Kearney is one of the world's foremost strategic operations consulting firms - with around 6,000 people in 40 countries.
The firm is, as described by Alfredo Vetencourt (Manager, New York), "big enough to be working with the largest companies in the world, but small enough to where folks can actually have a quick impact."
If you're considering applying for a position at Kearney, you'll face a case interview. Today, we're excited to share what to expect in a Kearney case interview through a real-time demonstration led by Alfredo.
In the demonstration (below), you'll see Alfredo take a real candidate through a Kearney case study - based on a client project!
The case is a fantastic overview of Kearney's interview process. Follow along with paper and pencil to see if you can solve the case alongside our candidate.
Kearney Case Interview Video
Kearney Case Interview Podcast
Connect with Kearney
- Kearney is hiring for a select number of roles - see openings and apply
- Contact Kearney's recruiting team
- Learn about Kearney's Hispanic Origin and Latin America (HOLÁ) Network
- Learn about Kearney's Digital and Analytics practice
Management Consulted Resources
- 0 spots left for the Strategy Sprint consulting project
- Work with expert coaches to prep for case interviews in Black Belt - limited seats available
- Book a 15min call with a member of our team to confirm which package is right for you
Kearney Case Interview Example Transcription:
Kearney Interviewer: So our client is a carbonated soft drink manufacturer and distributor, and they’re currently exploring the possibility of expanding their glass bottle brand portfolio in the US market. The CEO asked Kearney to help determine whether that’s a good idea or not, and they haven’t provided a specific margin or revenue targets. They want to make sure that if they expand, that it is actually a profitable pursuit.
Candidate: Cool. So I’m just going to reiterate the case to make sure I have all the information that you provided. So does that sound like a good approach for now.
Kearney Interviewer: 100% Yeah.
Candidate: So our company is a soft drink manufacturer and distributor, and they are looking to expand in the US with their glass bottle portfolio. They don’t necessarily have a target in mind, but they just want to make sure that the company would be profitable if they expand, and ensure that the venture would be a profitable investment.
Kearney Interviewer: A lot of times you’ll get a prompt from a CEO that says, Is this a good idea or not? What should I think about it? Right? So that’s the help that they’re looking to get.
Candidate: Sounds good? Yeah, I do have some clarifying questions in mind before we jump into the framework first. Do they have an idea of, like, where they want to expand first, one is it just like the larger US market that we’re looking at?
Kearney Interviewer: No, it’s broader in the US.
Candidate: And do we have like a time frame specific in do we have like a specific time frame we’re looking forward to to make sure that this is a good investment,
Kearney Interviewer: Not at this point, or just exploring options.
Candidate: Sounds good? And do we handle the distribution ourselves and the manufacturing ourselves and the rest. Like, how is this the business model? Like, do we sell in stores, for example? Or, like, what’s our business model like in this case?
Kearney Interviewer: Oh, that’s it. That’s a great question. So, so basically, yes, they’re a manufacturer and distributor, right in the carbon area, soft drink space, you can have the large scale buyers, like, say, a Walmart or a Target, right? And then they have a DST, which is another model where they just go and distribute. For the purposes of this case, just assume that they are focusing on manufacturing and distribution and they’re exploring options, no, no need to go into the channel.
Candidate: Sounds good. It’s okay. If I take a couple seconds to structure my thoughts,
Kearney Interviewer: I will be surprised if you didn’t cool, sounds good.
Candidate: So I do have a sort of understanding of how I want to approach this case. The way I want to do it is kind of in four main buckets, and I list off all the buckets that I have, and then we’ll go into each of them one by one, specifically, okay, first one, I want to look into the market attractiveness, see how big is the market see, like, what are the competition like? And there are some recent trends, which I will go into more in the future. Second would be company capabilities, understanding, but like what we are doing best, and how we can make sure that this product is proprietary enough to be able to capture enough market share, as much market share as possible. Thirdly, I want to look into the financials. What’s the upfront cost, like, what’s the revenue and cost drivers, and also, like, the payback period to make sure that this is a profitable investment. And four would be risks and considerations. Obviously, we don’t want to have any cannibalization within this product and our portfolio. We want to understand how we can enter the market, what’s the best way to do so and things like that. So going deeper into the framework, in terms of the market attractiveness, I want to first understand the size, like, how big is the market that we’re trying to play at? I also...
