麦肯锡案例分析题及答案
麦肯斯实达案例分析-
果设计激励机制，鼓励员工更加有效的工作，变革 将更加有效地进行下去
13
LOGO
14
职能层面tips
12
4 如果HR参与变革，实达的方案 成效又如何？
变革前
&减少变革带来的恐慌，提高员工对变革的认识程度 &迅速让产品经理上位 &提前汇报可能出现的人力资源问题，让高层对未来
人力资源有一定的认识和预判
变革中
＆避免“千人大换岗”带来的产能的下降 ＆减轻员工对变革的抵触 ＆增加彼此之间的信任，减少变革的阻力，促进变革
ቤተ መጻሕፍቲ ባይዱ
观念思维方式的 变革
•HR在战略制定中为高层提供人力资 源信息，帮助企业制定战略制定出与 企业战略相匹配的人力资源计划
组织结构和工作 程序的变革
业绩管理及激励 机制变革
•岗位调整、工作分析 •员工招聘、员工培训
•绩效考核 •薪酬及激励制度
7
3实达公司变革为什么失败？
中国的企业文化
没有跟进实施
麦肯锡
选聘、培训 员工
协助麦肯锡 制定激励
机制
制定符合实达公 司的激励机制。 包括绩效的重新 评定和薪酬的重 新设计。并形成 绩效和薪酬的预 期愿景。
帮助企业整合人力 资源，包括员工的 晋升、降至、平级
调动等。
整合人 力资源
职能方面
重设岗位 说明书
在充分理解新的管 理体系、组织结构 体系下重新设计符 合各个岗位的工作 说明书。
❖ 企业高层变革的决心受到重创，整体难以发展 下去，所以退回了老路。
4
实达面临哪些变革？这些变革那些关系到HR？
-产品导向VS市场导向 - 权利VS程序 - 人本思想
透视麦肯锡在华的战略错误现象-王府井百货案例分析与点评
透视(tòushì)麦肯锡在华的战略错误现象——王府井百货(bǎihuò)案例分析与点评关于麦肯锡，新闻界最常见的观点就是，不是麦肯锡的思想方法不好，而是它提出的方案和建议，在中国企业中，没有办法执行。
尽管另外一些专家和学者也从另一个角度,提出作为管理咨询公司，你提出的方案，客户无法执行，这难道是客户的错误？然而，从来没有人分析与研究麦肯锡在几个著名中国企业咨询中所提出的战略建议的科学性，麦肯锡自己(zìjǐ)也没有对这些过去的案例进行反思分析。
作为一个从事战略与营销的学者，我认为，新闻界仅对麦肯锡一两次咨询活动结果进行评价，是不够的，中国企业、学界应该从战略管理与营销管理的学术角度来，分析麦肯锡在一些案例中对客户提出的关于管理与战略的建议，像围棋比赛复盘一样，分析这些建议的正确与否，从理论上总结，这些建议与实践结果的差异，对于理论体系的价值与作用。
从这个角度出发，本人根据收集的有限资料，分析和研究麦肯锡的几个案例中提出的战略建议，并就其不足，进行了自己的分析，并将其贡献给同行。
本文今天从战略角度重点分析的是麦肯锡在王府井案例中的一些建议。
分析(fēnxī)研究结果，我们有三个结论：首先，麦肯锡的战略错误，并不像一般人的想象那样，仅仅是一个(yīɡè)中国人有没有执行能力的问题，而是战略建议本身有严重的问题；其次，在王府井案例中，麦肯锡没有分析出中国百货业面临分业经营与其它业态的竞争，因此，没有预先提出防范性的建议；其三，王府井没有分析出，百货连锁业作为一种业态，在全球生存发展的核心竞争能力问题，有明显的误导影响。
对比王府井与国美电器：1998到2002年据历史资料显示，王府井在1998年、1999年均是负增长，其中，王府井在1999年的增长幅度-28.2%，2000年之后，王府井才开始恢复元气，实现其持续增长的目标。
这个我们不能不说麦肯锡的战略方案存在重大问题，有人可能会说这是中国人执行力的问题，但实际情况呢？我们来回忆一下中国零售业在1998年的市场整体增长情况，1998年中国的零售业是什么样子？回顾1998年中国的零售商业，总结出主要的特点有三：--兼并重组成为业界主打潮流--国际连锁企业在中国攻城略地--专业连锁应时而出业绩非凡第一、兼并连锁。
麦肯锡兵败实达案例分析
麦肯锡兵败实达关于实达连年亏损被ST 与两年前麦肯锡兵败实达的事件屡见报端，随着麦肯锡中国区副总裁吴亦斌和实达副总裁贾红兵在中央电视台谈话节目中同台对峙，人们的兴趣更被掀至高峰，非常可惜的是，节目中两人对两年前的合作及这次合作引发的后果都是点到即止。
麦肯席如何兵败实达？让我们来看看这件事情的前前后后。
实达请兵麦肯锡1998年实达集团与麦肯锡签署协议，请麦肯锡对实达现有营销及销售体系作出评价，并针对集团的硬件产业设计一个面向二十一世纪、向国际化公司运行机制靠拢的市场营销及销售组织体系。
这种花费重金援请国际“外脑”进行企业咨询的做法在当时国内IT 界还是首次。
据了解，这次咨询的题目是《建立高绩效的市场营销及销售组织体系》，实际整个事情早有较长的来源。
实达向来比较重视三个方向的事情，一是技术，即在终端产品上形成自己的核心技术；二是销售策略上，重视销售，面对市场；三是以人为本，重视人力资源的管理。
实达认为这三方面正是知识经济条件下IT 企业必须完成的三件事.从1996 年起的两年半时间，实达一直在探索自身销售体系的出路。
实达自成立后一直在考虑建立营销中心，在1996、1997 年甚至都已挂起营销中心的牌子，但在当时还没有从市场概念来做这件事情。
因为从创建到1998 年很长一段时间以来，实达的观念是做市场太虚，做销售拿单子比较实在，因此虽然建立起营销中心，也是光说不练、始终没有动作起来的一个空架子。
1997 年底实达集团建立了子分公司平台，是由于在现实中发现只要出一个产品就多出一个公司来，而想把分公司的行政资源、管理资源和财务资源整合起来，面对所有产品，但这一平台仍没有直接参予经营，产品还是分公司各做各的。
98年6 月实达又提出了一个区域子公司运作方案，想通过区域考核来调动人员，让他们从经济角度整合所有产品来一起销售。
因此，可以说从96年到98年两年多的时间里，实达一直在探索自己的销售体系，但一直没走出来。
2023年麦肯锡招聘面试案例分析样题和答案英文
McKiney On line case studyTo step through this case example, we will give you some information, ask a question, and then, when you are ready, give you a sample answer. We hope that the exercise will give you a sense of the flow of a case interview. (Please note, you can stop this exercise and pick up where you left off later. Your cookies must be on to use this feature).In this exercise, you will answer a series of questions as the case unfolds. We provide our recommended answers after each question, with which you can compare your own answers. We want to emphasize that most questions in a case study do not have a single right answer. In a live case interview, we are more interested in your explanation of how you arrived