Consultant taking questions Forum

[Anonymous User]

Few questions after having read responses by current and ex consultants:

1. I am planning on applying to MBB with about two years of Biglaw transactional experience. How much does LSAT matter? Went to decent school but didn't do so well on LSAT (low 160s)

2. During interview, any suggestions on how to approach selling my short experience as a corporate lawyer?

Thanks for your time in advance!

OP again.

1 - Your school matters more, though LSAT is important as well. But if MBB recruits at your school you should still be able to get your foot in the door despite a lower LSAT score (but don't quote me on that).

2 - They definitely have respect for lawyers at top firms from a recruitment standpoint. Emphasize communication, teamwork, and deep knowledge on particular topics. Also emphasize that you have a very structured way of thinking and solving problems (though open to some creativity and flexibility).

[juzam_djinn]

OP here - thanks to Green for filling in on some questions!

Thanks for sharing your experience. If you're interested in business, why do consulting at MBB instead of a top investment bank (e.g., Goldman, PJT, Evercore, JPM)? Wouldn't you get paid more (especially at the elite boutique banks), travel less, and still work on high-level make-or-break business challenges at the banks? Any insight would be helpful.

As a JD/MBA at a T14/M7 school who is gunning for IB, I agree with where you are leading. Most people buy the "MBB allows for work-life balance" pitch, but I think MBB only buys you more predictability in workflow.

Why work bankers' hours, get paid half as much, and spend M-TH in Topeka?

Well, I can say easily we don't (typically) work anything close to banker hours. I've almost never worked more than 1-2 hours on a weekend or past 7pm on a Friday. I have the occasional late night but nothing approaching an all nighter yet. On the paid half as much, we get paid as much as BigLaw so in the same boat there.

Also, I encourage you to speak to associate-level bankers. The work is tedious and repetitive, the culture is terrible, lifestyle is significantly worse, and exit options are exclusively into corporate finance (not private equity like for analysts). If you want to solve for high pay alone, yes go banking no doubt. If not, there's lots of reasons to not go banking. This is coming from someone who received an investment banking offer out of law school for one of the above banks mentioned and turned it down for MBB.

i don't think this is true anymore with biglaw to 180k. overall compensation might be equal, but consulting pay has more components that aren't immediately liquid. Also, to be equal to biglaw you have to be getting close to the max bonus at your level. it seems like pay rises a bit faster than biglaw when you're talking about comparing people 3-4 years in both fields. All this being said, I'm still considering leaving biglaw for consulting. It's way more important to be somewhat interested in the substance of your work than it is to make 10-20% more doing work you can't stand (which, btw, is why banking still sucks relative to consulting or even biglaw until you make VP)

[lawlorbust]

i don't think this is true anymore with biglaw to 180k. overall compensation might be equal, but consulting pay has more components that aren't immediately liquid. Also, to be equal to biglaw you have to be getting close to the max bonus at your level. it seems like pay rises a bit faster than biglaw when you're talking about comparing people 3-4 years in both fields. All this being said, I'm still considering leaving biglaw for consulting. It's way more important to be somewhat interested in the substance of your work than it is to make 10-20% more doing work you can't stand (which, btw, is why banking still sucks relative to consulting or even biglaw until you make VP)

Still is. This survey is pretty authoritative:

https://charlesaris.com/wp-content/uplo ... y-2015.pdf

And note that 1) those numbers are two years old; and 2) exit options are way better than V10 exits at each level of experience.

ETA: I'm pretty sure that consulting doesn't give you a serious chunk of restricted compensation? Unless you're thinking retirement match, which really is a perk as opposed to a drawback.

[Anonymous User]

Few questions after having read responses by current and ex consultants:

1. I am planning on applying to MBB with about two years of Biglaw transactional experience. How much does LSAT matter? Went to decent school but didn't do so well on LSAT (low 160s)

2. During interview, any suggestions on how to approach selling my short experience as a corporate lawyer?

Thanks for your time in advance!

OP again.

1 - Your school matters more, though LSAT is important as well. But if MBB recruits at your school you should still be able to get your foot in the door despite a lower LSAT score (but don't quote me on that).

2 - They definitely have respect for lawyers at top firms from a recruitment standpoint. Emphasize communication, teamwork, and deep knowledge on particular topics. Also emphasize that you have a very structured way of thinking and solving problems (though open to some creativity and flexibility).

