Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
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
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.
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.
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 ☺
Having seen the glint in her eye… I was confident that I was sailing
thru… and proceeded to the synthesis phase.
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.
What do you think went I think the “market” approach was a very intuitive and elegant
right for you in the in this approach. This made the rest of the stuff easy.
interview? Rigor…
Connected very well with Neelam… she was a really nice person to
talk to …
What do you think went Nothing… this was perfect. I was stuck in the beginning but didn’t
wrong in this interview? let it show on my face and pulled myself thru…
Any tips for the future Be comfortable with analytical rigor… smile … make it a peer
batches based on this interaction. Be yourself and CONNECT WITH THE
interview experience. 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…”
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…
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.
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 ☺
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.
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.
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.
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 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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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, 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.
What do you think went I think the personal bit went on very well and I interested him with
right for you in the in this my passion (this is what he said later!). In the case bit, he said that
interview? 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).
What do you think went I think there was a huge lock-in and I had built in a hypothesis
wrong in this interview? 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.
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 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.
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.
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, 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.
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.
What do you think went 1. Quantified an abstract idea – otherwise there was a danger of
right for you in the in this going around in circles.
interview? 2. Was quite creative in coming up with ideas to boost the value of
the painting.
What do you think went Was the last interview of the day. Didn’t show enough energy.
wrong in this interview?
Any tips for the future Follow a structured approach even for cases as abstract as this one.
batches based on this Think well before answering open-ended questions and be
interview experience. prepared to defend your point of view.
Name S Shankar Prasad
Company Interviewed BCG
With
Name of Interviewer and Arvind Subramaniam, Partner
designation
Round First, Interview #2
(First/Second/Third
round)
Personal interview Asked me whether I would like to start with PI or case. Preferred
questions (with indicative PI ☺. Centered around:
answers if you choose to 1. Leadership lessons at HLL
share them) 2. Change management (my course in change management helped
a little ☺)
3. How to improve HLL’s performance.
Narration of the case Interviewer’s hobby was diving. So he gave a case on calculating
interview (please be as the breakeven of a diving company.
descriptive as possible) 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.
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.
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.
What do you think went 1. Connected well with the interviewer. Understood exactly what
right for you in the in this he was looking for.
interview? 2. Was relaxed throughout the interview and showed a keenness to
crack the problem even though this was from a totally unrelated
domain.
What do you think went Nothing much went wrong in this interview ☺
wrong in this interview?
Any tips for the future Don’t get psyched out when you get a case in an unrelated
batches based on this industry. Start from the basics and adopt a fundamental approach.
interview experience. Ask for help from the interviewer in areas where you don’t have
industry knowledge.
Name S Shankar Prasad
Company Interviewed BCG
With
Name of Interviewer and Neelam Phadke, Project Leader
designation
Round First, Interview #1
(First/Second/Third
round)
Personal interview Started with PI. Very basic PI, not more than 5 minutes. Things
questions (with indicative like:
answers if you choose to 1. Most memorable experience from HLL
share them) 2. Why consulting?
3. Career goals and so on.
Narration of the case Client is a large fabricator of offshore rigs. Wants to upgrade the
interview (please be as vessels used for carrying material out into the sea. What will you
descriptive as possible) advice them.
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.
What do you think went 1. Didn’t give up when I initially didn’t crack what the problem
right for you in the in this was.
interview? 2. Cracked the numbers and the financing part.
What do you think went Took too long to think about things. This was just my second
wrong in this interview? interview of the day, still I was not alert. Didn’t walk in fully
primed.
Any tips for the future Understand the basic problem well – don’t hesitate to ask questions
batches based on this but make sure they are relevant and linked to the problem.
interview experience.
Ruchi Bansal
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 to show depth of analysis. I explored many factors under each sub
interview? head to demonstrate that before I got to the final answer.
What do you think went Being very open ended, I always had a feeling this was not going
wrong in this interview? the right way which probably was visible in my demeanor
Any tips for the future Be ready for anything from very intense case discussions to very
batches based on this open ended ones! You never know which one strikes you next.
interview experience.
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.
P
R
O
F
I
T
S
PRICE REDUCTION
What do you think went Though the case could have ended much earlier, I think it helped to
right for you in the in this go through various aspects of the case since it again brought out
interview? depth of analysis before jumping to any conclusions.
What do you think went I should have provided the rationale for exploring the cost aspect,
wrong in this interview? which the interviewer did ask me later in the interview.
Any tips for the future Be persistent! I could not see any solution for the longest time but
batches based on this persisted to try and get there.
interview experience.
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.