Relying on memorised frameworks

Question

I have an interview with Bain fast approaching, and I am struggling to move away from memorised frameworks. It's an approach that just makes sense to me, and I struggle to figure out how to tailor frameworks to specific cases.

To explain my problem in more detail: for profitability, it seems natural to split the question into revenues vs costs, then look at how we can increase the number of consumers and the amount they spend, and then explore different areas of cost reduction. It makes sense to me that the “tailoring to the specific case” comes after this - for example, for a waterpark, they could increase consumer volume by increasing opening hours, opening new attractions, or perhaps finding uses for their space in the off-season (eg hiring out car parking space for events like Winter Wonderland, or using indoor facilities for swimming classes year-round). In a different example, a car company could increase demand through focussing on fast-growing markets like EVs or low cost/low emissions vehicles, but the underlying structure to map out the profitability analysis would be the same. I find the same thing for most of the frameworks that I know – they’re fairly intuitive and fit the MECE criterion, and the tailoring seems to come naturally after the structure, rather than during it. I would obviously answer the water park case differently to the car case, but I would analyse both by using the same framework.

This is a very drawn-out explanation to say that the frameworks make sense to me, and I struggle to tailor the framework itself to each new case. Is it ok to just make my answer case-specific in the analysis parts, or do I have to change the skeleton of the framework every time?

Victor Cheng says that this is something that will just “click” - if I keep practising with the structures, apparently I should have some kind of epiphany as to why we use them and therefore how I can make up my own, tailored to each case, on the spot. This hasn't clicked yet and I am worried that it won't in the next 3 weeks - I have been practising for a while and it hasn't happened yet.

If anyone has any advice to help with this problem, I would really appreciate it!

Answer 1

Hi Emma,

Ideally you want to tailor the framework for each new case from Level 1. You can just achieve this with a common framework such as 3C and 4P by adding or removing a block. It might be difficult to do so with profitability, the adaptation is more on Level-2 and below.

As a candidate many years ago, I tried the following to build up the skill:

Read a lot (particularly when you're not from a background in business). When you see sufficient business issues across sectors, you: 1) have a sense where the problem is, 2) see how a common framework diverge based on particular nature of the sector / sub-topic.
Practice a few cases about issues you don't commonly come across. For example, the old McKinsey non-profit organization case. For such cases, you can't rely on the canonical frameworks and have to come up with your own structure.

When you are so familiar with structuring in that each time you can come up with your own framework, those canonical frameworks serve good “checklists” for you to see if any areas missing.

Answer 2

Hi there,

If the frameworks make sense to you and you are able to customize them to fit the question asked, there is no reason to reinvent the wheel. You are fundamentally right, a “classic” profitability case should have very comparable structure and elements - and this is true also in actual consulting projects: teams would often use a structure from an old case to a new case and adjust where needed.

I think for most people the problem arises when they do not get the classic cases - which is very often, if not most of the time (I can say this for a fact at BCG for example). Forcing a learned framework into an unusual case is wrong and would get you rejected. Using a classic and tested framework for a classic case is fine.

So my questions back to you would rather be: did you practice sufficient unusual cases? How are you solving those? Easy peasy or do you struggle to come out with structures?

Bonus question: did you receive feedback from your practice that your structures are wrong / too “frameworky” or is this more of a hypothetical fear you have?

If you deal well with unusual case types and only received positive (but good quality) feedback on your case structuring, then you are golden and I would not worry about it further!

Otherwise, those might be areas for you to explore …

Hope this helps,

Ariadna

Answer 3

Hi there,

The simple answer is: If you want to receive an offer you need to learn how to create structures from scratch and move towards a first-principles problem-solving approach.

I am quoting a few portions of an article I wrote on the topic:

Consider the following recent prompts from consulting firm interviews:

"A hotel has lower bookings: Who would you talk to?
"Machines break down more often: What factors could be contributing to this issue?"
"Airline customer satisfaction is down: How would you analyze the situation?

These scenarios cannot be answered through memorized frameworks. Trying to fit these unique problems into a pre-existing framework often leads to frustration and poor performance.

Why framework memorization fails

1. No points for problem-solving

Case interviews are designed to test your problem-solving and critical-thinking skills, not your ability to regurgitate memorized information. Frameworks are meant to be a guide, not a script. Using a memorized framework can make it obvious that you are not thinking critically about the problem at hand. Interviewers want to see tailored, relevant, and concrete analytical constructs. Using generic categories and ideas not tailored to the case will score poorly in problem-solving.

2. Creative and unique scenarios

Case interviews often involve unique and unpredictable scenarios. No two cases are the same, so a memorized framework will not apply to the specific problem you are presented with. For example:

"You are working with an operator of a specific type of machine. They break down at different rates at different locations. What factors can you think of why that would happen?"

Which Victor Cheng framework or Cosentino idea would you present here? There isn’t a single bucket that would work. We covered that before.

Even in more traditional settings, firms want to see your own perspective, no cookie cutter approach

3. Limiting creativity

Using a memorized framework limits your ability to think creatively. If you always have something to fall back on, then your mind will automatically stop looking at new ideas and angles for a case.

When you try to fit the problem into a pre-existing framework, you may miss opportunities to come up with innovative solutions. Welcome to the 99% of non-offer holders...

4. Lack of rationale

Case interviews also test your ability to communicate and present your thought process effectively. When relying on a memorized framework, you may struggle to explain the reasoning behind your solutions. You have no clear hypotheses.

Interviewers want to understand why you think a certain way, not just what you think. Memorizing frameworks can hinder your ability to support and defend your choices.

The memorized framework approach was developed by Marc Cosentino, a career advisor with no skin in the game who has never seen a consulting firm's office from the inside. When I was at McKinsey there was a saying that his advice is preventing more offers than the actual difficulty of the interviews. Something that makes you think…

There is a reason why only 1% of applicants get the offer, yet everyone continues to rely on the faulty framework approach.

How to change this?

At the core, all consulting firms want to see creative ideas communicated in a structured manner, the more exhaustive the better.

Your goal should be to develop a tailored and creative answer that fits the question. The framework should - broadly speaking - follow these three characteristics:

Broad
Deep
Insightful

You would need to go into detail and qualify your answer with practical examples and more details.

To work on this, please reach out either for coaching or the following: I am launching a free case interview foundations course and am happy to include you as a beta tester.

All the best,

Florian

Answer 4

Congrats on getting these interviews in the first place! We are looking for the same qualities in the written case as... (read entire answer)

Congrats on getting these interviews in the first place! We are looking for the same qualities in the written case as in the verbal one. You should have 1 hour to prepare so the... (read entire answer)

Answer 5

Neil, I was an experienced hire as well, so can definitely relate. The hardest part for your will likely be to get... (read entire answer)

Neil, I was an experienced hire as well, so can definitely relate. The hardest part for your will likely be to get an interview. McK is probably most open, assuming you have a... (read entire answer)

Answer 6

Typically, in depth screening is completed by the ACs / Consultants at the office that you are looking to apply to on... (read entire answer)

Typically, in depth screening is completed by the ACs / Consultants at the office that you are looking to apply to once you have made it past the initial filters. HR will assist... (read entire answer)