Thanks OP. Could you please elaborate on the "structured way of thinking and solving problems"? You're not the first consultant to have advised this, and while I do take a systematic approach to many of the problems I face in my corporate pratice (so-called issues in a deal), I was hoping to get an illustrative example of what thay may look like in consulting context.

Also one more question regarding MBB's hiring practice. Would it be safe to assume that all candidactes are evaluated solely based on their interview performance once they get to the case interview phase, or would the hiring decision be made through a holitic evaluation such as (school * 25% + WE * 25% + case interview performace * 50% = ?)

[Anonymous User]

**

[juzam_djinn]

i don't think this is true anymore with biglaw to 180k. overall compensation might be equal, but consulting pay has more components that aren't immediately liquid. Also, to be equal to biglaw you have to be getting close to the max bonus at your level. it seems like pay rises a bit faster than biglaw when you're talking about comparing people 3-4 years in both fields. All this being said, I'm still considering leaving biglaw for consulting. It's way more important to be somewhat interested in the substance of your work than it is to make 10-20% more doing work you can't stand (which, btw, is why banking still sucks relative to consulting or even biglaw until you make VP)

Still is. This survey is pretty authoritative:

https://charlesaris.com/wp-content/uplo ... y-2015.pdf

And note that 1) those numbers are two years old; and 2) exit options are way better than V10 exits at each level of experience.

ETA: I'm pretty sure that consulting doesn't give you a serious chunk of restricted compensation? Unless you're thinking retirement match, which really is a perk as opposed to a drawback.

Not sure which numbers you're pointing to...the chart on there seems to prove my point. Average cash comp for 1st year is ~173k, and this is assuming MAX bonus. That's lower than the $180+ 15k bonus for biglaw. It only becomes comparable to biglaw 195k if you factor in things like 401k match, which I mentioned is restricted/non-liquid comp and shouldn't be valued as a cash equivalent.

And those numbers are two years old but likely still accurate. Go compare them to the recent numbers cited on poetsandquants or managementconsulted, etc. Exit options are definitely broader and have greater upside though, that much I agree with.

[lawlorbust]

i don't think this is true anymore with biglaw to 180k. overall compensation might be equal, but consulting pay has more components that aren't immediately liquid. Also, to be equal to biglaw you have to be getting close to the max bonus at your level. it seems like pay rises a bit faster than biglaw when you're talking about comparing people 3-4 years in both fields. All this being said, I'm still considering leaving biglaw for consulting. It's way more important to be somewhat interested in the substance of your work than it is to make 10-20% more doing work you can't stand (which, btw, is why banking still sucks relative to consulting or even biglaw until you make VP)

Still is. This survey is pretty authoritative:

https://charlesaris.com/wp-content/uplo ... y-2015.pdf

And note that 1) those numbers are two years old; and 2) exit options are way better than V10 exits at each level of experience.

ETA: I'm pretty sure that consulting doesn't give you a serious chunk of restricted compensation? Unless you're thinking retirement match, which really is a perk as opposed to a drawback.

Not sure which numbers you're pointing to...the chart on there seems to prove my point. Average cash comp for 1st year is ~173k, and this is assuming MAX bonus. That's lower than the $180+ 15k bonus for biglaw. It only becomes comparable to biglaw 195k if you factor in things like 401k match, which I mentioned is restricted/non-liquid comp and shouldn't be valued as a cash equivalent.

And those numbers are two years old but likely still accurate. Go compare them to the recent numbers cited on poetsandquants or managementconsulted, etc. Exit options are definitely broader and have greater upside though, that much I agree with.

I don't want to be pedantic, but: 1) $173k doesn't assume max bonus, it's the average reported figure, 2) MBB stubs get a $25k signing bonus and biglaw stubs don't, and 3) 401(k) match is as close to a cash equivalent as you can get -- for one thing, IIRC, it's entirely vested, unlike stock options or equity.

You end up in a place where any residual difference is ... simply not big enough to be meaningful?

ETA: Here you go, the 2016 compensation survey -- http://files.constantcontact.com/b27df4 ... 25883e.pdf
$195k (bonus + salary) for Y1, $215k for Y2, not inclusive of retirement match / sign-on.

