Boston Consulting Group Interview Experiences

ISB Consulting Club

Class of 2006

Compiled by:
Ruchi Bansal
Simran Khara
Gaurav Balhara
Amrit Singh
 Index
1. Yashraj Erande (2)
2. Asish Mohapatra (4)
3. Shankar Prasad (4)
4. Ruchi Bansal (2)
5. Arun Neelkanthan (4)
Yashraj Erande

Name Yashraj Erande

Company Interviewed Boston Consulting Group
With
Name of Interviewer and Neelam Phadke
designation
Round Second Round, 1st interview
(First/Second/Third
round)
Personal interview Covered by others.
questions (with indicative
answers if you choose to
share them)
Narration of the case Problem Statement: You are consulting for an Engineering
interview (please be as Construction Company which is trying to expand in India as well
descriptive as possible) as internationally. The CEO calls you one day and mentions that
their company is facing a severe “talent” problem. How should the
company address this problem?

Case Analysis

Problem Identification:
I started off by segmenting “talent” on two dimensions – Fresh vs.
Lateral and Technical vs. Managerial. These were broad segments
however covered the entire spectrum in a comprehensive manner.
She concurred.
Further, I explored the nature of the problem – whether it was
difficult to retain talent or recruit new talent at various levels. She
clarified that the major problem was in recruiting new talent and
also retaining talent at the entry level.
After this I formulated the problem statement so that both of us
were on the same page. Post problem definition, I went on to put a
structure which we could follow to solve the problem. Note that it
was not only important to identify the causes of the problem but
also recommend possible solutions.

Structure:
Early on I had realized that this case required me to be very
exhaustive in my analysis and also creative in problem solving
because I hadn’t come across any such business problem earlier.
So let me confess, for the first 10 seconds I was couldn’t think of a
good structure which would ensure which would ensure this.
So I decided to start from first principles… I said that I would look
at this problem as a ‘demand – supply’ problem in the talent or
labor market. Then I would identify the demand drivers and the
supply constraints, locate the mismatch to identify the main causes
and finally recommend some intervention or corrective measures to
set this problem right. She seemed to be pretty satisfied with my
approach and asked me to proceed.

Issue Identification:
note – its important to use the first name of the interviewer if
possible during the conversation because this gives the feeling that
the interaction is a peer level interaction)
I identified that the target market looks at the following criterion in
making a career decision ( I mentioned explicitly to her that since I
have no experience in recruitment I would use my own example to
identify the demand drivers – she was comfortable with this):
a. Brand
b. Lifestyle
c. Role and Resp.
d. Compensation
e. Growth path
I also elaborated on each of these points. For example, I told her
that “Brand” perception is affected by the media (external) and also
personal (internal) network – i.e. what your friends have to say
about the firm you join is also an important decision criterion.
Similarly, I elaborated on the other points.

At this stage I asked her whether she would like me to consider any
more facets of recruitment. She seemed pretty satisfied with this
and hence asked me to continue.

Next step was to explore the supply side… I mentioned that the
supply for talent would come primarily from
a. Educational institutes – this would be for managerial as
well as technical talent. Also the company might have
existing relationships with some institutes which might
have to be revisited during the problem solving part...
especially because our client was going global. To this
Neelam smiled and acknowledged that I had hit upon a
key theme.
b. Open market – again for both managerial and technical
talent pool being hired laterally from other companies….
Again domestic and international companies…
At this point, I clarified whether there was any trend in the
recruiting pattern of the company such as the company seeking
primarily technical talent from the open market. This was
important because it would have a bearing on the problem solving
part of the case. She denied any such trend.

At this point I said that my hypothesis was that either there was
some mismatch between what our client offering to the talent pool
and what the talent pool wanted or there was some better option
available from competition. I further added that I would explore
the facts to identify which hypothesis was correct.

With reasonable confidence that I was on the right track I went on

to problem solving.

Issue Analysis:
In this part of the case discussion…I first clarified that the talent
crunch being faced was only for our client or for the entire engg
construction sector. I think this was a key question because it
clarified that the entire industry was facing this problem and our
client’s problem was a little more accentuated. I mentally took note
of this point because now it was important to identify what
percentage of the problem was due to industry wide phenomenon
and what was specific to our client (may be impact of
globalization). I asked her the reason why the entire industry was
facing some problem… I think by asking this question, I had asked
her to probably kill the case… so once again she smiled and asked
me to think thru the reasons. This is where reading some news
paper reports helped me. I had read about the problem faced by
brick and mortar sector due to competition from the IT sector in
India. So using that knowledge as the base, I went on to elaborate
on each of the five points (talent drivers) by comparing engg
construction industry with its competitors (in the talent space) such
as the IT and BPO sector… at least in India. This was a very
exhaustive but intuitive discussion.

Further, I discussed that there would be special problems on some

of the talent dimensions due to our client’s globalization efforts.
Mainly because our client doesn’t currently have an overseas
presence and hence no brand and relations with edu instis. I
elaborated on this aspect further… she once again nodded in
agreement that this was a huge problem.

So finally having identified the problems…issue analysis phase

done, we proceeded to the problem solving.

Problem Solving:
This was a completely new problem with no standard solutions
taught in mba… so it was completely a creative thinking session.
Here I made all the standard points … for example, I said that there
is often a gap between reality and perception and some of the
problems on the brand and lifestyle front can be eliminated if we
bridged this gap thru media campaign. I also recommended, that
we could compensate for a slightly tougher lifestyle (no AC on
shop floor ☺) by better roles and responsibilities and growth path.
However, this implied that the talent that we do hire should be
good enough to shoulder the challenges that come along with
higher roles. So there was clearly a problem here. To circumvent
this problem I recommended that the company should try hiring
the crème from Tier-2 colleges and firms which is generally
neglected. There are two advantages of doing this – firstly the top
of the class in these schools is also of very high caliber and secondly
people coming from smaller towns / colleges would value what
our client has to offer much more than people from top-tier
colleges. This was I think a wow moment for her… well… more
confession… this is not my original idea. This came up in one of the
random discussions I was having with a friend of mine (Rohit K) on
campus. Anyways, it goes to show that peer learning is for real ☺

For international recruitments I suggested some radical ideas such

as acquiring an international company just for the talent pool if it

What do you think went
right for you in the in this
interview?
What do you think went
wrong in this interview?
Any tips for the future
batches based on this
interview experience.
was very high quality and fitted well with our over all strategy.
This was highly feasible because our client was anyways
globalizing inorganically as well (clarified this with Neelam). Also
gave some standard dope about building relationships with
international educational institutes and head-hunters …or simply
hiring some really top guys from international firms who would
bring others along with them.
Having seen the glint in her eye… I was confident that I was sailing
thru… and proceeded to the synthesis phase.
Synthesis phase… made recommendations, refreshed her memory
by mentioning why the recommendations made sense.
She asked me if I had a question for her… I asked her if this was a
real problem she had faced in her assignment and how did she
solve it… she accepted that she had faced this problem but declined
to comment on the solution citing client secrecy.
I think the “market” approach was a very intuitive and elegant
approach. This made the rest of the stuff easy.
Rigor…
Connected very well with Neelam… she was a really nice person to
talk to …
Nothing… this was perfect. I was stuck in the beginning but didn’t
let it show on my face and pulled myself thru…
Be comfortable with analytical rigor… smile … make it a peer
interaction. Be yourself and CONNECT WITH THE
INTERVIEWER.
Name Yashraj Erande
Company Interviewed Boston Consulting Group
With
Name of Interviewer and Vikram Bhalla
designation
Round Third Round, 1st (Last) interview
(First/Second/Third
round)
Personal interview This was the coolest interview of them all. Vikram is really an
questions (with indicative amazingly cool dude. So first and foremost, just relax with him.
answers if you choose to I was chatting with Neeraj Agrawal while waiting for my turn and
share them) was already told by Neeraj that good things were being said about
me… so I was feeling comfy. Vikram called out for me and we just
walked for some time outside the quad discussing ISB’s
architecture, rules, culture, the ISB experience in general, the
maturity of ISB students etc..etc…..by the end of this discussion we
had meandered into the interview room and were ready for
interview.
Narration of the case Vikram didn’t sit across the table for this interview but instead
interview (please be as came and sat by my side… this was phenomenal. I was very
descriptive as possible) impressed. From here onwards it was a mere peer-to-peer
discussion with us calling each other by our respective first names.
It was the most fun interview I had ever!
So he started off by saying that he had heard great things about my
problem solving and that he looked forward to this session with
me. I said I was glad to hear it and really looked forward to a
stimulating session with him. Then he asked me if there was a case
book at ISB which had the cement company acquisition case. I said
that indeed there was… we both smiled. Then he said, ”let’s start
off by analyzing a fresh business situation I faced…”

Problem Statement: Your client is a paint manufacturer. The market

leader has around 45% of the market, where as there are three
players at number two position each with 18% market share. Your
client is a number two player and wants to become a clear number
two with a much larger market share within 5 years. There are no
other constraints…What would you advice him?

