Interviewer-Led vs. Interviewee-Led Cases: Don’t Overthink the Difference

If you’ve spent more than five minutes in the case interview prep world, you’ve probably heard people talk about “interviewer-led” vs “interviewee-led” cases. Lots of opinions about how you should prepare to get into consulting, but here’s my take: you do not need to prep separately for these two styles. 

You should not prep separately for these two styles. And if you insist on scouring the internet for McKinsey-specific cases so you can “get used to their format,” well, first, good luck; second, you might be better off cold-networking with McKinsey employees and asking them to help give you a practice case; and third, you really could use your time more productively.

Here’s why.

At a high level:

•  Interviewee-led cases (most firms) – You drive the structure of the case. After hearing the prompt, you define your approach, determine what data you need, and guide the conversation forward. Think of it like a choose-your-own-adventure, where you decide which path to explore.

• Interviewer-led cases (McKinsey) – The interviewer controls the direction, asking a series of discrete questions that you answer one by one. The prompts will take you through different aspects of the case—often pivoting to a new mini-scenario with each question.

Now, here’s the part that most people misunderstand about McKinsey-style cases: they are not just a series of guided prompts. Every single question is its own mini-case—meaning you still need to go through all three fundamental case steps:

1. Framework (How do we approach this?)

2. Data Analysis (What do we know already? What does the data say?)

3. Recommendation (What do we do with this insight?)

Interviewer-led cases test for the same thing as interviewee-led cases: can you structure your thinking, synthesize insights, and drive towards a recommendation?

In fact, they’re more difficult in that you don’t get a second chance to go back and pick up on something you didn’t fully explore. Once you move on from a question, that’s done, case closed. When you’re in control you can look down at your work and say, oh right, there’s this other piece I had wanted to look at that we haven’t fully unpacked. When your (McKinsey) interviewer is driving the case, just squint at it in the rearview.

That said, there isn’t anything exclusive to the interviewer-led style that you can’t learn and refine through practising interviewee-led cases.

“Interviewee-Led” Practice is All You Need

There are two simple reasons why you should only focus on interviewee-led cases in your prep.

1. It’s What You’ll Find in MBA Case Books Anyway

Nearly every case you’ll practice from an MBA case book is interviewee-led. If you’re practicing with peers, you’ll get (and give) interviewee-led cases. If you’re casing with a coach, it’s probably interviewee-led.

2. Case Skills are Case Skills are Case Skills

Regardless of who’s “leading” this case interview, you shine as a candidate when you can identify the “so what.”

Great case interview candidates don’t just answer the question in front of them—they always go one step further. They think:

• What does this insight actually mean for the client?

• How does this impact the bigger picture?

• What else should we explore before making a recommendation?

Whether it’s an interviewee-led or interviewer-led case, you want to get through all the core steps and build up to this moment where you point out the impact, why it matters, the “so what.” A good candidate answers the immediate question. A great candidate anticipates the next one. That’s what makes you a stand-out candidate for any firm. 

But if you really want to know…

True McKinsey cases pivot more than most interviewee-led cases.

For example, McKinsey cases usually have a long set-up. Your interviewer will give you lots of context and information (most of which will turn out to be irrelevant, but you won’t be able to tell just yet so note everything down). They’ll paint you a whole picture so you understand the full scenario. Let’s say your case is about a food truck client, and you learn about their existing business.

Question 1, they are thinking about expansion and where they should open next. After you go through the motions of explaining all the factors you’d consider as part of a comprehensive “where next” decision, you get Question 2: instead of opening a new location, they’re considering launching an ice cream bike fleet—should they do it?

Same client, same general case theme, but the question resets each time. This means you have to adapt quickly, reframe your thinking, and apply the three-step case structure all over again. (You usually don’t have to set up a full structure again, but there may be moments when, on your third or fourth question, it may make sense to sketch out a whole new structure because you’ve been asked something that is far away enough from the original framework you drew up that it wouldn’t apply to the new scenario. Don’t be afraid to take a moment and come up with a whole new “3 key factors” or “4 main elements” structure to organize your thinking!)

Does this mean you need to hunt down “McKinsey-style” cases to practice? No! Because if you’re already training yourself to always drive towards deeper insights and adapt your approach when new information is introduced, you’re already preparing for these pivots.

Mastering interviewee-led cases will make you a stronger candidate in both styles. The heart of the case interview, verbal or written, no matter who’s leading, remains the same: structured thinking, adaptability, and always pushing for the “so what.”

Now go practice.