[juzam_djinn]

i don't think this is true anymore with biglaw to 180k. overall compensation might be equal, but consulting pay has more components that aren't immediately liquid. Also, to be equal to biglaw you have to be getting close to the max bonus at your level. it seems like pay rises a bit faster than biglaw when you're talking about comparing people 3-4 years in both fields. All this being said, I'm still considering leaving biglaw for consulting. It's way more important to be somewhat interested in the substance of your work than it is to make 10-20% more doing work you can't stand (which, btw, is why banking still sucks relative to consulting or even biglaw until you make VP)

Still is. This survey is pretty authoritative:

https://charlesaris.com/wp-content/uplo ... y-2015.pdf

And note that 1) those numbers are two years old; and 2) exit options are way better than V10 exits at each level of experience.

ETA: I'm pretty sure that consulting doesn't give you a serious chunk of restricted compensation? Unless you're thinking retirement match, which really is a perk as opposed to a drawback.

Not sure which numbers you're pointing to...the chart on there seems to prove my point. Average cash comp for 1st year is ~173k, and this is assuming MAX bonus. That's lower than the $180+ 15k bonus for biglaw. It only becomes comparable to biglaw 195k if you factor in things like 401k match, which I mentioned is restricted/non-liquid comp and shouldn't be valued as a cash equivalent.

And those numbers are two years old but likely still accurate. Go compare them to the recent numbers cited on poetsandquants or managementconsulted, etc. Exit options are definitely broader and have greater upside though, that much I agree with.

I don't want to be pedantic, but: 1) $173k doesn't assume max bonus, it's the average reported figure, 2) MBB stubs get a $25k signing bonus and biglaw stubs don't, and 3) 401(k) match is as close to a cash equivalent as you can get -- for one thing, IIRC, it's entirely vested, unlike stock options or equity.

You end up in a place where any residual difference is ... simply not big enough to be meaningful?

ETA: Here you go, the 2016 compensation survey -- http://files.constantcontact.com/b27df4 ... 25883e.pdf
$195k (bonus + salary) for Y1, $215k for Y2, not inclusive of retirement match / sign-on.

401k match is subject to early withdrawal penalties. my biglaw (and many others) got stipends (i.e. signing bonuses) of $10-15k in addition to bar expenses, etc. Not as much as mbb signing bonus though, to be sure, but stipends/signing bonuses are one time things so I didn't make a big deal about them in my original post

read this site: https://managementconsulted.com/consult ... a-interns/
look at mbb, they're all $145-150k base, performance bonus of up to $40k. talk to people at mbb, the average bonus is not the target. That means at the highest end you are getting $190k cash first year. $190k cash + around 10% income contribution to your 401k (i.e. at most 19k) - 10% penalty for early withdrawal does come out to between $205-210k, so it's between 10-15k higher than biglaw IF you are a top performer. And if we're comparing apples to apples, biglaw top performing first years usually do get an additional $5-10k on top of their annual bonus (though it's usually not worth it on a marginal basis in terms of additional hours billed). hth

lastly, if you read my original post it's pretty clear I said that MBB work sounds more interesting to me than biglaw work and that any slight difference in $$ is immaterial. so yeah...i take it you agree when you say residual differences are not large enough to be meaningful.....

p.s. that chart you cited isn't "average reported figure." read more carefully: it says "base salary plus target annual bonus." that means it's an average of all TARGET bonuses, meaning an average of all MAX bonuses

[Anonymous User]

OP here. On compensation, I think the two above posters are both more or less correct to an extent, and the main conclusion is that whether you are a high or average or below average performer at MBB, the difference in salary between that and BigLaw for a first year is ~5-10% or so (higher or lower depending on performance). Like you both mentioned it really is irrelevant I would think to anyone considering the two options, and should come way way after (if at all) factors like work substance, lifestyle, exit ops, how you like people/culture, etc.

On retirement contribution - it is true that there's a penalty for early withdrawal, but you shouldn't automatically take that penalty off the value. It would be really foolish to not keep the "free" money your firm is giving you for retirement in a retirement account, especially given that there are some pretty cool proprietary funds you get to invest in (but also for the more obvious reason that saving for retirement is the rational thing to do).

Edit: also, at the V10 I summered at, you are on the hook for the "signing" stipend and pay it back over the course of your first year. Is that not the case at all firms?