Case Analysis

Problem Identification:
The first question I asked him was, “why is the client concerned
with market share?” The ideal objective function for a CE O should
be “increase profit”… why “increase market share”?
From my experience with Neelam I knew that eventually I would
be asked to answer this question myself… so I quickly added that
this is justified only if this is a “high degree of operating leverage”
(“asset intensive”) business and hence increased sales has direct
impact on increased profits. Further I clarified that I don’t have
much understanding of the paints industry and would seek some
inputs from him. I think he was satisfied with my line of thought
and said that indeed, my hypothesis was correct. The fixed cost is
very high for the client compared to the variable cost.
Now the market share objective function made sense…

Further I said I would like to have some background information

about the nature of products manufactured by our client. Vikram
said that there are two broad categories of paints manufactured –
for interiors and for exteriors.

Then I took my one minute time out to crystallize my ideas.

Structure:
Firstly I defined market share as the cross product of “share of
mind” (advertising) x “share of distribution channel” (availability)
x “share of heart” (purchase intent) … again not my idea at
all…Jagamohan Raju zinda baad.

I said that any problem that I identified from here on could be

chalked up to one of these three categories… He first asked me to
explain the logic of the formula, especially its multiplicative nature,
which I did promptly…

Further, I added to accurately identify the problems, I would look

at the customer segments and then determine the problems wrt
each market segment along the three parameters.

I told Vikram that market could be segmented based on the

products or demographic data or geography. However, I said that I
segmenting based on nature of customers would be most effective.
So there would be two categories:
1. Builders / Contractors
2. Small private home owners

He concurred and asked me to move forward.

Then I started looking at each of the three parameters for these

segments.

He said that there was no problem with sales for – distribution

coverage (i.e. share of distribution) and advertising (share of mind).
So now the problem boiled down to purchase intent. Then I started
with a value chain analysis (distribution channel portion). I
suggested that the purchase intent was governed by the distributor
for contractors and by the architect for small home owners.
However, he told me that this was not the case. Everyone relied on
the distributor for their purchase decision. Before proceeding
further I discussed with Vikram to rule out any other purchase
decision maker and zeroed in on the distributor as the most
important agent in this game. I also clarified that the distributor
carried the stock of only our client and no other competitor. This
ruled out any agency problems. Then I analyzed the manner in

What do you think went
right for you in the in this
interview?
What do you think went
wrong in this interview?
Any tips for the future
batches based on this
interview experience.
which distributor served the two segments I had identified earlier.
Thru the course of the discussion it turned out that the distributor
considered various aspects such as local weather, purchasing
power of the end customer, colors of the season. However, it turned
out that the company viewed the market segment as “interior
paints” and “exterior paints”. As a consequence they (a) didn’t
have enough paints for meet all the needs of the customers in terms
of climatic variance across India and (b) didn’t communicate all the
relevant information to the distributor. Therefore, our distributors
were losing out to the market leader. Bridging this gap was clearly
the key.
Further, we discussed the existing product lines and realized that
the client had presence only in the high end (premium) segment.
Subsequently we discussed that by broadening the product range
and entering into lower priced paints our client would be able to
achieve economies of scale in an asset intensive business and also
enter new segments. This recommendation was well received.
After this, Vikram said that he was satisfied with the discussion
and wanted to keep my rough paper because he had liked my
analysis very much. Or may be the true reason was that he didn’t
want me to use it to write the consulting club’s case book ☺…
either ways I knew I had cracked it ☺
Yet, I asked him if he wanted me to synthesize which he declined.
I think applying theoretical concepts studied at ISB in a rigorous
manner helped tremendously.
I was also very receptive to all the inputs given by Vikram and
hooked on to every cue. This is very important.
I also used the rough paper very well, making clear diagrams and
tables which I think he like a lot, especially because he was seated
right next to me and not across the table.
Nothing…
Be alert and receptive to interviewer’s hints.
Asish Mohapatra

Name Asish Mohapatra

Company Interviewed Boston Consulting Group
With
Name of Interviewer and Neelam Phadke
designation
Round First Round, 1st interview
(First/Second/Third
round)
Personal interview She started off with asking me where I was from. On knowing that
questions (with indicative I was from a tier II Indian city (I am from Cuttack, Orissa), she
answers if you choose to asked me what the difference was in the psychology of Indians in
share them) small towns and big cities. I divided the answer into how it was
different for the various social components – Government (I
stressed that involvement was far higher in small cities),
Consumers (I stressed that they are more value and price centric)
and manufacturers (problems that they face in small towns). On a
personal note, I told her how difficult it is for a student to make it
big against organized education, which is what the cities had
become hub of.
I proceeded to ask her where she was from and she shared her
thoughts.
She asked me what my biggest weakness was. I told her that I
become very complacent at the last minute and end up messing
things up at the end. (I gave her a few instances).
She asked me why I wanted to do consulting (to which I gave the
same standard answer).
She then asked me what I expected from the interview that was
coming up. I told her that I had not formed an opinion before
coming there but after the type of questions asked, I told her that I
was expecting a very cool, comfortable and frank interview where I
could be blunt and honest.
She proceeded to the case post that. This lasted close to 10 minutes.
Narration of the case A complete quantitative case, but the challenge was to bring in a
interview (please be as degree of management thinking into that.
descriptive as possible)
The case was about an oil drilling company. This company used to
rent out a critical bulky vessel from a contractor for its operations.
The company, in the recent past, was facing a lot of problems
because its contractor’s performance had gone down in the recent
past. So, the company wanted to know whether it should go ahead
with purchasing the equipment or not.
I initially structured the problem saying that first I will do an
economic analysis, in which I will analyze the quantifiable aspects.
In the second part, I will look at the strategic imperatives of the
decision that cannot be put a numbers on.

On the economic front, I said that first I will look at the benefits of
the above decision (this could be in terms of extra revenues or
reduced costs) over the current set-up and the costs of the above
decision (which could be in terms of increased costs or reduced
revenues). I mentioned that to do the analysis in the following way,
I needed to understand the complete operation of the vessel first.
These are a few salient points that I discovered (after trying to
guess and with her help) – There were multiple number of vessels
that had to be used in a project. Also the vessels were brought in for
a specified number of days and then had to be sent back for
maintenance (irrespective of whether they were used or not). They
were also huge and required some storage space during the
maintenance time. They also require skilled manpower to attend to
them during the maintenance time (maintenance time was dictated
by the way the vessel was being used ad varied with the skills of
the driver and the complexity of the project). They also required
specifically skilled drivers that had to drive them. It also required a
specific type of fuel that would run it. The vessel also had to be
periodically certified after a fixed period from a regulatory body.
The vessel also had a specified fixed life. All this put together gave
me the cost of a vessel in a year. I then calculated the amount spent
on vessels in a project (using the different types and number of
vessels used in the project). Here, I also had to factor in the fact that
a fixed number of vessels had to be kept on a standby because some
vessels will always be out on maintenance. Then, I calculated the
total amount spent on vessels in a year (using the number of
specified projects in the year to calculate the number of vessels
required in each category).

