Taylor Warfield vs Victor Cheng’s Approach

Hi,

I'm a newbie to consulting and have been reading Taylor Warfields Hacking the Case Interview and also Victor Cheng's Case Interview Secrets. Cheng's book emphasizes having a hypothesis while Warfield's book doesn't mention anything related to that and suggests presenting a structured framework right after the introduction in a case interview. I was wondering which approach is technically better? I know that Warfields book is also more up to date. Thanks so much!

Consulting Case Interview Course

  • 2,037 questions across 209 consulting firms. Crowdsourced from over 600,000 members.
  • 11 Detailed Exclusive Cases developed by a McKinsey Associate and 10+ hours of video.
  • Trusted by over 1,000 aspiring consultants just like you.

Comments (2)

  • Associate 2 in Consulting
Jun 5, 2021 - 4:53pm

You need to have a framework, and having a hypothesis can be good to guide the questions you ask

It's important to remember though that there isn't a one-size-fits-all method to casing, e.g. if you force a hypothesis where it really doesn't make sense during an interview it won't be a good thing

Start Discussion

Total Avg Compensation

June 2021 Consulting

  • Principal (20) $274
  • Director/MD (43) $260
  • Vice President (34) $249
  • Engagement Manager (75) $216
  • Manager (127) $165
  • 2nd Year Associate (122) $138
  • 3rd+ Year Associate (92) $128
  • Senior Consultant (270) $128
  • NA (10) $116
  • Consultant (482) $114
  • 1st Year Associate (428) $113
  • Engineer (4) $110
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (111) $107
  • 2nd Year Analyst (243) $96
  • Associate Consultant (133) $92
  • 1st Year Analyst (840) $84
  • Intern/Summer Associate (131) $82
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (374) $67