Kearney Interviewer: take a step back. Let’s take a step back. I like your framework, but let’s, let’s pressure test it a bit, right? So, it sounds good. Let’s answer the structure, the framework around the questions that we’re gonna tell the CEO right. What is the question that we’re answering with each of the components?
Candidate: Sounds good? Yeah, so I’ll go into them one by one. Do you want me to go one moment?
Kearney Interviewer: Yeah, each of the components of the framework don’t need to go into the next level. Just where are the buckets and what are the answers that we will be getting? Okay?
Candidate: Sounds. So market attractiveness We will first want to understand, is this a good idea or not, right? So this is, like, a pretty broad question. So the way I’m thinking about this is, when we think about the investment being attractive, we want to make sure that we enter the market where we can have a profitable investment, right? So in order to understand that, we want to understand how big the market is. We want to understand how fragmented the...
Candidate: competition. So like, is there enough room for us to play in terms of when we enter this market, I would understand the growth rate. Is there, like, enough growth so we will be able to handle this investment and also have a like, a continuous income and profitability, okay? And one thing that I also want to share is recent trends, like, what has been the recent trends within the market? Like, why did we choose to specifically expand our glass bottle portfolio, right? So understanding customer preferences, like, would they be willing to buy this product that we’re trying to expand? And lastly, I also want to look into the regulation in this category, just because I know that glass could be sort of like a half hazard product, that if it breaks, there might be certain compliance issues, so like that would also be a sort of a mini consideration within this larger bucket of market. Does that make sense to you? Do you have any questions for the market part? For now, I
Kearney Interviewer: I think that's pretty reasonable. What comes next?
Candidate: Cool. What comes next is the company capabilities. I want to understand what our existing glass bottle portfolio looks like? What have we done in terms of research and development? Where does it stand in terms of the ongoing maintenance or like, how do we make sure that this product is proprietary enough to be able to capture as much market share as possible? I want to look into our sales and marketing team, so understanding if we have any...
Kearney Interviewer: Okay, so no. Need to go into the third and fourth. I think they're pretty clear. Is there a reason why you first look at capabilities before profitability?
Candidate: Yeah, before profitability, I want to so profitability is the way I think about this is first we develop this product, and then we develop the costs. The reason I chose capabilities first is because I want to make sure that before making the investment, we have the necessarily the expertise and necessary sort of company, like brain power right to make sure that we can make this investment a profitable one, you could
Kearney Interviewer: also make a case right, that if possibly could, we could make it profitably, right, that we can figure out how to do it. So that’s not necessarily just just telling you to see life, but it works. Okay, let’s talk about the market. So I know a bunch of people are going to hate me right now, but let’s go. Let’s try to figure out. You’ll see some basic heuristics. What is the market size of the glass in terms of revenue, what is the glass bottle carbonated soft drink market in the US?
Candidate: So glass bottle carbonated soft drinks, so we don’t necessarily look like the people that buy it in cans, or like the fountain drinks, just the glass bottles. Yeah, exactly.