at your answer, not just the answer itself. An interviewer can always assess different but equally valid ways of approaching an issue, and then bring you back to the particular line of inquiry that he or she wants to pursue.You should also keep in mind that in a live case, there will be far more interaction with the interviewer than this exercise allows. For example, you will have the opportunity to ask clarifying questions.Finally, a live case interview would typically be completed in 30 - 45 minutes, depending on how the case evolves. In this on-line exercise, there is no time limit.There are eight questions in this on-line case study. This case study is designed to roughly simulate one during your interview, so you will not be able to skip ahead to the next question until you have answered the one you are on. You can refresh your memory of previous answers by clicking the highlighted Q&A links to the left. To print the answer, click on the print icon that appears in the TOP RIGHT corner. At the end, you can print the entire on-line case study at once.The caseQuestion 1Client Goal: Double the number of recruits while maintaining their quality with minimal increase in resources expendedOur client recruits graduating college seniors for entry-level positions in locations around the world. It currently hires and places 500 graduates per year but would like to triple in size over the next ten years while maintaining quality. Assumethat the increase must all come from hiring graduating seniors. (In an actual case, you may not be given this and other assumptions unless you ask.)The client's current recruiting budget is $2 million annually, and while it is in a strong financial position, it would like to spend as few additional resources as possible on recruiting. McKinsey is advising the client on what steps it will need to take in order to meet its growth targets, while staying within its budget constraints.Q1: What levers does the organization have at its disposal to achieve its growth goal?A: Some possible levers are given below. It's terrific if you identified several of these and perhaps some others.•Attract more applicants at the same cost•Review the list of campuses targeted (e.g., optimize resourceallocation across schools). The review may result in adding certainhigher potential campuses and eliminating other ones that appearto have more limited potential.•Review recruiting approach at each campus (e.g., optimize cost-effectiveness of messages and approaches at each school).•Extend offers to a higher percentage of applicants while maintaining quality (e.g., reduce the number of people who are turned down whowould have performed equally well in the job)•Improve acceptance rates among offerees (e.g., better communicate the benefits of the job relative to alternatives or improve the attractiveness of the job relative to alternatives)Question 2For the remainder of the discussion we'd like to focus on the two specific levers involving attracting more applicants at the same cost.•Review the list of campuses targeted (e.g., optimize resource allocation across schools). The review may result in adding certain higher potentialcampuses and eliminating other ones that appear to have more limitedpotential.