She then asked me to detail all the scenarios that could change my
analysis. I told her all the assumptions that had been used to
calculate and the variable that had the biggest sensitivity (number
of vessels used in a project). I also told her that scale effects were
crucial here as in my analysis I had assumed that we had projects
throughout the year for all vessels. In a futuristic scenario, the
demand has to be seen to compute this. I also told her that when we
compute demand, we have to take data from multiple sources so
that we are sure that the correct demand has been taken. I also told
her that operational efficiencies were important here because the
time that the vessel was out for maintenance depended on the skills
of the driver. I also told her that learning effects were crucial here
because a firm will get skilled at all these activities as time wears
on. I had also assumed that there will be complete backward
integration and all jobs remotely attached with the vessel had to be
performed by us. I also detailed out a few more assumptions that
were fairly obvious. She, then, asked me to do a scenario analysis
wherein she changed a few numbers and I redid the calculations.
(The whole analysis assumed no discounting effect)

Next, I told her that we need to look at the pay benefits. In this, I
understood the contractual agreement with the current contractor
(it was on a pay per year basis and depended on the number and
type of vessels being procured). For this again, I computed the type
and number of vessels required and the number of projects to
arrive at the cost per year. There was a lesser cost being incurred in
the current scenario but it was marginal.
I had to quantify the revenue benefits next. In this, I saw the
amount extra that will be earned if we earn the vessels on our own
and if we could earn some extra revenues through the vessels
(which could be in terms of the vessels being used elsewhere or
more number of projects coming in). On the first aspect, I told her
that it is important to understand who is at fault for all the
scheduling delays (it might be the contractor, us or both) and
whether it is unavoidable in the current scenario or not (we should
calculate the incremental after taking into account that all small
errors can be ironed out). She said that the contractor was
responsible for anything. It was also important to learn how the
client was earning revenue, whether it was cost plus or fixed sum
for a project. She told me it was a later and gave me a distribution
of the revenues that could have been earned. The, I asked her about
the number of days that the removal of delay would have saved.
She gave me a number and I computed the net gains.

Next, we went into the alternate sources of revenue and there I

identified that there were a few more uses that an unused vessel
could be put to use to. I had made a gnatt chart to identify each
vessel when it was free. I used this to compute the extra revenues
that could be earned by renting it out. Then, she told me that to
assume that there will be no extra revenues because of number of
projects increase because of vessel earning. I told her that the above
whole analysis should have been done for a marginal vessel but the
scenario got complicated because there was different type of vessels
being used.

After that I looked at the total capital expenditure required for the
whole project. Then, I took the opportunity cost of capital of the
company and computed the EVA, which I found to be slightly on
the positive side. I told her that now I need to look at the qualitative
aspects.

The first thing that I used was that it was getting into a kind of
business that it had no expertise in. This could also result in loss of
focus in the main business. The second thing that I looked at was
the extra admin hassles in managing the division and hence the
overheads might increase, which was not accounted for in the
analysis. The third thing that I looked at was financing required for
the project. This might not be easy to raise in the open market if the
company was not doing well (I was already told that the firm
lacked cash). I also told her that there might be the additional hassle
of managing a different organization structure and unionized labor
if so is the case.

I concluded the case with saying that the project does not look
viable and the firm should look for other options like a different
contractor, trying to start a vessel business with other firms, etc.
She, then, asked me to summarize the whole case.

What do you think went
right for you in the in this
interview?
What do you think went
wrong in this interview?
Any tips for the future
batches based on this
interview experience.
We then went into the last part of the interview, a chit chat that
lasted for close to 15 minutes. She, then, gave me a brief of what
had happened in the actual project and complimented me for the
sheer exhaustive nature of my analysis.
She, then, asked me about my experience in Hyderabad and how it
was different from other Indian metros that I had lived in (Kolkata
and Bangalore). We went into a discussion about Hyderabadi
cuisine (she did most of the talking here!) and Nizams.
She gave me an opportunity to ask a question. In this part, I asked
her how consulting projects in heavy industries (like the one we
discussed – ones involving site work) was different from the softer
ones (ones that were done primarily in the office).
I think sheer comfort with numbers and speed and accuracy of
calculations paid off for me. There were a few things that she
complimented me for at the end of the interview – the usage of
Gnatt chart, extensive scenario analysis and checking sensitive data
from multiple sources.
I think I was speaking too much. I desperately tried to do damage
control during the last personal part of the interview.
In BCG, it is extremely crucial to show comfort with numbers. It is
also important to do an exhaustive analysis. Also, very important to
connect with the interviewer and generate a few wow moments
during the personal part.
Name Asish Mohapatra
Company Interviewed Boston Consulting Group
With
Name of Interviewer and Arvind Subramaniam, Principal
designation
Round First Round, 2nd interview
(First/Second/Third
round)
Personal interview He began by asking me how my experience with Neelam had been.
questions (with indicative I gave him a two line summary of the case with Neelam and then I
answers if you choose to dwelled on the extra stuff that we had discussed. Next, I told him
share them) why I liked Neelam as an interviewer.

He then asked me how I had prepared for consulting round the

year. I told him that for a person actually interested in consulting,
preparation actually began the day he joined the school. The
preparation again was in 3 phases. The first phase was doing the
courses well so that overall learning was enhanced. Second was the
cases, wherein you slowly ramp up. Third was as the d-day draws
close, you do the personal part along with the case.

This lasted close to 3-4 minutes and then, we went to the case.
Narration of the case This was again a quantitative case. Here, I had to estimate the
interview (please be as break-even for a new deep water diving operation on the banks of
descriptive as possible) Australia. Then, I had to recommend ways of achieving/ increasing
the sales figure.

The way I did it is that I started off with a number x (the number of
people taking the dive on that day), that I assumed as the break-
even (that will yield me zero profits at the end of the year, as I had
estimated). Also, after having identified each of the revenue and
cost drivers, I will see how I could have increased each one of them.
The additional information given was that the diving operation
lasted for 4 months in the year (peak season) and was idle for the
rest (off season).

I started off from the cost side. The whole set of operations cost as
under. I had to identify all the cost drivers and then he gave me the
numbers. I identified all the cost drivers (except one in the fixed
costs, which he suggested).

There was an area that was rented out for storage and operations,
so rent had to be paid on that every month (year round figures
were calculated). Also, there was a cost of overheads, which again
was incurred every month (different for off and peak seasons).
Also, there was a fixed set of people who had to be employed
throughout the year. There was also a set of diving utilities that had
to be purchased during the peak seasons, which had a fixed cost
per month. Also, a certification had to be taken for each year (he
told this). All these amounted to be the fixed costs.
Each diving operation lasted close to 3 hours, wherein each guy
took two dives. The total work lasted for 8 hours in a day. So, each
set of resources like equipment and manpower could have been
used twice. Also, there were up to 5 people that could have gone on
the boat for a diving set once.

There was a fixed set of supplies (equipment) that the firm rented
out for a day depending on the kind of sales that it was getting.
Since each equipment could have been used twice, this number
amounted to x/2 * cost of renting in a day. The x/2 had to be an
integer, which is a final check that I had to run. The cost of
maintaining that came out to x/2 * 4 * cost of maintaining
(maintenance cost was incurred per dive and there were 4 dives per
equipment). There was also cost of assembling, which had to be
incurred twice in a day (at the start and during the break of 2
hours), hence the cost came to x/2 * 2 * cost of assembling (summed
up so that x/2 was an integer).