Kearney Interviewer: And for this, please walk me through the equation without going into the calculations, and then you can, you know, cool, show the numbers. Sounds
Candidate:
good? Is it okay if I take a couple of seconds to structure my thoughts first,
Kearney Interviewer:
of course,
Candidate:
cool. So the way I want to, I’m like, I want to structure this market sizing problem is, first, I want to start off with the US population. Understand how big the US population is? I would assume to use the 300 million number, if, unless you have any other thoughts. But I guess we want that. I’ve dived into the cap calculations just now. The way I want to segment the population is by understanding, what they are like, the percentage of people who get soft drinks on a weekly basis, right? So for my personal experience, I have friends who hate soft drinks. Couldn’t be me, but there are people like that. I have friends who get soft drinks like once a week. I have friends who get soft drinks like, I’d say, twice a week. And also I have friends to get soft things like three plus times a week. So those four mean buckets is the one I'm trying to look at. And then once we have those four buckets, we’ll assume the percentages. Make some assumptions, unless you have any other data to show, but we can make some assumptions about the percentages of falling to each of them, if you're in those categories. So that will give us the sort of the sum of that, those numbers will give us the number of people who consume soft drinks weekly. So after that, I want to sort of understand what’s the percentage of the people who consume soft drinks in a glass bottle, right? So understanding the percentage of people who buy just glass bottle soft drinks and. Then from that point on, I will try to annualize that number, just because we have used the weekly numbers
Kearney Interviewer:
we'll say cost, but price. But, yeah, it makes sense. But I'm going to challenge that framework a bit, right? Because instead, I mean, you're looking at the us population. You know, it’s a good heuristic, but there's another way that you could look at it, just based on how you anticipate people who consume sodas, right? Otherwise, a soda. Yeah, exactly.
Candidate:
That makes sense. Too
Kearney Interviewer:
Perfect. Let's use households, because it's simpler, but I agree with
Candidate:
your logic. Cool. Sounds good. So is that the only trick you wanted to make to the equation, or is there anything else or simplicity? Let’s,
Kearney Interviewer:
Let's use that one.
Candidate:
Yeah, cool. So diving into the numbers here, I would assume that, based on the US population, I would assume that there’s about 100 million households. Is that a good number to use for you? Cool so we’re still left with the 100 million households within the US. And then we'll go to the second personable framework, which is understanding the weekly consumption of soft drinks. So we have the zero, so like the non drinkers, we have the one, we have the two and the three, plus times a week. So going into here making some assumptions, I would assume that about 30% of the US population doesn’t consume any soft drinks, just because there’s a I wish something especially, there’s a big push towards more, healthier alternatives of soft drink. So I would assume that 30% of the US population would not be consuming anything. So does that number make sense to you, or should? Yeah, cool. So 30 million, 5 million households are already out of the window. When we think of the people who drink soft drinks once a week, I would assume they’re more than people who drink who don’t drink anything. So not a lot, but I would say about 40% if that number makes sense to you, experience like,
Kearney Interviewer:
yeah, I love the I assume yes, unless I’m going to call you anything’s crazy
Candidate:
cool, sounds good. So for efficiency reasons, I’ll go through each of them again. So we have about 70% so far. I would assume that people who drink soft drinks twice a week would consist of about 20% of the entire population. And then people who drink soft drinks, three plus times a week would only consist of about 10% of the entire US household population. So looking into the numbers here, trying to quantify our numbers, that we have is we have people who drink once a week, or that are the 40 million households. People who drink soft drinks are about 20 million households and also people who drink soft drinks three plus times out of some of that three number. So that would give us about 10%
Candidate:
overall, we have 10 million here. Overall, we have about 70 million who consume weak soft drinks on a weekly basis. But from that point on, I will try to calculate how many soft drinks. So again, taking into account the numbers of bottles that they consume. So for the people who drink once a week, that would be $40 million 40 million people. For the people who drink twice a week, that would be about, again, 40 million. And for people who drink three times a week, that would be about 30 million. So adding all those up, that would be about 100 and 10 million bottles per week. Okay, so 40 plus 40 plus 30. And then from this point, I would try to estimate the number of soft drinks sold in bottles, right? So again, making some assumptions here. Don’t want to, I want to try to make it as realistic as possible. From my experience, yeah, whenever I go to get a soft drink, I usually either get a fountain one or in a can, which is the most probably the easier option, or a plastic bottle, right? So I would assume that glass bottles would not be a huge component of this market, I would assume that I'm thinking between 10 to 20% would only be glass bottles, for simplicity reasons. I will use the 10% number, if that makes sense to you. Yep. Cool. So weekly consumption is about 11 million glass bottles per week, and then from that point on, I’m going to multiply that number by about 50 to annualize this number in order to get the annual number. So 11 million times 50 would give us around 550 million bottles. Okay, and then I want to understand what’s the average price per glass, bottled soft drink, right? Don’t really have any numbers here, but I would assume that $5 would make sense here, if actually, maybe that’s too
Kearney Interviewer:
much, just because I am really expensive. So I’m a bit i.