•Review recruiting approach at each campus (e.g., optimize cost-effectiveness of messages and approaches at each school).Please note that if you identified different but equally valid levers, the interviewerwould be able to assess them. But for the purpose of this case study, we are going to focus on these two levers.Q2: How would you initially approach determining whether the client can increase hiring by adjusting the list of campuses targeted? What sort of analysis would you want to conduct and why?A: You might take the following approach, where we've outlined two avenues of analysis:•Estimate the hiring potential across schools•Analyze the number of hires by school over the last several years•Develop a comprehensive list of schools that meet ourrequirements and a minimum set of standards for recruits •Survey seniors at these schools to determine interest in an entry-level position with the client•Consider the size of the graduating class at each school, determine how that class might be segmented (e.g., each class could besegmented by discipline or segmented based on career interests inresponse to the survey), then calculate the size of each segment •Estimate the optimal cost-per-hire across schools•Compare the current cost-per hire across schools•Identify opportunities to decrease the cost-per-hire at each school Helpful TipYou may have a slightly different list. Whatever your approach, we love to see candidates come at a problem in more than one way, but still address the issue as directly and practically as possible. In giving the answer, it's useful if you are clear about how the results of the analysis would help to answer the original question posed.Question 3Twenty-five percent of the annual recruiting budget is spent on candidates (i.e., attracting, assessing, and getting them to accept). Twenty percent of hires are categorized as "most expensive" and have an average cost-per-hire of $2,000.Q3: What is the average cost-per-hire of all other candidates? Remember that the client hires 500 students per year and its annual recruiting budget is $2 million (information that we hope you noted earlier).A: The answer is $750 per hire (or less than half the cost-per-hire of the "most expensive" candidates).Amount spent on the less expensive candidates:25% of $2 million budget = $500,000 spent on candidates20% of 500 student = 100 students categorized as "most expensive"100 x $2,000 cost-per-hire = $200,000 spent on "most expensive" hires$500,000 recruiting budget - $200,000 = $300,000 remaining for all other hires The number of less expensive candidates:500 hires - 100 = 400 "other hires"Cost-per-hire of the less expensive candidates:$300,000/400 =$750 per hireHelpful TipWhile you may find that doing a straightforward math problem in the context of an interview is a bit tougher, you can see that it is just a matter of breaking the problem down. We are looking for both your ability to set the analysis up properly and then to do the math in real time.Question4Q: In order to decide whether to reduce costs at the least efficient schools (i.e., those with an average cost per hire of $2,000), what else would you want to know?A: Some of the possible answers are given below.Basic questions:•What are the components of costs at these schools (why is it so expensive to recruit there)?