As it looks as consulting recruiting season is starting to wind down, I am guessing that my posts will become less frequent. That being said, I am anxious to hear updates from those of you who moved on to the next rounds and those of you who have/will receive offers.
I'm sure everyone will be interested to hear where you all are ending up. As for me, in the short term, I am going to get back to some science that I have neglected and keep my options open. Whether it is consulting next year, the pharma industry, or biotech, only time will tell.
I will keep posting things that I think might be relevant as I come across them. If you have any ideas, let me know.
Monday, November 16, 2009
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Recent Retractions
Received a voice mail from a McKinsey consultant who kindly asked that I remove the cases from my post. It was not my intention to post cases that they had intended to use moving into the future. As I mentioned in an earlier post, I did not post cases after my interview as I did not want to disclose cases while others were still going through the process. Instead I had tried to wait until Tuesday afternoon when the last of the interviews had taken place; however, I should have, perhaps, waited until a later time.
My thinking was that a number of widely distributed case books contain cases from past interviews, a forum which seemed analogous to this. Sorry for the inconvenience. If you wish to discuss your individual performance on a case and work through how to improve for future interviews, perhaps that is best accomplished through e-mail (consideringconsulting@gmail.com) and not through this forum. I am still anxious to try and improve my own skill set even after a rejection!
Thanks.
My thinking was that a number of widely distributed case books contain cases from past interviews, a forum which seemed analogous to this. Sorry for the inconvenience. If you wish to discuss your individual performance on a case and work through how to improve for future interviews, perhaps that is best accomplished through e-mail (consideringconsulting@gmail.com) and not through this forum. I am still anxious to try and improve my own skill set even after a rejection!
Thanks.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
McKinsey 2nd Round Rejection Feedback
So I made the phone call to the consultant and I did get some feedback that I can share with you. Firstly, I would say the feedback was a little strange, but perhaps reasonable.
He started out the conversation with some positives. I was very accomplished for someone may age, very dedicated, well spoken, and very likable. That being said, they "had some concerns." Their first concern was with the cases. He said that I did well on them, but that the feedback was unanimous. I seemed like I was "very well practiced," which can be a good thing, but apparently this can also be a bad thing in that I seemed to move through the case very logically and "without creativity with regards to the implications of the case."
Since the interview process is now behind me, I will discuss the cases I was given in detail in a later post and we can discuss the merit of this feedback...in my opinion, there wasn't a lot of room for creativity within the questions I was asked and we didn't ever get to the point where a true summary or implications were discussed directly.
With regards to the personal experience interview...one went very well and left them very satisfied, and one left them with some concerns. The "concerning" interview question was one in which I was asked to describe an experience where a conflict with a team member had an effect on the team dynamic. I talked about a time when I was leading a small team in a volunteer consulting project and a team member did not pull his weight and complete his tasks in a timely manner and how this prevented the rest of the team from moving forward. In the end, I talked to the team member, figured out he had a lot of stress in his life, negotiated a way by which he could contribute and solved the problem...blah blah blah. The consultant told me that he was concerned that it had taken me a while to address the emotional issues behind the team member not getting work done and that it seemed like my first inclination was that he just "wasn't a good worker" and he was concerned with someone that had that outlook towards people.
The reality of the situation was that this particular individual WAS A BAD WORKER in this circumstance! I actually went a great deal out of my way to make the situation amenable to him and make it possible for him to contribute. I realized he had a lot going on and worked through the situation to find a task the he could do well in a short period of time (although he had volunteered himself to do the tasks he didn't follow through on in the first place). That being said, he had made a commitment to our team that he refused to follow through on after several requests and on several occasions and when asked if he needed help, he had refused. It was only after a LOT of pressing and discussion that I was able to find a way for him to contribute at all. During my interview I didn't explicitly state that he was a pain in the ass and lazy because I didn't think it was right to throw one of my team members under the bus so I didn't fully disclose his faults...the funny part about this is that the team member I based my story on is now working for McKinsey in Europe despite being "unimpressive" (for the lack of a better word). I guess it goes to show that nice guys don't always win.