Candidate:
I would be biased here just because I go to school in California and I’m in New York now. I would assume $2 per soft drink would probably make, okay, yeah, that’s closer to it. Okay, cool. So that would give us about $1.1 billion and
Kearney Interviewer:
The only number that I think will challenge your assumptions that I think are reasonable is, if you have a household right, that is buying sodas, you think they're just going to buy one soda in the supermarket, one bottle. You just take one little, small bottle, right? And probably either six packs, or you know that you can take an average of you can make some assumption, right? So let's just multiply by two and say that the market is twice as large, okay, that makes
Candidate:
a lot of sense, yeah, so we will get about 2.2 billion per annual revenue.
Kearney Interviewer:
All right, so that's reasonable. So where else do we need to know to answer the first component of the case that you described.
Candidate:
So we do have the market size here, looking back at the framework we have, we said that we also want to look into the competitive landscape here. So understand, like, how fragmented is the market? How much room is there for us to grow? If there’s sort of enough competition, if the competition is fragmented, we can potentially capture more share than if it’s dominated by big players, such as, you know, the things that come to mind are like PepsiCo or Coca Cola that, yeah, could potentially be dominating the market. But that’s my assumption here. If I were to move forward with the case, I would like to look into the competitive landscape at first again, yeah, and then that would make sense to me,
Kearney Interviewer:
fantastic. Okay, so keep us moving. So let’s assume that the top two largest players take 50% of the market, right? Our client has about 15% of the market, okay? And there’s another large player that is very small, or used to be very small that its name is haritos. It has less than 10% of the market, but it has been growing at 30% CAGR for the past four years. What other information you might think is valuable?
Candidate:
So just digesting the information that you gave me, the top two, the top two competitors, which would be something like Coca Cola or Pepsi, would have combined 50% of the total market. We are also a pretty big player in the market. We have about 15% of the total of the annual revenue, so 15% of 2.2 billion. And then there’s a third player who has less than 10% of the market who has been growing really fast at a 30% sort of CAGR. The first thing that jumps to me is that obviously I want to think about the top two competitors.
We have only 15% of the market share, they are sort of out of out of our reach to compete with, so I won’t understand how we can capture the rest of the market to get on par with those numbers, just because, from the numbers you gave me this, these don’t necessarily add up to 100% so I think there’s other competition there, just to flag that the third, second thing that jumps to mind is we mentioned this third player called Harito Haritos, which has less than 10% market share, but has been growing at about 30% CAGR, which is annual growth compounded. So where I would look next is to understand the reason they are growing at 30% just because growing at 30% is really to put things in perspective, growing at a 30% CAGR is really like aggressive growth within the market, especially with those soft drinks.
Kearney Interviewer:
Do you know that yet? Are you missing any visa information to know if 30% is good?
Candidate:
Sorry, do I know what
Kearney Interviewer:
Do you know if 30% is great in this context, or are you missing some information?
Candidate:
Sorry, I didn’t understand the question.
Kearney Interviewer:
Do you know if 30% CAGR is good compared with the rest of the players, or are you missing any other information?