•What opportunities exist to reduce costs?•How much cost savings would result from implementing each of the opportunities?•What consequences would implementing each of these opportunities have on recruiting at the least efficient schools?Questions demonstrating further insight:•Why is the cost lower at more efficient schools, and are there best practices in resource management that can be applied to the least efficient schools?•If we reduce costs at the least efficient schools, what will we do with the cost savings (i.e., what would be the benefit of spending the moneyelsewhere vs. where it is currently being spent)?Helpful TipWe would not expect anyone to come up with all of these answers, but we hope some of your answers head in the same direction as ours. Yours may bring some additional insights. In either case, be sure that you can clearly explain how your question will bring you closer to the right decision.Question 5The McKinsey team conducts some analysis that indicates that increasing spending on blanket advertising (e.g., advertisements/flyers on campus) does not yield any significant increase in hires.Q5: Given that increased blanket advertising spending seems to be relatively ineffective, and the client doesn't want to increase overall costs, what might be some other ideas for increasing the candidate pool on a specific campus?A: We are looking for at least a couple of answers like the ones given below: •Improve/enhance recruiting messages (e.g., understand target candidate group, refocus message on this group, understand competitive dynamic on campus)•Utilize referrals (e.g., faculty, alumni)•Come up with creative ways to target specific departments/clubs of the school•Rethink advertising spending - while increasing blanket ad spending doesn't seem to work, advertising might still be the most efficient andeffective way to increase the number of candidates if it is deployed in amore systematic, targeted wayHelpful TipThis question is a good one for demonstrating creativity because there's a long list of possible ideas. Additional insights into how a given idea would be approached and how much it would cost are helpful.Question 6For simplicity's sake, let's say we've conducted market research and found that there are two types of people on each campus, A and B. Historically, our client has also used two types of recruiting messages in its advertising. The first, called "See the World," gets one percent of type A students to apply, but three percent of type B students. The second, called "Pathway to Leadership," gets five percent of Type A students to apply, but only two percent of type B students.The chart below lists the breakdown of types A and B students at some of our major campuses, and the message our client is using on campus.Q6: Assuming there's no difference between the costs of each message, what can you tell me from this information?A: According to these numbers, the client should use the "Pathway to Leadership" message across all four universities. The "See the World" message is preferable only if more than 80% of the students at a given