So beyond that, there isn't much to say. I suppose I could have practiced tooo much and that maybe that stifled my "creativity" some, but then again, I thought McKinsey was all about structure, structure, structure and fact based analysis and less about speculation and creativity. I think that creativity helps you develop a hypothesis, but that too much speculation (i.e. being overly creative upfront) also creates a lot of low-probability hypothesis that are unnecessary. Once you have narrowed down a number of broad categories, then hypothesizing about specific circumstances becomes more appropriate and less of a time sink, although I think I have learned that throwing out a few off the wall and unfounded thoughts will score you some creativity points even if it isn't really appropriate for the initial analysis. I also could have been more straightforward about my personal experience, but made a judgment call to be a bit more reserved in my descriptions, which also hurt me in the end.
I hope that some of you had better news than I did...I'd love to hear all of the feedback!
He started out the conversation with some positives. I was very accomplished for someone may age, very dedicated, well spoken, and very likable. That being said, they "had some concerns." Their first concern was with the cases. He said that I did well on them, but that the feedback was unanimous. I seemed like I was "very well practiced," which can be a good thing, but apparently this can also be a bad thing in that I seemed to move through the case very logically and "without creativity with regards to the implications of the case."
Since the interview process is now behind me, I will discuss the cases I was given in detail in a later post and we can discuss the merit of this feedback...in my opinion, there wasn't a lot of room for creativity within the questions I was asked and we didn't ever get to the point where a true summary or implications were discussed directly.
With regards to the personal experience interview...one went very well and left them very satisfied, and one left them with some concerns. The "concerning" interview question was one in which I was asked to describe an experience where a conflict with a team member had an effect on the team dynamic. I talked about a time when I was leading a small team in a volunteer consulting project and a team member did not pull his weight and complete his tasks in a timely manner and how this prevented the rest of the team from moving forward. In the end, I talked to the team member, figured out he had a lot of stress in his life, negotiated a way by which he could contribute and solved the problem...blah blah blah. The consultant told me that he was concerned that it had taken me a while to address the emotional issues behind the team member not getting work done and that it seemed like my first inclination was that he just "wasn't a good worker" and he was concerned with someone that had that outlook towards people.
The reality of the situation was that this particular individual WAS A BAD WORKER in this circumstance! I actually went a great deal out of my way to make the situation amenable to him and make it possible for him to contribute. I realized he had a lot going on and worked through the situation to find a task the he could do well in a short period of time (although he had volunteered himself to do the tasks he didn't follow through on in the first place). That being said, he had made a commitment to our team that he refused to follow through on after several requests and on several occasions and when asked if he needed help, he had refused. It was only after a LOT of pressing and discussion that I was able to find a way for him to contribute at all. During my interview I didn't explicitly state that he was a pain in the ass and lazy because I didn't think it was right to throw one of my team members under the bus so I didn't fully disclose his faults...the funny part about this is that the team member I based my story on is now working for McKinsey in Europe despite being "unimpressive" (for the lack of a better word). I guess it goes to show that nice guys don't always win.
So beyond that, there isn't much to say. I suppose I could have practiced tooo much and that maybe that stifled my "creativity" some, but then again, I thought McKinsey was all about structure, structure, structure and fact based analysis and less about speculation and creativity. I think that creativity helps you develop a hypothesis, but that too much speculation (i.e. being overly creative upfront) also creates a lot of low-probability hypothesis that are unnecessary. Once you have narrowed down a number of broad categories, then hypothesizing about specific circumstances becomes more appropriate and less of a time sink, although I think I have learned that throwing out a few off the wall and unfounded thoughts will score you some creativity points even if it isn't really appropriate for the initial analysis. I also could have been more straightforward about my personal experience, but made a judgment call to be a bit more reserved in my descriptions, which also hurt me in the end.