Candidate:
Yeah, we are obviously missing some information about, you know, what their product is, or, like,
Kearney Interviewer:
no, it’s something as simple as, what is the growth rate for the rest of the market, or for or for the client, right? So the market has been growing at 2% right? And our client’s market share has been decreasing 2% a year,
Candidate:
cool, so we have been decreasing at 2% per year, and the market has been growing at 2%
Kearney Interviewer:
yeah, and I want to move on to the other components of the case. But I think those are very, very useful questions, right? We have been decreasing because we were just focusing on our segments.
Kearney Interviewer:
Basically, across our portfolio, we do have some brands that could potentially target the same market as Aritos Cool. So we have the project, we’re in the middle of the project, and then the chief marketing officer says, Hey, I know you’ve been looking into this, but we know that whatever we can produce, we can sell and make money out of it.
Candidate:
Okay, so our chief marketing officer says, Whatever we can produce, that we can sell.
Kearney Interviewer:
Yep, profitable.
Candidate:
So I want to understand, whenever we say whatever we can produce, does that mean like we can produce sort of a competitor for haritos or
Kearney Interviewer:
no? No, why can we produce glass bottles? Right? We know that there's a market for cool sounds. And then we can make, we can make money out of it.
Candidate:
Sounds good. So, yeah, again, what I try to, where I'll probably try to go next, is understanding, what are some customer demographics here? Understand, like, what are they? What do they want within this market? Like, why are those growing at a 30% rate, and why are we declining at 2%? We said that we have some portfolio of products, so I would like to look into the portfolio as well and each other's growth rates.
Kearney Interviewer:
So let's go back. Let's take a step back to your hypothesis, right? The first question was, is the market attractive? What is your answer? Okay,
Candidate:
What was the second question? The
Kearney Interviewer:
second question
Candidate:
What was the competitive landscape?
Kearney Interviewer:
I know, but was it the market attractive part of the competitive landscape? I’m thinking about four buckets, the buckets, the buckets,
Candidate:
yeah. The second was the company capability, so understanding what we can sell,
Kearney Interviewer:
okay, the third one, the
Candidate:
one was the financial one, so, okay, understand what the option cost would be, and also revenue and cost drivers.
Kearney Interviewer:
Do we have the answer for that one already?
Candidate:
I mean, we have our market size, which is 15% of 2.2 billion, which is the revenues.
Kearney Interviewer:
But we also know that the chief marketing officer said, whatever we can do, we can sell, we can make money out of it.
Candidate:
That is true. I just don’t necessarily understand what like that would entail, what that means like, whatever we can make we can sell.
Kearney Interviewer:
What that means is that we need to focus on your second bucket,
Candidate:
cool the capabilities. Yeah.
Kearney Interviewer:
So let me give you some information. So the client, they have manufacturing operations, both in Mexico and in the US, right? And they're, they're exploring to see if they can focus some of those manufacturing operations, to actually focus on those glass bottles and try to take them to markets. What are some factors or considerations that you would want to consider
Candidate (24:30):
cool? So I want to say that we have manufacturing capabilities in both Mexico and the US, and we want to focus on glass bottles. The first thing I would want to understand is, when it comes to glass bottles, what percentage of manufacturing is being done in Mexico versus what percentage of manufacturing is being done in the US?
Candidate:
So again, talking about the variable and fixed costs, starting off with the variable costs, I would want to understand how much we’re paying for labor. So understanding the wages per employee that we are trying to understand the cost of. I want to understand the direct materials and whether or not there is disparity between the US and Mexico.
