Mckinsey framework structuring question

Question

Hello,

I can see from Mckinsey website and from some specific content such as Peter K. “15 advanced-level cases inspired by real McKinsey interviews” that all framework questions have the following format:

- What factors would you like to investigate ..

- What issues ..

- What information ..

This can be very different from the framework questions asked here in PrepLounge. I feel like this questions are more broad/qualitative, and that there isn't generally a specific quantitative target in mind. Is this typical or always the case for Mckinsey interviews? Is it the same for Europe?

Thanks!

Answer 1

Hi there,

Accurate observation!

A McKinsey interview is interviewer-led, meaning you get a sequence of questions you answer separately. That means the interviewer effectively determines which areas you investigate further, leading with questions.

To make sure you restrict your answer to a framework and do not start analyzing (which would be a separate question) and to make sure you develop a broad comprehensive framework so they are able to assess your structuring skills and creativity, they often use operators like the ones you mentioned („which factors would you look at…“ etc.).

Hope that adds some clarity!

Best,

Gero

Answer 2

No, they don't.

The upfront question can come in many shapes any sizes.

Check out the cases I published in the library (I'll paste 3 below as an example). These are all based on real MBB interviews and then adjusted to protect IP. You'll see that the formulation of the question differs significantly - for instance, not only exploratory questions a la ‘What factors…’ but also prescriptive ones ‘What are some of the reasons…’

Looking for typical frameworks is likely to lead you to an average performance - in the best-case scenario.

To have a distinctive performance - which is what you need to nail the interviews in the current market conditions - you should approach structuring from first principles.

Best,
Cristian

Answer 3

Most McKinsey cases start with a similar question framing. They do this to make sure candidates focus on formulating a problem-solving structure before diving into analysis. This tests how well candidates can structure problems.

Unlike BCG and Bain, McKinsey hires from various diverse backgrounds, so some candidates might not know be prepared in terms of how case interviews work. That's why this starting format is helpful.

In most McKinsey cases, the interviewer guides the conversation with a series of questions, each question designed to evaluate specific skills. However, some interviewers, mainly partners, might not follow this format , in which case you might receive a different framing.

Thanks Ashwin

Answer 4

Hi there,

Yes, the case questions from McKinsey are oftentimes worded along the lines of “Which factors would you consider?”.

But do NOT get distracted by this, because it does not mean to just list buckets and qualitative bullet points! The adequate way to think about this wording is to just expand the question to its true meaning. E.g.: “Which factors would you consider to decide whether the client should do X?”.

Cheers, Sidi

___________________

Dr. Sidi S. Koné

Former Senior Engagement Manager & Interviewer at McKinsey | Former Senior Consultant at BCG | Co-Founder of The MBB Offer Machine™

Answer 5

Those prompts trigger you to go after a broad set of “buckets”.

The “watch out” here is to avoid boiling the ocean and mentioning a wide range of possibilities that may be only “interesting” or vaguely related to the case at hand.

While the question may or not be asked in such a way, the real question is always “how would you reach a certain objective”. [That objective may have been quantified or not.]

If you just go for that long list of buckets, it may either be unstructured or simply not objective-driven. This is clearly suboptimal. Most likely, it will ressemble the typical bucket list of most candidates (no differentiation and, most importantly, the interviewer has no insight on how you think, which is the whole point of the case).

As such, always this of it not as a generic list of factors, but as an approach that you would have to take to answer a certain question (i.e. reach the objective). Then, of course, make sure that you have the factors that are relevant / critical to reach that answer/objective.

Answer 6

I would say that they are not “different” from framework questions.

In a candidate-led case you need to decide yourself on what question you want to answer using your framework.

In the interviewer-led case, they are making it easier for you by giving you the question you need to solve for.

If you have perfected your framework-skills - you will find the focused questions actually easier than the free-range approach of candidate-led cases.

Happy to guide you in any challenges you are facing with candidate-led vs interviewer-led frameworks.

Answer 7

At the end of the day, all these questions lead to the same place: slice a complex problem in different and independent pieces with a MECE structure.

Then, your framework can be a list of factors, questions, etc. It doesn't matter as long as you answer the case question, tailor it to the case and create a MECE structure.

Best,

Alberto

—

Check out my latest case based on a real MBB interview: Sierra Springs

Answer 8

The main difference really is the risk at stake. Entrepreneurial Drive is more about having initiative and driving th... (read entire answer)

The main difference really is the risk at stake. Entrepreneurial Drive is more about having initiative and driving things forward, but Courageous Change is about making the hard... (read entire answer)