university are of type B.Helpful TipAn even more insightful response would mention that the ultimate answer depends on the cost of each message, whether the cost increases depending on the number of students at the campus, and how interested we are in students of Type A vs. Type B (e.g., will one type be more likely than the other to get an offer and to be successful on the job). One could imagine using both messages onsome campuses if the additional cost were justified by the resulting increase in hires.Question7University 4 graduates 1,000 seniors each year.Q7: How many new candidates might be generated by changing the recruiting message at University 4 to Pathway to Leadership?A: The answer is 20 candidates (i.e., an increase of over 100%).Number of each type of student at University 4:1,000 seniors x 60% = 600 Type A students1,000 seniors x 40% = 400 Type B studentsCandidates attracted be See the World message:(1% x 600) + (3% x 400) = 18 candidatesCandidates attracted by Pathway to Leadership message:(5% x 600) + (2% x 400) = 38 candidatesIncrease in candidates resulting from change in message:38 - 18 = 20 more candidates (an increase of over 100%)Question8Q8: What sort of next steps should we tell our client we'd like to take based on what we have discussed today?A: The ability to come to a logical, defensible synthesis based on the information available at any point in an engagement is critical to the work we do. Even though we'd consider ourselves to be very early in the overall project at this point in the case, we do want to be able to share our current perspective. The ideal answer would include the following points:FINDINGS•There appears to be an opportunity to significantly increase total applicants of the same quality that we are getting today at the same orreduced cost:•Increasing blanket advertising is ineffective and costly, butchanging the advertising message on some campuses couldincrease applicants significantly without increasing costs. At one ofthe campuses we've looked at, University 4, the number ofapplicants would go up more than 100 percent•The cost-per-hire varies dramatically from school to school. This suggests that there may be opportunities to reduce costs in certainplaces or reallocate resources more efficientlyNEXT STEPS•We plan to explore further ideas for increasing quality applications by changing the mix of schools, beginning with a more detailed review of the opportunities to reduce costs at certain schools•After looking at levers to increase total applicants, we will be analyzing opportunities to improve the offer rate (i.e., ensure we're not turningdown quality applicants) and to increase the acceptance rate•We will examine additional methods for attracting more applications from our current campuses (e.g., referrals, clubs) in addition to assessing the impact of improved messaging on campus。
麦肯锡问题分析与解决的方法
• 指出分析资 料可能出处
•说明负责 搜集资料或 分析工作的 人
最终产品
• 说明诊断後 的结果
行动
• 确定每个议题都 • 列举假设可用
尽量具体明确
–前线想法
• 必要时进一步细 –自我想法
分
–同事间想法
• 小组组员之间讨
论
–琢磨假设
–重新调整分析
议题的先後顺
序
• 决定决策过程 • 决定分析深度
–简单案例 –复杂的说明
延长开馆时间 能否有重要的 改善机会？
通过更好地 选择书籍/刊 物能否改善 业绩？
图书馆书刊材料的收集工作有改变吗 ？ 图书馆员工有改变吗？ 图书馆的布置改变了吗？ 图书馆的借阅程序有改变吗？
晚上时间延长？ 周末时间延长？ 周末提早开馆？
准备更多的当代小说？ 不同的专题？ 更多的精装而非平装书？
P-24
所以他们必须支持改革