Kearney Interviewer:
So what are some components that go into that? What are some, like, how much it costs us to sort of create one single unit of sub bottle for the fixed cost. We touched upon this for the capacity issue, I wouldn’t understand how much we’re paying for rent, how much we’re waiting for administrative costs. All of this administrative costs, not as much, just because we’re trying to understand the cost of goods sold here, based on my initial thoughts, but yeah, understanding the administration cost and also in the variable cost, I forgot to mention that we also need to take into account the distribution costs, to understand how much it cost us to distribute our products, distribute our products, from the Mexico to the US or the US intercontinental, perfect. And also, the other thing I would like to consider, which is probably less important than the direct labor and direct material distribution, would be understanding how much it costs us to maintain the factories that we are trying to ensure that there is capacity. And we said that we have manufacturing capacity, I wouldn’t understand how much capacity we have, so like, how many bottles we can actually create and take to the shelves. And, yeah, just to sum it up, those are the costs that I like to look into. All
Kearney Interviewer:
right. So here’s information that they came back with. The cost looks at my numbers to make sure that it gives you all the right information. Okay, so the cost to manufacture the bottle in Mexico and manufacturer includes direct and indirect labor is 10 cents a bottle. The cost to manufacture, including the same components in the US, is 15 cents a bottle. Okay, then the cost to bring all the goods through customs, put it in the same location that you will get it in the US. It’s five cents a bottle. Those are the only costs that need to be a part of this analysis. Okay, so as I give you this information, literally, you wrap up your day, you get these insights, right? And then the CEO of the company is saying, Hey, I’m meeting with the board tomorrow, and I want to look smart. So can you prepare a recommendation based on what you know already, so at least I can give them some signal into if it’s a good idea.
Candidate:
Do you want to jump into the recommendation first or to contextualize these numbers, see what they mean. Now
Kearney Interviewer:
the CEO just called. You’re going to tell the CEO, hey, no, let’s talk tomorrow, because he has to talk with the board. Cool.
Candidate:
Sounds good. So the recommendation I would give is try to produce all the bottles that we can in the US. First of all, just because we know that based on the cost information that was provided, i. Yeah. I mean, let’s take a step back and understand our recommendation first is it would be a good idea to expand this product within the US, just because we found out that the market size is about 2.20% it’s going at about 2% per year. And also, we have been seeing decreasing market share at 2% but there are ways we can reverse that, if we launch this if we end up launching this venture. So the way I would consider doing this is first trying to understand where we want to manufacture these bottles. First, that would be the recommendation that would be continuing the operations in the US, just because that provides about 15 cents per bottle. And whenever we think about the Mexico distribution model that would provide 10 cents per bottle, and also five cents per bottle per distribution, so it adds up to about the same. But whenever we think about the US model, we necessarily, we don’t necessarily exclude this other consideration that comes in Mexico right. So there are a lot of border issue controls. So politics could change every single day, and there could be potentially a lot of instability when it comes to that. So based on the recommendation, I would say that it does make sense to pursue this venture of expanding our glass bottles within the US and also keeping our operations within the US as much as possible.
Kearney Interviewer:
All right, the CEO says, Thanks for the recommendation, but I believe that my chief marketing officer will kill me if we go with that solution. Why do you think that is?
Candidate:
The reason that I'm thinking about this is we've seen that the third player, who is mostly targeting Hispanic consumer press, has been growing at a 30% CAGR, and when we think about public relations, moving our own capacity from Mexico to the US, which we might have more sort of connection to the Mexico landscape, that could potentially be a reason for that. But I guess, ways to mitigate that. We don't necessarily need to put the entire operations within the US. We can sort of keep it at a half and half percentage and also conduct, potentially ways to mitigate that is like, conduct customer service, understand, like, what they would feel about their connection to our brand, how they like our how their loyalty is, and like, what determines that loyalty. So understanding what our customers really want from us, and like, where is some room that we can play with whenever it comes to public relations, would be good places to start.
Kearney Interviewer:
Perfect. Well, the CEO, thank you for your advice, and then thank you for solving the case.
Candidate:
Awesome, perfect.
Kearney Interviewer:
Great job, Edward. How do you feel?
Candidate:
Feel good. I wish I had more time to sort of do some calculations about, like, how much each bottle would make. Like, how much it cost us to produce each bottle and like, what’s the break even point? But I guess, yeah, this was a very interesting case, and, like, very operationally focused, which is probably not something that I'm very used to, but definitely a great experience.