Next was the manpower cost. Every diver had to be accompanied

by a man. And each diver could oversee two men during the day.
Hence, the cost came to be x/2 * manpower cost per day. All these
people were external and could be rented out.

Next was the cost of the boat. The boat was owned and had a useful
life of 5 years with no salvage value. So, the investment had to be
divided by 5 to get the fixed cost of the boat. Also, each boat could
carry 5 people and make two rides in a day. So, x/10 scaled up to
the next integer was the number of boats used. The total cost came
to x/10 * cost of boat per month. Next, there was the cost of fuel in
the boat. Each boat made two trips ( one trip being 5 km back and
forth – a total of 20 km) and the number of boats was x/10. Thus,
x/10 * 20 * cost of fuel/ ltr * mileage in ltr/ km was the total cost of
fuel.

I added the cost of one boat as a standby (this was an assumption)

for breakdowns. Then, I took some inventory over the supplies and
fuel (again an assumption – 5% I took).

After summing up I found out that the total costs came to be fixed
costs + variable costs (contingent on the integer assumptions about
x/2 and x/5).

Next, I had to estimate the revenue side of the operation. Each man
paid a fixed sum per dive. Hence, the revenue was 2x * the fixed
sum.

Thus, after equating the revenue and total costs I found out the
value of x. This came out to be 12.8. I had to redo the calculations
using 2 boats, 13 equipments and 7 people for the helpers. This
scaled up the costs and I got a figure of 13.6 for break-even by using
only the revenue part as the variable. Another set of similar
iteration yielded the fact that I needed 15 people, to which I settled.
The criterion for settling was that the numbers for x should not go
up by more than equal to 1 after every operation.

Next, I had to identify how to achieve/ decrease this breakeven.

First, I dealt on the revenue side. There were four factors, either
make the person pay more, get more people by increasing the pie,
get more share from competition or do something in the off season.
I took each one of them one at a time.

I said that the person could be asked to pay more by giving him
value added services like making his experience better, take him to
good locations, giving him information in the boat when he is not
diving, etc. The second lever I identified as an industry wide factor,
which could not be influenced by the firm. The third can be done
by again giving value added services and advertising the quality of
helper men on hand (he asked me not to get into this). On the
fourth lever, I told him that the firm can get into off season
businesses that are related. (This he said was exactly what diving
firms do). I gave him a few more creative ideas of what could be
done during the off season.

Next, I took up costs. On the costs side, I took up the fixed costs
first. I said that they can be decreased if they go to a contract with
some party that gives them the land only during peak seasons. The
manpower can also be taken on a contract basis. On the boat and
equipment part, options for owning them can be looked at. Better
fuel (mileage) can be looked at. All other drivers were found to be
negligible.

He asked me to summarize the case after that.

We ended the discussion with him asking me whether I liked the

case. I told him that the iterative process was specifically
interesting. He also asked me how the case could be made better
(read tougher). I told him that the suggestions that he asked me at
the end could be quantified. This will prevent people from shooting
ideas off the hat. I gave him an example of that.

Next, we went into a discussion about the nature of business that

adventure sports entail (very much dependent on things like
tourism and disposable economy). We, then, discussed about how
adventure sports had evolved in India.

I told him that I had a special likeness for sports and then, we kept
discussing about what plagued the Indian sporting scene. We
discussed a lot about the social support that sportsmen receive
from their families. We also discussed about the infrastructure,
government, post sports employment opportunities and corporate
sponsorships in India.

He ended the discussion saying that it was a lively discussion so

far. He asked me to ask him something. I asked him about his

What do you think went
right for you in the in this
interview?
What do you think went
wrong in this interview?
Any tips for the future
batches based on this
interview experience.
interest in diving. He gave me a full discourse in diving for 3-4
mins. This whole part lasted close to 30 minutes.
I think I stayed cool and used raw common sense to solve the case
after laying down the initial structure. It is also important to do the
calculations slowly in the case if you are not too accurate if fast.
Again, in such cases, the challenge is on you to bring the strategic
angle even if the case does not demand that. That shows the depth
of analysis.
I think I could have easily solved the case much faster but I took my
own sweet time, might have counted against me.
It is important that in the BCG cases (esp in the 1st round) that you
expect extensive quantitative cases that are very exhaustive. Being
mentally prepared for that generally helps a lot. This has to be
factored in during the preparation phase.
Name Asish Mohapatra
Company Interviewed Boston Consulting Group
With
Name of Interviewer and Neeraj Agarwal
designation
Round Second Round, 2nd interview
(First/Second/Third
round)
Personal interview Neeraj was visibly tired, probably had interviewed too much. I
questions (with indicative asked him if he had and then, he told me that he’s had worser days.
answers if you choose to Then, he asked me when did I have a worser day. I told him that it
share them) was during one of our earlier placement days, when I wasn’t
shortlisted and was watching from the fringe. Being a part of the
real game was so much fun, I would love to have the exhaustion
free with the action any day ☺. He laughed at this.

He started with a feedback on how my day had been so far. I gave

him some gyan about how we had anticipated that the day would
be close to it but the real thing always has its own surprises.
He then asked me what my most memorable experience in the day
had been.

He then asked me what is the advantage of doing co-curricular

activities (especially in a one year program; where it can consume a
lot of time). I told him that he was right. The amount of effort
required to get involved in anything else at ISB is much more than
one can imagine. But I told him that in ISB, it becomes all the more
important that you get involved with something else (co-curricular
is just one avenue) else you tend to slide into a cocoon very soon
and then it has a spiraling effect. I also told him that it gives you a
simulated platform to utilize theoretical knowledge.
He asked me for a feedback on the BCG interviews so far.
He also asked me how confident I felt that I would go the full
distance. I told him not quite (because I felt so) and told him that
this has been an issue with me all the time.

He told me that confidence gets built and lost in no time. I added

that it’s a lot about successes and failures. The former spurs you on
while the later holds you back. Hence, it is important that you
convert every activity into these little milestones, so that you feel
the joy of achievement each time. I told him that was one of the
ways that I was handling the interview process that day. Take it
one step at a time and celebrate after each little amount. He said
that this was a form of mental conditioning and every body has
his/her own methods.

Then, he went into my poems (I am an amateur poet) and asked me

what I wrote about. I read him a few snippets that I had in my
memory. We, then, discussed a lot about the importance of creative
pursuits in life. I was of the view that this was a dimension that one
needs to have; else life is tough in the fast lane. He told me, then,
 what does one do that does not have the gift in him. I told him that
it is more for personal satisfaction and not for becoming a
professional. It is also my belief that anything/ everything (with
exceptions only proving the rule ☺) can be cultivated. I gave him a
few examples of a few hobbies that I had about which I had no clue
earlier, leave alone a gift.

We then proceeded to the case and this whole experience lasted

close to 20 minutes.
Narration of the case The case was a pretty small one. He drew me a graph of the total
interview (please be as quarterly ($) sales of a consumer durables manufacturer. The
descriptive as possible) company had seen a meteoric rise in sales over the last 5 years but
suddenly, it saw that in the last three quarters, the sales had
dipped. So, what was the issue here and what would I do about it?

I started with saying that I need to first understand whether I am

the only one who has this behavior or is it the industry that is
behaving in a similar way. He told me that the industry is in it’s
growth path. I asked him to give me the data pattern about unit
sales. He smiled and said that it is not available. I understood that
the case would be a throw-away if he reveals it.

I will look at three different situations. Is the scene because of

external conditions, internal conditions or some environmental
factor that happened in the recent past. He asked me to break each
one of them. I said in the internal conditions, I would look at things
like price change, quality/content of the product change, product
mix change, any communication strategy change, any distribution
policy change, any manufacturing change, any cost change, any
labor issues, etc. (I think I named a few more – don’t remember
now). Coming to external conditions. I said that I will bucket them
into customers, collaborators, competitors, distributors and
employees. In the environmental factors, I would look at things like
regulatory change, some bad publicity that the company might
have gained and some substitute that might have cropped up for
the company’s offering. He was ok with the strategy and approach
and asked me to move ahead.