2.影响决策者的主要因素
5.主要衡量标准
图书馆馆长
•12个月後需再由市长续聘并由理事会批准 •已任职7年
市长
•将在9个月后重新选举，并面临着需增加赋税但
没有提供足够服务的压力
•不超出预算 •客户满意度调查结果有所改善 •发给市长、报纸或图书馆长的表扬信
3.解决问题的时间安排
•必须在6个月内进行改善，所以必须在2月内
3.解决问题的时间
•多快需要找出解答？
6.所需的准确度
•需要何种准确度？
P-17
9、麦肯锡解决问题的七个步骤
第一步-陈述问题
问题背景情况的实例-公共图书馆
1.决策者
•图书馆馆长 •理事会 •市长
4.成功的标准
•改革必须同图书馆的使命一致 •改革计划必须可在6个月内实施 •改善成果必须在6个月内可以衡量并有所显现 •因为图书馆的工作人员是主要的改革实施者，
麦肯锡咨询面试题目(3篇)
第1篇一、背景随着互联网、大数据、人工智能等新技术的快速发展，企业数字化转型已成为必然趋势。
某大型企业为了提高市场竞争力，降低成本，提升效率，决定启动数字化转型项目。
项目涉及企业内部业务流程、组织架构、信息技术等多个方面，旨在实现业务流程的优化、组织架构的调整以及信息技术的升级。
二、面试题目1. 针对该企业的数字化转型项目，请从以下四个方面进行分析：（1）业务流程：分析现有业务流程中存在的问题，提出优化方案。
（2）组织架构：分析现有组织架构的不足，提出调整建议。
（3）信息技术：分析现有信息技术的局限性，提出升级方案。
（4）风险管理：分析数字化转型过程中可能面临的风险，提出应对措施。
2. 针对上述分析，请提出以下问题的解决方案：（1）如何确保数字化转型项目顺利实施？（2）如何评估数字化转型项目的成效？（3）如何确保项目团队的高效协作？（4）如何降低数字化转型项目的成本？3. 请根据以下情景，设计一套针对该企业的数字化转型培训计划：情景：企业内部员工对数字化转型缺乏认识，对新技术应用存在抵触情绪。
培训计划应包括以下内容：（1）培训目标：使员工了解数字化转型的重要性，掌握新技术应用的基本技能。
（2）培训对象：企业全体员工，特别是业务流程、组织架构、信息技术等方面的相关人员。
（3）培训内容：数字化转型背景、重要性、实施策略、新技术应用、案例分析等。
（4）培训方式：线上线下相结合，包括讲座、研讨会、实操演练等。
（5）培训时间：分阶段进行，确保员工有足够的时间学习和实践。
4. 针对该企业的数字化转型项目，请从以下角度提出创新性建议：（1）业务模式创新：结合新技术，探索新的业务模式。
（2）管理创新：优化管理模式，提高管理效率。
（3）组织创新：调整组织架构，提升组织灵活性。
（4）技术创新：引进新技术，提升企业核心竞争力。
三、面试要求1. 分析问题：要求考生具备敏锐的洞察力，能够从多个角度分析问题，找出问题的本质。
麦肯锡案例分析题及答案
Client Goal: Should Great Burger acquire Heavenly Donuts as part of its growth strategy？Our client is Great Burger （GB) a fast food chain that competes head–to-head with McDonald's, Wendy's, Burger King, KFC, etc。
Description of Great BurgerGB is the fourth largest fast food chain worldwide, measured by the number of stores in operation。
As most of its competitors do，GB offers food and "combos” for the three largest meal occasions: breakfast，lunch, and dinner。
Even though GB owns some of its stores, it operates under the franchising business model with 85 percent of its stores owned by franchisees (individuals own and manage stores，pay franchise fee to GB，but major business decisions (e.g。
，menu，look of store) controlled by GB)。
McKinsey studyAs part of its growth strategy GB has analyzed some potential acquisition targets including Heavenly Donuts （HD），a growing doughnut producer with both a U。
麦肯锡结构化战略思维 案例应用解析
麦肯锡结构化战略思维案例应用解析
麦肯锡结构化战略思维是一种解决问题的框架，其核心在于将复杂的问题进行分解，使其变得更容易理解和解决。
以下是这种思维模式在案例中的应用解析：
案例：某零售企业希望提升销售额
1. 明确问题：首先，要明确问题的本质。
这里的主题是提升销售额，关键问题是找到提升销售额的方法。
2. 分析问题：其次，利用结构化战略思维对问题进行分析。
可以从产品、价格、促销、地点等方面进行分析，找出可能影响销售额的因素。
3. 提出假设：基于分析，提出可能的解决方案。
例如，增加产品种类、调整价格、举办促销活动、改变店铺位置等。
4. 实施方案：根据提出的假设，制定实施计划并执行。
例如，进行A/B测
试以确定最佳的促销策略。
5. 评估结果：最后，评估实施的方案是否有效，是否真正提升了销售额。
如果方案有效，则可以继续执行；如果无效，则需要进行调整。
在这个案例中，麦肯锡结构化战略思维的应用使得提升销售额的问题得以分解和解决。
首先明确问题，然后分析问题，提出可能的解决方案，实施方案，
最后评估结果。
这样的流程使得复杂的问题变得更容易解决，提高了解决问题的效率和质量。
以上内容仅供参考，更多麦肯锡案例分析可以咨询管理咨询专业人士了解。
麦肯锡咨询公司经典案例分析
一.Case Interview1．类型介绍(1) 什么是Case Interview?一般来讲，Case Interview要紧针对咨询公司面试而言。
也有一些公司如Dell二面会用一些小case来考察面试者的应变能力、考虑问题的全面性以及逻辑分析能力。
咨询公司的Case Interview能够分成两个部分，一开始先是Warm-up。
在这一部分，你可能需要自我介绍，然后大致回答一下面试官针对简历以及个人选择提出的一些问题。
接下来才是真正的Case Interview。
简而言之，Case Interview确实是现场对一个商业问题进行分析的面试。
然而和大多数其他面试不同，这是一个互动的过程。
你的面试官会给你提出一个Business Issue，同时会让你给出分析和意见。
而你的任务是向面试官有逻辑的提出一些问题以使得你能够对那个Business Issue有更全面，更细致的了解，同时通过系统的分析最后给出建议。
一般而言，Case Interview是没有绝对正确的答案的。
面试官看重的不是答案，而是从面试过程当中你表现出来的分析能力和制造力。
关于大学毕业，没有工作经验的学生来讲，大多数情况下Case可不能专门难，也可不能需要你对那个行业有系统的了解。