[Anonymous User]

Hi OP, biglaw M&A junior associate here, I have an interview with an MBB later this month. I have been practicing with a few consultants and got some feedback: 1) my case approach is somewhat robotic, feels like I'm checking boxes and too "lawyerish"; 2) I'm a good thinker but my case approach doesn't show much business judgment. I would love to hear your thoughts on how to improve from here, and/or if you have any tips on breaking the "lawyer stereotype" in the interviews. Thank you very much.

[Anonymous User]

Hi OP, biglaw M&A junior associate here, I have an interview with an MBB later this month. I have been practicing with a few consultants and got some feedback: 1) my case approach is somewhat robotic, feels like I'm checking boxes and too "lawyerish"; 2) I'm a good thinker but my case approach doesn't show much business judgment. I would love to hear your thoughts on how to improve from here, and/or if you have any tips on breaking the "lawyer stereotype" in the interviews. Thank you very much.

Would you mind sharing which market you're in and how you secured an interview? How long did it take you to get the interview scheduled from when you applied (assuming that had to be done)? Also curious to know your UG/LS and LSAT score if you don't mind...

[Anonymous User]

Hi OP, biglaw M&A junior associate here, I have an interview with an MBB later this month. I have been practicing with a few consultants and got some feedback: 1) my case approach is somewhat robotic, feels like I'm checking boxes and too "lawyerish"; 2) I'm a good thinker but my case approach doesn't show much business judgment. I would love to hear your thoughts on how to improve from here, and/or if you have any tips on breaking the "lawyer stereotype" in the interviews. Thank you very much.

(OP)

That's interesting feedback. First I would say not to get overly caught up in the frameworks. It's easy to do this when you're first starting out, but once you have enough practice under your belt you should start getting comfortable enough to branch out and apply your own logic to the cases. You should absolutely feel free to bring in random, interesting insights you may have. You may not know much about, say, a defense company, but you can probably guess gov't regulation is going to be important. So make interesting hypothesis-based guesses like that.

On the business judgment bit, try to always relate what you're saying to the "client's" problem. You're there to partner with the interviewer to figure out what the problem is and how to solve it. If it's a lemonade stand, don't just throw out something about government regulation (to riff on that theme) because the business owners won't be impacted. Everything part of your structure and answers should eventually tie back to the main question at hand. Even when you're going through the math portion - if the answer is "10%", you should frame it like "well, a 10% revenue increase by introducing xyz widget in abc market sounds like a reasonable expectation and goal but not worth the risk our client would incur". Or something like that. At all phases of the interview, imagine the CEO or similar client stakeholder walking into the room and tapping you on the shoulder and saying "hey, what ya got for me?" You wouldn't waste the executive's time with things that don't matter at that point. You would say "Well based on what we know, we can say 1, 2, and 3. This is what they mean for your business, and therefore we recommend _____. If we had more time, we could explore ______."

Hope that helps!

[Anonymous User]

Few questions after having read responses by current and ex consultants:

1. I am planning on applying to MBB with about two years of Biglaw transactional experience. How much does LSAT matter? Went to decent school but didn't do so well on LSAT (low 160s)

2. During interview, any suggestions on how to approach selling my short experience as a corporate lawyer?

Thanks for your time in advance!

OP again.

1 - Your school matters more, though LSAT is important as well. But if MBB recruits at your school you should still be able to get your foot in the door despite a lower LSAT score (but don't quote me on that).

2 - They definitely have respect for lawyers at top firms from a recruitment standpoint. Emphasize communication, teamwork, and deep knowledge on particular topics. Also emphasize that you have a very structured way of thinking and solving problems (though open to some creativity and flexibility).

Thanks OP. Could you please elaborate on the "structured way of thinking and solving problems"? You're not the first consultant to have advised this, and while I do take a systematic approach to many of the problems I face in my corporate pratice (so-called issues in a deal), I was hoping to get an illustrative example of what thay may look like in consulting context.

Also one more question regarding MBB's hiring practice. Would it be safe to assume that all candidactes are evaluated solely based on their interview performance once they get to the case interview phase, or would the hiring decision be made through a holitic evaluation such as (school * 25% + WE * 25% + case interview performace * 50% = ?)

I'm at big4 consulting so it may be different but as to your second question i think the latter, a holistic evaluation is the case.

[juzam_djinn]

OP here. On compensation, I think the two above posters are both more or less correct to an extent, and the main conclusion is that whether you are a high or average or below average performer at MBB, the difference in salary between that and BigLaw for a first year is ~5-10% or so (higher or lower depending on performance). Like you both mentioned it really is irrelevant I would think to anyone considering the two options, and should come way way after (if at all) factors like work substance, lifestyle, exit ops, how you like people/culture, etc.

