segments Ð What new segments might we be able to pursue? b. Needs Ð What are the needs of each segment? 3. Supply Chain a. Distribution Ð Do we have the capability to reach a new customer segment? 4. Revenue a. Volume Ð What the size of a new target segment? b. Price Ð What price point can we hit? How to Crack the Case Now letÕs pull everything together into an approach to solving cases. Most cases should follow four stages: listening to the question, planning your approach, probing for information, and reaching a conclusion. Listening to the Question Ð Many cases will involve a data dump at the beginning of the case where the interviewer shares a large amount of information following the statement of the case problem. You must take notes effectively at this stage because you are not going to want to ask her to repeat this information if you need it later. Take notes neatly and in an organized manner. Writing your notes in the style of slides with a title and bullets will help you keep organized and shows that you are already thinking like a consultant. When practicing cases, figure out what information you need to write down, and what you can simply commit to memory. You donÕt want to be asking the interviewer to pause while you write down every word. More likely, you will need only to write down numbers and note key facts, but leave contextual information to memory. You may, however, want to write down the core question that you are trying to solve as a reminder to be sure that conclude the case properly. Case Planning Ð Once the interviewer has stated the problem and provided any initial information, you need to take a moment to plan your approach to the case. Rather than simply falling silent while you plan, ask the interviewer for a minute to plan your approach. Be careful here Ð after practicing many cases, people often fall to asking for this time in shorthand: ÒCould I take a minute?Ó Remember that in the interview, impression is everything. Have an articulate and polite line ready for your interviewer, such as ÒI would like to develop a plan for approaching this problem. May I take a minute to do so?Ó In most cases, the interviewer is expecting this and will oblige. Be ready, however, for a Stress Interview where the interviewer may decline (politely or not) to allow you to take a minute to plan. In this case, you must comply and move forward immediately with your probing. While doing this, you should still sketch out a plan in your head to attack the problem and stay in control of the case. Now that you have a minute to think, pull out your framework and start devising a plan. You will want to identify 3 to 5 major topic areas to investigate and the appropriate subtopics for each. Write each major and sub topic on your note paper in a neat manner that you can share with the interviewer. I suggest that you use one complete sheet of paper to do this and format it as you would a slide. The layout of the slide is not important as long as it clearly shows your topics of investigation and can be clearly followed by the interviewer. This slide becomes your roadmap for the case and you can refer to it throughout the interview to keep both yourself and the interviewer on track. Competitors x Rivals x New Entrants x Substitutes Customers Supply Chain x Segments x Needs x Distribution Revenue x Volume x Price Figure 1: Sample Plan Slide Probing for Information - Once you have drawn up your plan of attack for the case, it is time to start digging for information about the case. Using your plan, start questioning the interviewer about each topic. You are trying to get information that is going to shed light on the problem being asked, so it is important to guide your questions based on your evolving hypothesis about what you believe the ultimate solution to be. If you suspect that a low-cost competitor is stealing share from the company, your first two questions might be ÒWho are the other competitors in the market?Ó and ÒWhat are the relative cost positions of each market player?Ó Be sure to ask concise and definite questions. Asking general questions such as ÒWhat is happening in the market?Ó or ÒTell me about company profitabilityÓ are likely to get unhelpful responses from the interviewer. You will need to ask specific questions that the interviewer can answer without giving up information too easily. If you are not getting anywhere in your questioning, perhaps you are asking questions that are too vague. While you are probing for information, you will be gathering more and more data. It is imperative that you take effective notes during this stage. As you did during the initial data dump, it is wise to organize your notes in the form of slides. For each major topic area (such as Competition, Revenue, Cost, etc.) create a topic heading, and then list all information gather on that topic as bullets below. If you are careful to follow this format and write neatly, the interviewer will be pleased to see both the organization of your thoughts and your ability to produce slide output. As you get deeper into the case, you will reach a point (hopefully) where you believe that you know the answer. Here is important to shift gears from your planned approach to try to validate your hunch and then gather as much supporting data as possible. In our surgical gloves example, we may find that indeed a low-cost competitor has entered the hospital glove market and is destroying our margins, but that the market for gloves in non-hospital settings is still relatively underserved. At this point, we may switch gears to investigating the potential of this new market, our competitive advantages therein, and key assets that will enable us to penetrate this market. We know what we are trying to conclude Ð that we want to reposition the company to enter this new market Ð and we are now gathering data to back up that position. Nailing the Conclusion Ð At some point, you will have to conclude. If you have run the Probing for Information part of the case well, you will come to a point that you feel you have everything you need in order to conclude the case. Even if still have time left, go ahead and push to a conclusion. You interviewer will appreciate your ability to rapidly progress through the case and wrap up your ideas. He will likely then extend the case by asking additional questions or posing what-if scenarios. This is just bonus time, and you have likely impressed him. At the beginning of the case, take a look at your watch and note the time by which you must end the case. When you get to three minutes before the end, you must stop probing for more information and offer a conclusion. You may not be completely finished investigating the case, and you may not even be confident in your conclusion. Regardless, you must offer some conclusion based upon what you have discovered.