Case Interview一般是一对一的，一轮会有两个Case Interview，由两个不同的面试官来负责，每个Interview持续45分钟，包括10-15分钟的warm-up以及一些Behavior questions，剩下的30分钟确实是讨论Case。
10-15分钟的Warm-up一般用英文，Case可能是英文，也有可能是中文，不同的公司以及不同的面试官对语言是有不同的偏好的。
(2) 什么缘故使用Case Interview?由于咨询师在工作上的许多时刻差不多上在和客户以及同事进行相互的沟通，同时咨询工作本身的特点要求咨询师必须具备一系列的特质才能够成功。
麦肯锡练习题
麦肯锡练习题一、逻辑推理题1. 若A是正确的，B是错误的，那么C是正确的还是错误的？a) 有些怕水的动物是猫b) 有些猫不怕水c) 所有怕水的动物都是猫d) 没有不怕水的猫a) 小明不喜欢打篮球b) 小明喜欢打篮球，但不喜欢运动c) 小明不喜欢运动d) 小明喜欢运动二、数据分析题2019年销售额：1000万2020年销售额：1200万2021年销售额：1500万25, 28, 30, 25, 28, 35, 40, 30, 25, 283. 某商品的成本价为100元，售价为150元，销售过程中产生了20元的物流费用。
请计算该商品的利润率。
三、案例分析题1. 某企业面临市场份额下滑的问题，请你分析可能的原因，并提出相应的解决措施。
2. 某公司计划推出一款新产品，请你为其制定一份市场推广方案。
甲公司：产品创新能力强，但生产成本较高乙公司：生产成本较低，但产品创新不足四、创新思维题1. 请提出一种提高公共交通出行效率的方法。
2. 请设计一款面向老年人的智能产品，并说明其功能特点。
3. 请为一家餐厅制定一项吸引顾客的营销活动。
五、团队协作题1. 若你在项目中遇到团队成员之间产生分歧，你会如何协调解决？2. 请举例说明你在团队合作中发挥领导力的经历。
3. 当项目进度紧张时，你会如何合理分配团队成员的工作任务？六、沟通能力题1. 请用简洁明了的语言描述一下你的上一个项目经历。
2. 当你需要向领导汇报一项重要工作时，你会如何准备？3. 请举例说明你在工作中如何处理与同事之间的沟通问题。
七、问题解决题1. 如果你负责的项目预算突然削减了20%，你会如何调整计划以确保项目目标的实现？2. 面对客户投诉产品质量问题，你会采取哪些步骤来解决问题并提高客户满意度？3. 当公司面临原材料价格上涨的挑战时，你有哪些策略来降低成本？八、战略规划题1. 请为一家初创企业制定一个三年发展计划。
2. 针对当前市场趋势，你认为公司应该采取哪些战略来保持竞争力？3. 请分析一个行业内的潜在机会和威胁，并制定相应的应对策略。
麦肯锡精英管理咨询案例分析
麦肯锡精英管理咨询案例分析作为世界知名咨询公司，麦肯锡（McKinsey）的咨询服务一直备受欢迎。
近期，麦肯锡在政府领域实施的一项管理咨询项目备受关注。
针对这个案例，本篇文章将进行分析和解读，探究麦肯锡如何解决这个案例并实现成功。
案例背景某城市政府希望全面改善市场环境，支持当地经济发展，麦肯锡精英管理咨询公司便受邀为该城市制定具体的发展战略。
问题分析针对市场环境的问题，麦肯锡进行了深入分析。
首先，团队发现当地存在明显的市场垄断现象，数个大型企业垄断了市场份额。
其次，由于存在高昂的参与成本和市场准入难度大等问题，新进入的企业难以生存。
此外，市场存在信息不对称的问题，导致消费者无法获取到真实的市场信息。
最后，地方政府对市场管理不力，监管不严，导致违法违规行为时有发生。
解决方案针对这些问题，麦肯锡给出了它们的建议。
首先，应该引入竞争政策，加强市场监管，促进市场竞争，降低市场垄断企业的市场份额。
其次，打破市场准入壁垒，促进新企业的生存发展。
第三，加强信息透明度，提高市场的信息公开度。
最后，政府应建立健全的监管体系，加强日常巡查和管理。
实施效果麦肯锡的这些建议被市政府所采纳。
在政府的支持下，六个月后，市场出现了良好的变化。
新企业得以充分展示其实力，市场份额得到了逐步扩大。
市场上的价格也得到了长足的改善，市场交易在更加透明的基础下进行。
市场竞争性增强，从而提高行业效率。
在此基础上，政府还对市场的监管和管理进行了优化和加强，遏制了违规违法行为的发生。
结论麦肯锡精英管理咨询公司的案例分析表明，对于政府或者企业而言，在面临市场问题时，通过了解市场结构及市场机理等方面的知识，进行深入的剖析和分析，制定相应的市场调整方案是解决市场问题的关键。
对于政府而言，要加紧市场管理和监管，畅通信息透明渠道。
对于企业而言，要注重内部管理和品牌建设，增强自身实力，同时还要注重符合政策和规定的合规经营。
麦肯锡案例面试题
麦肯锡案例面试题：Magna Health案例分析(英文，有答案)面试, 案例分析Practice CasesMagna HealthIntroductionTo step through this case example, we will give you some information, ask a question, and then, when you are ready, give you a sample answer. We hope that the exercise will give you a sense of the flow of a case interview. (Please note, you can stop this exercise and pick up where you left off later. Your cookies must be on to use this feature).In this exercise, you will answer a series of questions as the case unfolds. We provide our recommended answers after each question, with which you can compare your own answers. We want to emphasize that most questions in a case study do not have a single right answer. In a live case interview, we are more interested in your explanation of how you arrived at your answer, not just the answer itself. An interviewer can always assess different but equally valid ways of approaching an issue, and then bring you back to the particular line of inquiry that he or she wants to pursue.You should also keep in mind that in a live case, there will be far more interaction with the interviewer than this exercise allows. For example, you will have the opportunity to ask clarifying questions.Finally, a live case interview