I hope that some of you had better news than I did...I'd love to hear all of the feedback!
Friday, November 6, 2009
McKinsey 3rd Round Invites
PLEASE DON'T JUST READ-PARTICIPATE:
As you all may have seen, there is quite a discussion going back and forth in the comments section of the last post (caseinterview.com). What we are starting to see is a number of people are hearing back from McKinsey with the results of their 2nd round interviews.
If you feel comfortable discussing the outcome from your interview, please help us keep a running tally...might give us all a better idea of how they might be viewing hiring this year. Additionally, if you received a phone call from one of the consultants you interviewed with...please feel free to share the feedback you were given...I'm sure that will also help the group as a whole!
I will keep a running total at the bottom of this post--keep your eyes open for updates
So far the total that I have from those who have responded:
2 moving on to next round
15 rejected
As you all may have seen, there is quite a discussion going back and forth in the comments section of the last post (caseinterview.com). What we are starting to see is a number of people are hearing back from McKinsey with the results of their 2nd round interviews.
If you feel comfortable discussing the outcome from your interview, please help us keep a running tally...might give us all a better idea of how they might be viewing hiring this year. Additionally, if you received a phone call from one of the consultants you interviewed with...please feel free to share the feedback you were given...I'm sure that will also help the group as a whole!
I will keep a running total at the bottom of this post--keep your eyes open for updates
So far the total that I have from those who have responded:
2 moving on to next round
15 rejected
Thursday, November 5, 2009
caseinterview.com
Whenever interview season comes along, it seems like there are always a group of people who weren't too serious about getting a consulting job until they got a "surprising" invitation to interview with a firm.
For a lot of these people, doing cases isn't really something that they are familiar with and they need to get ramped up pretty quickly. I think the following website is a great resource for those kinds of candidates. I kind of hesitate posting too much help as I am actively competing for spots with all of you, but my poor judgment and personal avidity towards being helpful says to proceed.
Anyway, I think the site: http://www.caseinterview.com/ is pretty helpful for getting a broad overview of how to approach cases. There are 6+ hours of free video tutorial and a very helpful FAQs section to help answer all of the standard questions about consulting and the interview process.
I think this site is also a great resource for those of us that have been thinking about consulting for a while. It is always good to learn as much as you can and the guy that put this site together used to be an associate at McKinsey and conducted interviews there himself....his suggestions are probably pretty great and worth checking out no matter what stage you are at in your preparation.
For a lot of these people, doing cases isn't really something that they are familiar with and they need to get ramped up pretty quickly. I think the following website is a great resource for those kinds of candidates. I kind of hesitate posting too much help as I am actively competing for spots with all of you, but my poor judgment and personal avidity towards being helpful says to proceed.
Anyway, I think the site: http://www.caseinterview.com/ is pretty helpful for getting a broad overview of how to approach cases. There are 6+ hours of free video tutorial and a very helpful FAQs section to help answer all of the standard questions about consulting and the interview process.
I think this site is also a great resource for those of us that have been thinking about consulting for a while. It is always good to learn as much as you can and the guy that put this site together used to be an associate at McKinsey and conducted interviews there himself....his suggestions are probably pretty great and worth checking out no matter what stage you are at in your preparation.
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
McKinsey 2nd Round Interview
So I just finished my second round interview at McKinsey. We have been specifically instructed not to give any information about the cases until after interviews are completed, so I will not give too much detail in my discussion of my case interviews at this point.
Overall, I have 2 thoughts. 1) I'm glad that the interview is over and 2) I think it went OK...I'd give myself a B/B+.
The cases were rather typical. Evaluate a series of opportunities/proposals, launch a new product, and declining sales. Nothing too out of the blue. I did pretty well structuring my answers, didn't stumble toooo much with the math, and had good personal experience interviews.
I was surprised with how much I was interrupted during both the case and experience portions and asked clarifying questions or probed for deeper answers.