On retirement contribution - it is true that there's a penalty for early withdrawal, but you shouldn't automatically take that penalty off the value. It would be really foolish to not keep the "free" money your firm is giving you for retirement in a retirement account, especially given that there are some pretty cool proprietary funds you get to invest in (but also for the more obvious reason that saving for retirement is the rational thing to do).

Edit: also, at the V10 I summered at, you are on the hook for the "signing" stipend and pay it back over the course of your first year. Is that not the case at all firms?

yeah agreed on the retirement contribution; I was just illustrating that it's not quite the same as straight cash (i.e. if you wanted to use it as cash in the year you received it, it'd be subject to the penalty)

my firm (and several others) gave stipends, rather than "salary advances." advances need to be paid back, stipends do not. I think it depends on what firm/market you are in

[Anonymous User]

i applied in fall this past year as a 1L from UT/Vandy/UCLA and did not get a screener (presumably due to lack of work experience/poor uG GPA/etc.)

does it make sense/will i have a shot applying as a 2L?
fwiw, i have a 1L SA at a v100 firm lined up so i'm not sure if that makes me any more competitive or at least puts me in the race to begin with

[Anonymous User]

i applied in fall this past year as a 1L from UT/Vandy/UCLA and did not get a screener (presumably due to lack of work experience/poor uG GPA/etc.)

does it make sense/will i have a shot applying as a 2L?
fwiw, i have a 1L SA at a v100 firm lined up so i'm not sure if that makes me any more competitive or at least puts me in the race to begin with

It's always worth applying. Especially since if prior work experience was a weakness, a solid 1L SA will help remedy that in their eyes to an extent.

Besides, you NEVER lose anything by applying even if I'm wrong. Worst comes to worst, you show you're interested and stay in touch.

[Anonymous User]

i applied in fall this past year as a 1L from UT/Vandy/UCLA and did not get a screener (presumably due to lack of work experience/poor uG GPA/etc.)

does it make sense/will i have a shot applying as a 2L?
fwiw, i have a 1L SA at a v100 firm lined up so i'm not sure if that makes me any more competitive or at least puts me in the race to begin with

You should definitely apply. Unlike in biglaw, I think there are more spots for the full time positions than for the summer program. At least that was the case for entry level hiring in undergrad.

[Anonymous User]

i applied in fall this past year as a 1L from UT/Vandy/UCLA and did not get a screener (presumably due to lack of work experience/poor uG GPA/etc.)

does it make sense/will i have a shot applying as a 2L?
fwiw, i have a 1L SA at a v100 firm lined up so i'm not sure if that makes me any more competitive or at least puts me in the race to begin with

It's always worth applying. Especially since if prior work experience was a weakness, a solid 1L SA will help remedy that in their eyes to an extent.

Besides, you NEVER lose anything by applying even if I'm wrong. Worst comes to worst, you show you're interested and stay in touch.

i guess i should rephrase my question; does the addition of a 1L SA give me a live shot here? from what i've been reading, they only recruit at certain t-14 schools so i'm trying to gauge how likely it would be to even get a bite

[Anonymous User]

i applied in fall this past year as a 1L from UT/Vandy/UCLA and did not get a screener (presumably due to lack of work experience/poor uG GPA/etc.)

does it make sense/will i have a shot applying as a 2L?
fwiw, i have a 1L SA at a v100 firm lined up so i'm not sure if that makes me any more competitive or at least puts me in the race to begin with

It's always worth applying. Especially since if prior work experience was a weakness, a solid 1L SA will help remedy that in their eyes to an extent.

Besides, you NEVER lose anything by applying even if I'm wrong. Worst comes to worst, you show you're interested and stay in touch.

i guess i should rephrase my question; does the addition of a 1L SA give me a live shot here? from what i've been reading, they only recruit at certain t-14 schools so i'm trying to gauge how likely it would be to even get a bite

You definitely have a shot. I had a worse UG GPA, no work experience, and went to a worse school and I had screeners at 2/3. This was for fulltime though.