I started checking each one of the things that I had mentioned.

After the end of it all, I found that there were two things that I had
figured out. The company’s volumes were on the rise (this I figured
out through the variable cost structure of the company) and the
company had obviously started charging a lower price.

I told him that given the information that I have figured out, I feel
that there has been a shift in strategic focus of the company
(moreover because the competitors have not reacted to this change
and the environment did not demand it in anyway). He said that it
was right and asked me what the possibilities could be. I told him
that the possibilities could range from capturing more share to
trying to beat a new entrant or drive out an existing player from the
market. He said he wanted me to explore all these three

What do you think went
right for you in the in this
interview?
What do you think went
wrong in this interview?
possibilities in greater detail.
In the first case, I went into the consumer price elasticity (they were
price sensitive), the likelihood that the customer will react (I saw
that they were already facing issues with margin) and can we
sustain it in the longer run (do we have a competitive advantage
that results in a lower costs which can be passed on). I found that
the above three points gave me an affirmative reply but the fact is
when I got into whether the increase in sales would have justified
the sales in $, I did not find that to be the case. Hence, I negated it.
Then, I went into the second part and I found out that this was not
clearly the case. In fact the third part seemed more likely to me and
there were facts that favored that this was the issue (because there
were too many players and the company was growing at a much
faster rate than the industry). So, I thought that the company was
trying to preempt future saturation or decrease in rate of growth.
Hence, this was its strategy. He asked me to figure out how I would
decide to do that if I was a product manager in that company. I told
him that a simple back of the envelope calculation can be done to
estimate the size of penetration, current penetration and the growth
rate to arrive at the time of saturation. Also, our current sales and
the competition sales along with the growth rates of each one of us
can be taken to see when we would fight with each other. This was
an approximate analysis. He said that the approach looked fine.
He asked me what I should do about it. I told him that it is the
ability to differentiate that will matter in a market or else all the
industry profits will be dissipated. So, it should search for avenues
by which it can differentiate its product offering from that of its
competitors. This differentiation has to be in line with the needs of
the customer. Hence, a needs analysis has to be done and then the
company should go about developing its offering. He agreed and
then, asked me to summarize.
He, then, told me that in the real life, the case had actually taken a
different turn and there was something about the price that I had to
figure out.
The whole case lasted close to 15 mins. I thought that I had spoiled
it after his feedback!
Then, the discussion actually went into some campus titbits and we
discussed about one of the most favorite campus topics, Grade Non
Disclosure.
I think the personal bit went on very well and I interested him with
my passion (this is what he said later!). In the case bit, he said that
he was happy with my ability to persevere; I kept on fighting even
though I wasn’t going anywhere (and it was quite late in the day).
I think there was a huge lock-in and I had built in a hypothesis
about the case, which I wanted to communicate at any cost. Not
 being open-minded is one of the cardinal mistakes in consulting
interviews. Also, I had to wait for this interview for more than 2
hours (Neeraj wasn’t free and he wanted to meet me) and that had
completely sapped me out. I probably had lost out a little bit of
focus. In such a moment, I consoled myself thinking that I will give
my best in the last interview.
Any tips for the future Remember that in the second round, specific skills get tested. So, it
batches based on this is important that you try to understand what aspect the interviewer
interview experience. is trying to evaluate. This session of mine also proves the fact that at
times, cracking the case is not so important. There are a lot of
variables that go into deciding the final performance. Cracking the
case, if at all it is one, could be just one out of twenty. The fact is
that cracking the case is at times the most verifiable and visible
parameter, so interviewees tend to judge themselves based on how
they did there. Nothing can be far from the truth. From my own
personal experience, I never cracked this case (I wasn’t even close
to it) and I felt that I had spoiled it all. This is a feeling that I took to
my next interview as well and I took some time to recuperate. I was
lucky that I got over it fast and it didn’t affect me but then, why
leave it to luck at all.
Name Asish Mohapatra
Company Interviewed Boston Consulting Group
With
Name of Interviewer and Alpesh, Partner
designation
Round Second Round, 2nd interview
(First/Second/Third
round)
Personal interview He first asked me how the BCG experience had been so far. Then,
questions (with indicative he went into asking me how they could make it better.
answers if you choose to
share them) Then, he asked me whether I knew about the BCG apprenticeship
model. I told that I had heard about it but did not know in very
great detail. He explained the whole process to me and how it had
helped new joinees in the past.

He asked me then what the USP of ISB was. I told him about the
quality of learning that we get here from global professors and the
general maturity level of the people here. We, then, went into a
discussion about why the above were a competitive advantage in
the longer run. I flatly told him that the school’s model was a good
one to start with but the school’s own faculty resources had to take
over in the long run. I also told him that that the school had to
develop itself as a center for learning. It was taking steps in the
right direction and it won’t be long before the school achieves its
full potential.

He, then, narrated his experience with the whole batch and paid a
compliment towards the maturity shown during the interview
process.

The whole discussion lasted close to 15 minutes and then, we went

into the case.
Narration of the case A very standard case I was given.
interview (please be as
descriptive as possible) The case was about a Beer Club that had opened in the streets of
Bombay with great fanfare. The club had an amazing couple of
weeks when people rushed in to due to the novelty factor that the
club brought in but thereafter, it had lost steam. Now, the owner
was contemplating whether he should close it down.

I structured the problem saying that I would like to see the external
factors and see whether there were any insurmountable odds that
the club had to overcome. Then, I will see whether the client had
any strength that it could leverage in the above environment.

I began with the competitive scenario. I realized that the market

was very competitive and most of the people were not making
money. Also, a lot of the clubs had closed down for lack of funds.
Then, I asked about the regulatory environment. The government
had also made a lot of regulations that was stopping the clubs from
opening at the time they actually made profits – after midnight. On
inquiring about customers, I found that they saw no difference
between the players and always craved for something new and
always lost interest after two to three visits. The club model,
wherein they had to go and sit and drink was also losing out
because the hectic pace of life in Bombay, where people were
having less and less disposable time. On inquiring about the
distributors, I came to know that it was a standard network where
the manufacturer had all the bargaining power.

I told him that it was puzzling me why did the client start a
business in such a scenario. He asked me what I thought. I told him
that there was definitely something unique that the client had and
he thought that it was real lethal. I think that it did not work out to
be as much. I had also figured out that the owner was a retired
public servant. I asked him whether the owner had a distinct
interest in this business. He said I was right.

I told him that a distinct advantage unique could have been a set of
assets or resources. Assets might be something like location, a
unique beer taste, etc. Resources may be human (maybe there was a
group very interested in making this business) or anything else that
is tangible. He told me that I was on the right path. The man was
very interested in beer making and had gone ahead with the
business along with his few friends investing in that. He had also
figured out a unique way of making the brew that he felt would be
a killer.

I told him that a product alone would never make a business

successful. It had to be backed by sound business strategy,
operations and marketing to make it successful. He asked me to
prioritize. I told him that the operations part would be the crucial
one because he had to figure out a method by which he had to
make and maintain the secret of his brew. I asked him how he had
his set-up planned. He told me that the man had set-up the
complete set up in his backyard along with a local machine
manufacturer. I told him that when the business is new, it is
important to maintain quality and quantity of supply. He told me
that this was an issue. I went ahead to figure out that the beer had
actually caught the attention of people but then it lost out after the
demand started building for reasons mentioned above.

Next, I told him that the man had to get his strategy right. He had
to first decide whether he wanted to go mass-based or remain as a
niche player. I recommended the later because I thought that the
product USP will be lost if it is taken to mass based. He asked me to
go ahead with the strategy.