Overall, it was a good experience...we are supposed to find out our fate by Nov. 17th...a long time to wait! I'm sure I'll get another post up once I have some more time to collect my thoughts...right now my mind is a little numb.
Good luck to everyone with interviews the rest of the week!
Overall, I have 2 thoughts. 1) I'm glad that the interview is over and 2) I think it went OK...I'd give myself a B/B+.
The cases were rather typical. Evaluate a series of opportunities/proposals, launch a new product, and declining sales. Nothing too out of the blue. I did pretty well structuring my answers, didn't stumble toooo much with the math, and had good personal experience interviews.
I was surprised with how much I was interrupted during both the case and experience portions and asked clarifying questions or probed for deeper answers.
Overall, it was a good experience...we are supposed to find out our fate by Nov. 17th...a long time to wait! I'm sure I'll get another post up once I have some more time to collect my thoughts...right now my mind is a little numb.
Good luck to everyone with interviews the rest of the week!
Monday, November 2, 2009
The Personal Experience Interview
I have come to learn a lot about the McKinsey personal experience interview and how it might be a little different than what you are used to. I'm sure that you have all been told to develop "stories" that describe a leadership experience, a time you made an impact, or a time you had a conflict. I had been told that before too and I have stories to answer all of those questions. However, with during your PE interview, there is a right and a wrong way to deliver those stories.
We are all used to telling a story as a narrative...setting up the situation, giving a problem, giving a solution and then trying to tell about how we fit into that story. This is not the way to go about telling a story in your interview.
The interviewer at McKinsey is looking for very specific details regarding your situation. Actually, they may not even be interested in your particular situation at all. What they ARE interested in is what YOU DID in that situation. They don't care if a conflict happened at work, in the lab, or at home. What they want to know is what you thought and said in that situation and how you influenced change. To get to these answers, they will interrupt you and ask very specific questions. If you are giving a long narrative, you will likely be interrupted before you even get to what you did in a situation.
The best way to make sure you get the key points of your story in the interviewer's head is to take your narrative and give it a title...a lot like a newspaper headline. Then take your narrative and try to make it three strong sentences that describe the situation, what you did, and how it made a difference. The interviewer will then probe deeper into one aspect of what you mentioned and you can give them as much detail as they ask for at that point.
This technique ensures that you get the highlights across and also shows some structured thinking.
During everything make sure to emphasize YOUR role, YOUR thought process, and the results that YOU brought about. After all, they are going to hire YOU, not your team, your lab, or your family... And always always answer the specific question that you are asked!
Hope this helps. I'm working overtime trying to get my long and drawn out stories into a manageable 3-4 sentence highlight reel before tomorrow afternoon!
We are all used to telling a story as a narrative...setting up the situation, giving a problem, giving a solution and then trying to tell about how we fit into that story. This is not the way to go about telling a story in your interview.
The interviewer at McKinsey is looking for very specific details regarding your situation. Actually, they may not even be interested in your particular situation at all. What they ARE interested in is what YOU DID in that situation. They don't care if a conflict happened at work, in the lab, or at home. What they want to know is what you thought and said in that situation and how you influenced change. To get to these answers, they will interrupt you and ask very specific questions. If you are giving a long narrative, you will likely be interrupted before you even get to what you did in a situation.
The best way to make sure you get the key points of your story in the interviewer's head is to take your narrative and give it a title...a lot like a newspaper headline. Then take your narrative and try to make it three strong sentences that describe the situation, what you did, and how it made a difference. The interviewer will then probe deeper into one aspect of what you mentioned and you can give them as much detail as they ask for at that point.
This technique ensures that you get the highlights across and also shows some structured thinking.
During everything make sure to emphasize YOUR role, YOUR thought process, and the results that YOU brought about. After all, they are going to hire YOU, not your team, your lab, or your family... And always always answer the specific question that you are asked!
Hope this helps. I'm working overtime trying to get my long and drawn out stories into a manageable 3-4 sentence highlight reel before tomorrow afternoon!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