[lawlorbust]

i applied in fall this past year as a 1L from UT/Vandy/UCLA and did not get a screener (presumably due to lack of work experience/poor uG GPA/etc.)

does it make sense/will i have a shot applying as a 2L?
fwiw, i have a 1L SA at a v100 firm lined up so i'm not sure if that makes me any more competitive or at least puts me in the race to begin with

It's always worth applying. Especially since if prior work experience was a weakness, a solid 1L SA will help remedy that in their eyes to an extent.

Besides, you NEVER lose anything by applying even if I'm wrong. Worst comes to worst, you show you're interested and stay in touch.

i guess i should rephrase my question; does the addition of a 1L SA give me a live shot here? from what i've been reading, they only recruit at certain t-14 schools so i'm trying to gauge how likely it would be to even get a bite

It definitely won't hurt. But as a general rule the world outside law school doesn't really get how competitive 1L SAs are. And specifically for your position, I'm not sure that they'd put much weight on a generic v100; non-law employers tend to recognize a lot less fewer law firms than you might think.

ETA: One way or another I wouldn't put any stock into your being rejected 1L year. MBB almost as a categorical rule didn't have 1L summers, and only recently did BCG go out and try to establish a 1L pipeline.

[Anonymous User]

How important is the LSAT in getting the interview/the job?

Edit: answered above.

[Anonymous User]

How would you estimate the GPA cutoff for a top 20 school? Would a top 20-25% have a shot?

[Anonymous User]

Few questions after having read responses by current and ex consultants:

1. I am planning on applying to MBB with about two years of Biglaw transactional experience. How much does LSAT matter? Went to decent school but didn't do so well on LSAT (low 160s)

2. During interview, any suggestions on how to approach selling my short experience as a corporate lawyer?

Thanks for your time in advance!

OP again.

1 - Your school matters more, though LSAT is important as well. But if MBB recruits at your school you should still be able to get your foot in the door despite a lower LSAT score (but don't quote me on that).

2 - They definitely have respect for lawyers at top firms from a recruitment standpoint. Emphasize communication, teamwork, and deep knowledge on particular topics. Also emphasize that you have a very structured way of thinking and solving problems (though open to some creativity and flexibility).

Thanks OP. Could you please elaborate on the "structured way of thinking and solving problems"? You're not the first consultant to have advised this, and while I do take a systematic approach to many of the problems I face in my corporate pratice (so-called issues in a deal), I was hoping to get an illustrative example of what thay may look like in consulting context.

Also one more question regarding MBB's hiring practice. Would it be safe to assume that all candidactes are evaluated solely based on their interview performance once they get to the case interview phase, or would the hiring decision be made through a holitic evaluation such as (school * 25% + WE * 25% + case interview performace * 50% = ?)

Could someone shed light on this?

[Anonymous User]

Green:

How would you estimate the GPA cutoff for a top 20 school? Would a top 20-25% have a shot?

I think you're going to find that you face a school filter and then a grade filter, not both at once. What I mean is: no one cares what your Yale grade is, you'll get an interview. If you went to USC it's going to be tough even if you're the top of your class. Relative to law firms, I think you'll find more weight on the school and less weight on GPA/law review. But it's the same concept.

Thanks OP. Could you please elaborate on the "structured way of thinking and solving problems"? You're not the first consultant to have advised this, and while I do take a systematic approach to many of the problems I face in my corporate pratice (so-called issues in a deal), I was hoping to get an illustrative example of what thay may look like in consulting context.

Also one more question regarding MBB's hiring practice. Would it be safe to assume that all candidactes are evaluated solely based on their interview performance once they get to the case interview phase, or would the hiring decision be made through a holitic evaluation such as (school * 25% + WE * 25% + case interview performace * 50% = ?)

To your first point: in consulting you're often handed a large chunk of something to deal with. They want to know that if you sit in on a meeting with a client and your manager has to run off to another meeting afterwards, you can draft a sketch of what a response to the concerns brought up in the meeting might look like without any direction provided. As you go you'll get better at applying a useful structure, but the real sticking point is that you have in mind steps to take to approach any problem and you don't just sit there staring at an empty Powerpoint presentation. (Or more relevant to interviews: you don't just sit there staring at the interviewer when they ask you how many golf balls can fit in a 747.)

To your second: the answer is no, it's more holistic. This is good for JDs because they set the bar lower on case interviews than with MBAs. If it were blind, JDs wouldn't get jobs in consulting. We collectively suck at case interviews.

[Anonymous User]

.