I told him that he should develop a strategy of restricting supply of

the unique beer that he had on hand. This beer should be the crowd
puller into the store. He can also keep other mass marketed brands
in the store and try building up margins through that as well. He

What do you think went
right for you in the in this
interview?
What do you think went
wrong in this interview?
Any tips for the future
batches based on this
interview experience.
could also think of extending store offerings beyond the beer.
Next was to decide on the pricing bit. I told him that since the
supply is unique and the taste is unique, he should start from the
very high end. The exclusivity needs to be enhanced by all the
elements of the business strategy. Next, I told him that there needs
to be no mega publicity done; some elementary stuff will be enough
as word of mouth will travel here fast.
In the later years, he can also think about licensing the brew outside
to make money. For this, he has to patent his new product (if it’s
possible).
I told him that the full potential of the product should be realized
by making it available to one who can exploit it as well. Hence, our
client can also look at the possibility of selling the product to a big
firm. But to demonstrate the potential and to get a fair price, he
needs to show that it has a huge potential. Hence, he needs to run it
for some time. He agreed.
He asked me to summarize. The whole process lasted close to 20
mins.
He, then, went onto explaining what to expect in a firm like BCG.
He told me about their organization structure and asked me to
comment on it. I told him that to me it resembled a chariot, which
was BCG. There were the front horses (no flexibility but all the
effort needs to come backs, which were analysts and associates like
us. There were some at the back, which had greater flexibility but
had to still put in some effort and were basically the project leaders.
Next were the guys who drive the chariot – principals. Partners
were the ones who sit in the chariot and give directions. BCG is like
the complete chariot.
Then, we had a general chat. The whole process lasted close to 5
mins.
I think he liked the personal part. In the case, I think I arrived at the
problem pretty fast. I was also focused on solving the problem at
hand. I think creativity is important to display at least once during
the entire process. It’s these wow moments that compel the
interview to make a decision in your favor. It is important to bring
atleast one in the whole process.
I think I could have done better by making the case more
exhaustive and bringing in a few numbers. I think I was too tired at
the end (it was my 8th interview spread over more than 12 hrs in the
day)
At the fag end of the day, it becomes very important to bring
energy. Mental conditioning is very important here, wherein you
need to reiterate here that it is the last gasp effort that you need to
put in.
Shankar Prasad
Name
Company Interviewed
With
Name of Interviewer and
designation
Round
(First/Second/Third
round)
Personal interview
questions (with indicative
answers if you choose to
share them)
Narration of the case
interview (please be as
descriptive as possible)
What do you think went
right for you in the in this
interview?
What do you think went
wrong in this interview?
Any tips for the future
batches based on this
interview experience.
S Shankar Prasad
BCG
Abhinav Sinha, AP
Second, Interview # 2
Mostly from resume.
Your friend is an accomplished painter. He has never before sold
his painting in the market. But nowadays, painters are recognized
by what value their painting fetches, than by awards and critics. So
how will you value his painting for him?
Framework used: History/capability of the painter, customers of
painting, cost of a painting (likely to be irrelevant), competition and
market conditions/context of the sale.
Asked questions about each of these. It turned out that the painter
was an accomplished artist for more than 40 years. Padma
Bhushan winner, well acclaimed by critics. Customers are mainly
rich people, who wanted to show off paintings. Cost was
irrelevant. Competition was in different segments: Tyabji/Hussain
sold for Rs. 2 crores, Raja Ravi Verma/Anjolie Ela Menon sold for
Rs. 50 lakhs, others for 10 lakhs and so on right down to Rs. 1 lakh.
I brought out the idea of comparables and what are the parameters
we should compare painters against. Tried to quantify as much as
possible (no. of awards won, shows held, % positive reviews and so
on). Then the discussion moved to how we could get the highest
price for the painting. Different types of auctioning, private sale,
having another painting at Rs. 5 crores, so that people settle for the
one at Rs. 2 crores and so on. Event management, expectations
management and the like – in the end it required a lot of creativity
and free thinking.
1. Quantified an abstract idea – otherwise there was a danger of
going around in circles.
2. Was quite creative in coming up with ideas to boost the value of
the painting.
Was the last interview of the day. Didn’t show enough energy.
Follow a structured approach even for cases as abstract as this one.
Think well before answering open-ended questions and be
prepared to defend your point of view.
Name
Company Interviewed
With
Name of Interviewer and
designation
Round
(First/Second/Third
round)
Personal interview
questions (with indicative
answers if you choose to
share them)
Narration of the case
interview (please be as
descriptive as possible)
What do you think went
right for you in the in this
interview?
What do you think went
wrong in this interview?
Any tips for the future
batches based on this
interview experience.
S Shankar Prasad
BCG
Arvind Subramaniam, Partner
First, Interview #2
Asked me whether I would like to start with PI or case. Preferred
PI ☺. Centered around:
1. Leadership lessons at HLL
2. Change management (my course in change management helped
a little ☺)
3. How to improve HLL’s performance.
Interviewer’s hobby was diving. So he gave a case on calculating
the breakeven of a diving company.
Asked clarifying questions: I said I knew nothing about diving and
wanted to understand the whole thing. What exactly does a diving
company do? Is it year-round operation? Is it based out of India or
somewhere else? Single or multi-location (single). Then set out to
solve the case.
Framework: Breakeven would depend on revenues, costs and
investments. Wanted to attack each of these separately.
For doing this, I wanted to know the exact sequence of events when
a diver goes to the diving shop till the time he comes out. I was
given a minute-to-minute detailed description of the process which
I put down in the form of a process flow diagram, leaving space for
putting in revenue streams and costs. This diagram proved
mightily helpful eventually.
So I worked out, based on the data given, the revenue streams –
asking questions at each stage and summed up the total revenue
per diver. Then the costs – variable and fixed. Then the
investments both initial and ongoing. On the basis of these,
worked out the breakeven number of divers per day. This was a
heavy quant case. Then the discussion turned to how to improve
the operations – there were lots of clues in the way he had given
out the data – going back to the process flow diagram helped. At
each stage, identified ways to improve revenue. Things like
charging more for deeper dives, refreshments on board, and so on.
1. Followed the copy-book structured approach.
2. Asked the right quantity and quality of questions.
Some of my PI answers turned out to be too long.
Practice for case interviews well. And follow a disciplined
approach of documenting during the interview. Scribbling
randomly can land you in trouble when you want to go back to
facts.
Name S Shankar Prasad
Company Interviewed BCG
With
Name of Interviewer and Janmejaya Sinha, Managing Director
designation
Round Second, Interview # 1
(First/Second/Third
round)
Personal interview 1. What are you passionate about? What have you done about it?
questions (with indicative 2. What are your career goals?
answers if you choose to
share them)
Narration of the case This was a banking M&A case. Bank of India wants to takeover
interview (please be as Union Bank of India. Chairman of BoI wants your advice. What
descriptive as possible) will you tell him? Interviewer explicitly mentioned that he wanted
me to demonstrate my experience in solving the case. I was also
given background info about number of nationalized, private and
foreign banks in 1994 vs. 2005. Essentially the number of private
and foreign banks had more than doubled (albeit from a small base)
whereas the number of nationalized banks had reduced.

Asked clarifying questions: Why does the chairman want to merge

the two banks? (Size matters in banking, chairman’s ambition to be
the boss of a bigger bank).

Framework: Divided the analysis into Strategic considerations

(synergies), Financial considerations and post-takeover issues.

Synergies could be from costs, asset base advantage and access to

markets. Costs could be divided into interest costs and operating
costs. Operating costs comprise manpower, ATM costs, branch
operating costs, technology cost (turned out to be an important one)
and corporate office costs. Discussed ways, means and problems of
cutting costs in each of these post merger.

No major asset base advantage besides the fact that credit rating
could improve. Access to markets turned out to be important. The
retail coverage would increase – location of branches and ATMs is
critical in a retail banking scenario – the more ATMs one sees, the
more one thinks the bank is large and accessible, hence more retail
deposits – which means lower cost of borrowings. So the merger
made sense from this point of view.