Kearney Interviewer:
Nice, nice. Any questions that popped out of the case?
Candidate:
Yeah, I guess what I’ve tried, like, kind of struggled a bit, is like, moving the case forward and trying to understand, like, what you really want from me whenever we move the case forward. So like, Do you have any advice on how we can make sure that transitions are like, more smooth or like more like, yeah, make more sense?
Kearney Interviewer:
Yes. And I think you, I mean, I’ve given this case probably more than 50 times, and there’s always a different path, but like, we always go around the same blocks. I think you did a really good job with the structure. I can give you feedback, but specifically to your question about moving the case forward, you're structuring a set of hypotheses, right? And you need to be thinking about the hypothesis. And if you have enough data to go solving from one to the other...
Kearney Interviewer:
right, cool. If you feel that you are asking questions right, that gets you to a third level of answer that might not change a lot of the trajectory of the way to solve the hypothesis, then you’re going into the lip so I had to steer you back. So, so, so we don’t go into too much, into the specific I believe that the questions that you ask compared with other 60 people is, they’re very good, they’re very structured, right? But for some of them, you got to a level that was too deep to go to move on to the next component of the case. It
Candidate:
kept it at a higher level, yeah. I mean, basically,
Kearney Interviewer:
Hey, is the market attractive? You reach a point where, yeah, the market is growing. There are players that are there. We do have some capabilities. We can probably make an assumption that the market is attractive, right? And you can work with the interviewer to say, like, this gives me enough right? And then they cannot prompt you to say, but they’re not gonna penalize you for coming up with something like, Hey, I have enough data to come up with an accessor, right? That also happened with the profitability, profitability question, right? Hey, we can do it. We can make money. That’s the key for you, not our main focus, right? So you can always stay back to your hypothesis. That’s it to confirm. That seems to be confirming my hypothesis, that it is a profit of. The client. Any other consideration you’d like to factor in, such as, right? And you can show your brainstorm capability there, but that way you can have a gross enough hypothesis and just focus on what you need to solve the case. Perfect. Any other questions? No.
Candidate:
Would love to hear your feedback on, like, specific things I can do to improve, like, what were the strong points? What were the weak points would activate more about what you felt
Kearney Interviewer:
perfect in terms of structure I saw. I mean, I can easily tell that this is not your first time doing this. They’re not your first rodeo. You did a good job at taking and structuring the buckets. I really liked how you went to the next level and explained the structure, especially when I ask you to do a pressure test with you, right? Sometimes people struggle with that because they say revenue, cost, profitability, right? But you need to actually structure it as an answer to the clients, as if it especially for everybody that is in the call. When you’re thinking about these buckets.
Think about the storyline for a PowerPoint that you’re going to be for the client, right? So basically, you want to structure it like this, because if you just put profitability, then that’s not a storyline. That’s just a bucket. Okay? I already mentioned my feedback on going too deep into some areas, right? Especially where you don’t get enough, the only part that I think, I would say that we approach differently is when you go into a recommendation, right? In this case, I always force the recommendation, but it’s okay to take time to build a recommendation, right?
The CEO is calling, but it’s okay to take time to prepare the recommendation and put 200 together. There’s one point that you missed that is, hey, the cost of manufacturing in the other is the same. I mean that virtually the costs are the same. But I don’t believe that to be the best approach for X, Y, the reason that you mentioned right in the end, you solve the case you presented the right recommendation. You know, when you go pre and also, another point is you can also recap as if you’re doing an executive summary, right? If you think about a PowerPoint, this is an executive summary, right?
If you go too deep into a specific on your ability recommendation to CEO, you probably drifted a bit from that executive summary, right? So you might have missed a couple of the queues there. But our ally, I think you did a great job, compared with all the 60 people that have gone through this. And this is my way to retire in this case, right? I wanted to, you know, retire in glory or shame, depending on if people liked it or not. But that’s basically, that’s that usually, I think you did a great job!