Based on the case, I suggested a different structure. Is it right?
- Analysis of the company position in the Market (For both Work boot sector (before and after competitors); Casual boot sector)
- Competitor Response idea 1: Focus efforts on competing in work boot sectors (potential growth, market size, competitors landscape)
- Competitor Response idea 2: Strengthening position with casual boots
No.
This isn't a structure.
you need a fundamental MINDSET SHIFT in how you approach frameworking.
This is a random list of ideas/options (ones they already gave you). Paired with a generic “analysis” which anyone can do.
MBB doesn't get paid millions of $ for random ideas/lists. They get paid for objective-driven, structured, completely hollistic approaches to solving complex/obtuse problems.
You have to use the clues from the case here:
FOR YOU TO DO: please prepare first some insights regarding market size and competitive landscape.
They want a market sizing…not a framework!
You've just restated literally the choice they're bring you in to evaluate.
==========================
IF THEY ASKED FOR YOU TO FRAMEWORK WHICH CHOICE TO MAKE:
Framework Option 1
Bucket 1: Ability to cost cut + price cut in order to compete (unlikely because of limited financial resources…also “bad” to price war)
Bucket 2: Ability to compete in areas outside of cost (brand, marketing, placement, partnerships, quality, etc.) Cost to do so (investment) versus expected gain in sales
Bucket 3: Weaknesses/opportunities in casual boots. Determining how $ would be spent in casual and what uplift would be in terms of profit
Framework Option 2
Bucket 1: Current state of work boots (amount of $ losing) = cost of staying
Bucket 2: Amount of $/effort required to fix work boots situation compared to benefit/uplift = cost of staying + benefit of staying
Bucket 3: Estimated uplift of $ required in #2 if we put into casual boots.
Framework Option 3
Bucket 1: Benefit/cost of comitting to work boots
Bucket 2: Benefit/cost of comitting to casual boots
Framework Option 4
Bucket 1: Total market potential of work boots vs. casual boots (which market overall is best)…customer
Bucket 2: “Gap” or missing piece in our current work boots + casual boot performance (competitor)
Bucket 3: Cost to bridge gap + expected benefit in each of casual and work boots (company/product)
There are more frameworks that work, but this should give you an idea.
Please reach out for coaching if you want to learn how to actually break down and solve problems without being generic.
Hi there,
It's a bit difficult to give feedback on this because we have a limited understanding of the case prompt, question and also only a high-level idea of your framework.
I would suggest you edit the question and add a more detailed breakdown of your answer (basically, the same way you would present it to the interviewer). Then happy to get back with more granular feedback.
Also, you can check out different structuring techniques at the following link:
Best,
Cristian
Company case by