Then I was asked how I would estimate if the synergies could be

realized and what could be the issues. Things like labour unions,
government’s inclination (being the majority shareholder in both
banks), and so on. Eventually the discussion led to the conclusion
of hiring consultants ☺. Also about passion, leadership and such
stuff.

What do you think went 1. Connected well with the interviewer. Understood exactly what
right for you in the in this
interview?
What do you think went
wrong in this interview?
Any tips for the future
batches based on this
interview experience.
he was looking for.
2. Was relaxed throughout the interview and showed a keenness to
crack the problem even though this was from a totally unrelated
domain.
Nothing much went wrong in this interview ☺
Don’t get psyched out when you get a case in an unrelated
industry. Start from the basics and adopt a fundamental approach.
Ask for help from the interviewer in areas where you don’t have
industry knowledge.
Name
Company Interviewed
With
Name of Interviewer and
designation
Round
(First/Second/Third
round)
Personal interview
questions (with indicative
answers if you choose to
share them)
Narration of the case
interview (please be as
descriptive as possible)
What do you think went
right for you in the in this
interview?
What do you think went
wrong in this interview?
Any tips for the future
batches based on this
interview experience.
S Shankar Prasad
BCG
Neelam Phadke, Project Leader
First, Interview #1
Started with PI. Very basic PI, not more than 5 minutes. Things
like:
1. Most memorable experience from HLL
2. Why consulting?
3. Career goals and so on.
Client is a large fabricator of offshore rigs. Wants to upgrade the
vessels used for carrying material out into the sea. What will you
advice them.
Asked clarifying questions: how exactly does the business operate,
what are these vessles, what are currently doing? (currently they
are hiring vessels to do the job). My first struggle was to identify
the problem – what exactly is the problem? Seemed to be a
scheduling issue. Also they were hiring vessels from competition.
After close to 10 mins of struggling to find the problem (asking a lot
of questions), I identified the problem as one of cost, scheduling
and service. So one possible solution was to buy one of these
vessels. Then it became a project evaluation (NPV) question.
The standard approach to project evaluation was done:
NPV =
Savings from operating own vessel – cost of operating – fixed
charges (maint, insurance). Also given cost of capital as 10%.
Asked questions on each of these items
and arrived at an NPV of $50 million. So go ahead and buy the
vessel.
Then strategic considerations and the “what are the problems with
buying the vessel question?”. Talked about basic skills required,
the risk of shipping (maritime conventions and stuff like that –
having a shippie friend helped here ☺). Then how will solve the
skills problem? – by hiring from competition or by forming a JV or
by taking over another company. Then summarized the case in the
end.
1. Didn’t give up when I initially didn’t crack what the problem
was.
2. Cracked the numbers and the financing part.
Took too long to think about things. This was just my second
interview of the day, still I was not alert. Didn’t walk in fully
primed.
Understand the basic problem well – don’t hesitate to ask questions
but make sure they are relevant and linked to the problem.
Ruchi Bansal

Name Ruchi Bansal

Company Interviewed Boston Consulting Group
With
Name of Interviewer and Harsh Vardhan
designation
Round First round, First interview
(First/Second/Third
round)
Personal interview We talked about CA and transition to MBA from that, my previous
questions (with indicative organization (KPMG) and what I thought about my experience
answers if you choose to there.(Discussed some common acquaintances there)
share them)
Narration of the case An oil and gas Company is interest in entering India. How would
interview (please be as you go about analyzing the situation and determining the course of
descriptive as possible) action?

Few clarificatory questions:

What all operations is the oil & gas company into?
- The interviewer clarified that it is in the entire spectrum of oil
& gas activities such as upstream, downstream including LNG
and piped natural gas
Further the interviewer clarified how much each business
contributes to the Company’s revenue:
- Upstream (60%) , downstream including LNG (20%) and
piped natural gas (20%)

Structure:
I clarified that I would like to take the decision based on the most
profitable opportunity which I could identify taking into account
the highest net present value project. To determine this I identified
we will have to do a revenue and cost analysis for which we will
need to understand the following:
 Determine market attractiveness of each of these segment by
analyzing
- Current size and expected growth
- Existing and anticipated competition
- Customers for each segment
 Identify competencies of the oil & gas company in terms of its
competitive strength vis-avis competitors as well to deal with
the operational, technological and geophysical landscape in
India
 Risks in each segment primarily relating to regulatory
environment and overall economic & political risk (country).

The case was a very open ended one wherein the interviewer did
not give any leads into any areas but rather discussed the broad
framework within which the analysis ought to be done. But, it
appeared from the case discussion that the interviewer was
primarily looking for the last aspect (risks).
What do you think went I took my time to get to what I anticipated was the crux of the case
right for you in the in this
interview?
What do you think went
wrong in this interview?
Any tips for the future
batches based on this
interview experience.
to show depth of analysis. I explored many factors under each sub
head to demonstrate that before I got to the final answer.
Being very open ended, I always had a feeling this was not going
the right way which probably was visible in my demeanor
Be ready for anything from very intense case discussions to very
open ended ones! You never know which one strikes you next.
Name Ruchi Bansal
Company Interviewed Boston Consulting Group
With
Name of Interviewer and Neeraj Aggarwal
designation
Round First round, second interview
(First/Second/Third
round)
Personal interview Where all have you been interviewing?
questions (with indicative How has the interview experience been so far?
answers if you choose to What do I value in a job?
share them) What kind of people do I not enjoy working with?
Narration of the case A global fibre optic manufacturer based in the United States has
interview (please be as had phenomenal growth from 1998-2000 but is now facing a
descriptive as possible) declining sales resulting in falling profitability. What suggestions
do you have?

Clarificatory questions:
Is the decline specific to the Company or is it happening in the
whole industry?
- He clarified that this was an industry phenomena. The entire
industry was faced with declining demand.
What was the nature (& time) of decline expected to be according to
industry experts? Permanent or temporary.
- The interviewer clarified that this was expected to continue for
about 3-5 years after which the industry would revive. He
made a reference to the tech boom and bust which had
resulted in this situation (which is pretty much why I had
asked the question having audited a client in this industry)
What was the client’s position in the industry and relative
competitive landscape?
- The interviewer clarified that the Company had the largest
market share at 35%, following 2 competitors with 15-20%
market share and remaining market being shared by 4-6
players.

Based on this I inferred and clarified with the interviewer that the
action plan we have to determine is essentially for the short term
till the industry comes out of decline, to sustain the client’s viability
till that stage. He concurred and asked me to proceed.

Structure:
I followed the structure to consider the revenue and cost side to
explore profitability improvement/maintenance:
Revenue:
Volume increase mechanisms: We discussed that by and large this
was not possible due to global decline in the industry although we
explored options like entry into new countries, alternative uses if
any could be determined etc. However, I clarified with him that
though these were long term measures and require significant
investment, they would help to sustain the Company.
Price: I questioned on the price elasticity of demand on which the
interviewer responded that since the market was declining, it had
become high. I identified that the basis of competition in the
industry was price. Further, the client was already lowest cost
provider in the industry with the best quality. However,
differentiation was not a significant factor in the industry. I told
him, in that case, I would first like to explore the cost aspect of the
case

Cost
First I tried to understand the value chain, mostly the process to get
a feel of where majority of the costs lie. Majority of the costs related
to the manufacturing process. We then explored opportunities for
cost reduction in manufacturing:
- Economies of scale
- Experience curve effects
The interviewer clarified that being the lowest cost provider; it had
already achieved maximum experience curve benefits. He also
clarified that none of the other components of cost could be
reduced further.

Next I discussed with him the number of manufacturing locations

and their geographical spread. I explored whether all the locations
were performing at the same efficiency level. He clarified the worst
plant was 40% lower in efficiency compared to the best plant. This
worst plant was located in Australia. I checked with him whether
cost reduction through benchmarking had been experimented at
this plant. He clarified that such efforts had been made but had
resulted in no success. The basic reasons being smaller capacity
and older machines at this plant.

He kept clarifying with me why I was exploring cost reduction

aspect of the case. I told him that the intention was to explore
either of the following:
- Maintain current profitability by retaining price and obtaining
cost reductions; or
- Reduce price in accordance with cost reductions obtained to
maintain profitability. He asked me how would reducing
price help. Here I discussed with him, that since the client was
already the lowest cost provider with largest market share in
an industry with experience curve benefits, other players are
likely to have higher cost structures. Reduction of price is
likely to make them unprofitable and drive them out of the
industry. As a result, our client would be in a position to
capture their share and maintain at least its volume position to
continue till the decline ends, possibly as a market leader.

We returned to the discussion relating to price. I concluded that

since costs cannot be reduced price reduction was the only option
to be considered in order to maintain its industry position for the
medium term.

What do you think went
right for you in the in this
interview?
What do you think went
wrong in this interview?
Any tips for the future
batches based on this
interview experience.
He then asked me to identify how I would take the decision to
reduce price. We discussed that using price elasticity of demand; I
will determine the point till which reduction in price will increase
volumes in a way that total profits improve. Beyond this point, the
total profits will decline. Ideally, price reduction should be done
till this point.
P
R
O
F
I
T
S
PRICE REDUCTION
Though the case could have ended much earlier, I think it helped to
go through various aspects of the case since it again brought out
depth of analysis before jumping to any conclusions.
I should have provided the rationale for exploring the cost aspect,
which the interviewer did ask me later in the interview.
Be persistent! I could not see any solution for the longest time but
persisted to try and get there.
1st round

Case 1:
Should Bank of India (BI) acquire Union bank (UB)?

Main points:
Bank of India – large bank, 1.15 ROA, 85000 crore asset base, 16% growth, 2.5% NPA, 2600
branches and 5% SOM
Union Bank – similar locations as BI, 1.2 ROA, 60000 crore asset base, 16% growth, 2% NPA, 1800
branches and 3.5% SOM
Both customers are similar profile – small, medium and large corporates. They offer similar
products. There are not many other competitors and no other acquisition is apparent in the
market.
There has been changes in the industry structure – in 1994 about 88% assets were with PSU, 8%
with foreign and 4% with private banks. Now, about 73% are with PSU, 7% with foreign and 20%
with private banks.
The private banks have better personnel, modern technology and more aggressive marketing.
There are several synergies associated with the acquisition –
Location synergies – most of the branches of both banks are based in West India and they can be
consolidated
Head count reduction – reduce unneeded labor
Credit rating will improve
Merged entity will be more efficient with the use of IT and higher productivity practices of UB
Larger asset base will give it greater power and allow it to invest more liberally
Concerns –
Management of UB might not want to give up control – so they have to be pacified by giving a
good role in the new merged entity
Workers union will become larger and so will have more power in negotiations.

On the whole BI should go for the merger but should address the concerns and also ensure that
the synergies are realized.

Case 2:
Your client is a cement manufacturer and sells the cement to the customer through the distributor
and retailer. Occasionally the manufacturer bypasses the distributor and sells directly to the
retailer. The value chain is –
Manuf
Distributor
Retailer
Customer

How should the value chain be reconfigured to increase the manufacturers profits?

Main Points:
This was essentially aligning incentives of everyone on the distribution channel. The competition
follows the same model – we are the market leaders and so everyone follows our lead. Customer
preferences haven’t changed – there is lot of demand for cement. The purchase is done at the
retail shops – almost 90% go with their mason to the shop and purchase the cement. The
purchase price for the end customer is between 150 and 160 per bag. Our product is a slight
premium product and customers realize it. Our product price is higher than that of our
competitors – the competing products sell at 140 per bag. So they are willing to pay slightly extra
for our product. But cement is essentially a commodity product and there is not much difference
between the various products.
The retailer has a lot of power and is given a margin. The margin to the retailer is 5 per bag and
for the distributor is 2 per bag. The distributors and retailers carry competitors products in
addition to our products.
The cost to the company is 100 per bag (manufacturing and distribution cost). The profit per bag
is based on the customer price minus manufacturing cost minus margins. Based on the final end
price between 150 and 160, the profits can vary from 43 to 53 per bag (150 – 100 – 7 = 43).
Among the ways of increasing volume of our product is for the distributor to give Rs 1 of his
margin to the retailer. So the retailer will have Rs 6 per bag and the distributor Rs 1 per bag. This
will give the retailer a higher incentive to push our product.
Also the retailer has an incentive to quote a lower sale price i.e., he can say that he sold the bag at
Rs 150 when he actually sold it at Rs 160. This will give him a higher margin. One of the ways of
countering this is to do mystery shopping to determine the actual sale price. Also the margin can
be given as a % of the sale price rather than the fixed 5 per bag.
However, there is still the issue of our competitive products being cheaper than our products.
This can be addressed by different manners – remove distributors from the channel, take on
exclusive distributors/retailers. The downside is a reduced reach and reduced footfall in store. So
they have to be traded off to determine the optimal distribution structure.

Case 3:
Your client is a manufacturer of fiberglass cable. You sell the cable to companies like AT&T and
Verizon who use it for internet/telephone or other service. The market has shrunk by 20% and so
your client is concerned that the revenue could decrease further in the future. How would you
address it?

Main Points:
The company is a global player and has presence in US, Europe and Asia. The markets in US and
Europe are declining while the market is Asia in increasing. However, most of the clients revenue
are from the US and European markets. Company has a 35% market share – its 2 competitors
have 20% market share each while the rest is taken by small players. The technology hasn’t
changed and there is no threat of substitutes as yet. The cost structure is 40% fixed and 60%
variable, but that hasn’t changed. Your costs are about 25% lower than your competitors. There is
excess capacity in the industry and both you and your competitors are sitting on excess capacity.
Incremental increase in revenue can be achieved by focusing on Asia, using it for alternative
purposes like TV, providing after sales service etc. To increase the revenue by a large amount, the
options are to decrease the price. The industry is very price sensitive and the elasticity is high. So
if you reduce the price, you can expect an increased volume. However, we need to factor in
competitive response to the decrease in price. Some of the competitors might be driven away
from the market while the rest might be willing to pay the price war. However, in this situation a
price reduction is a viable alternative.

Case 4:
A friend of yours (say Mary) has designed a new battery. It’s a radical innovation – it is 3 V
battery that is small, scalable, rechargeable and light i.e. you can combine 100 of these batteries to
get a 300 V battery. The battery works and Mary has a patent on this. She is looking to
commercialize this – either with a venture capitalist (VC) or other areas. Also, her current
employer (an automobile manufacturer) has expressed an interest in commercializing it. How
would you advise her?

Main Points:
Mary is looking for financial return and personal recognition. So the options have to be evaluated
on both these fronts. There is no possibility of competitor developing a similar product or
imitating this product. There is significant demand in the market – however, the battery costs 10
times the normal battery. So the primary demand would be in applications where the flexibility
and small size is more important than the price of the battery i.e. the cost of the battery is only a
small portion of the cost of the device/service. The primary areas are aerospace, high end
audio/video etc.
There is a possibility of a solar powered car coming into the market. This is the primary
motivation for Mary’s employer to want to commercialize the battery. The auto manufacturer has
the expertise in running factories, management expertise, contacts/networks/distribution that
might be useful in commercialization. However, the auto manufacturer is looking only at the
auto market and is not much concerned about reaching the entire market.
The VC is looking for financial returns and so would look to reach the entire market. The VC
would have made a financial commitment to commercialization and he would look to get the
highest return possible. However, there is possible loss of control over the company that is set up.
Amongst the other options are to look at licensing or to structure the deal to take an initial
upfront fee and to take a licensing fee per battery produced.