would typically be completed in 30 - 45 minutes, depending on how the case evolves. In this on-line exercise, there is no time limit.There are ten questions in this on-line case study. This case study is designed to roughly simulate one during your interview, so you will not be able to skip ahead to the next question until you have answered the one you are on. You can refresh your memory of previous answers by clicking the highlighted Q&A links to the left. To print the answer, click on the print icon that appears in the TOP RIGHT corner. At the end, you can print the entire on-line case study at once.Start Case Study====================================================================== =======================================Client Goal: To determine how to improve its financial situation.Our client is Magna Health, a health care company in the Midwest. It both insures patients and provides health care services. Employers pay a fixed premium to Magna for each of their employees in return for which Magna covers all necessary health services of the employee(ranging from physician care and medications to hospitalization).Magna currently has 300,000 patients enrolled in its plan. It has 300 salaried physician employees who provide a broad range of services to patients in six centers. These physicians represent a wide range of specialty areas, but not all areas. When a patient needs medical treatment in a specialty area not covered by a Magna physician, they are referred outside of the Magna network for care, and Magna pays all referral costs on a fee-for-service basis. Magna does not own any hospitals itself, instead contracting services from several local hospitals.Magna's CEO has retained McKinsey to help determine what is causing the declining profitability and how Magna might fix it.QUESTION 1What key areas would you want to explore in order to understand Magna's decline in profitability? ANSWER 1Some possible areas are given below. Great job if you identified several of these and perhaps some others.Magna's revenuesPrice paid by employer for employee health coverage.Number of employees covered by Magna.Magna's costs (or fixed and variable costs)Magna's main cost components consist of administrative (non-medical) and medical costs (e.g., hospital, drugs, outpatient care)Outpatient costs can be split into internal physician costs versus external referral costsMagna's patient base demographics/overall risk pro may affect medical costs====================================================================== =======================================QUESTION 2The team discovers that the demographics of Magna's subscribers have changed significantly in the past 5 years, from majority industrial workers/laborers to majority office employees. Knowing this, are there any specific areas you would investigate first?ANSWER 2We are looking for a few responses, similar to the ones below:Claim costs, as the change in the subscriber base will change the pro diseases (e.g., more heart disease/stress and less work related injury)External referral costs, due to the change in the disease pro which they have in-house competency =============================================================================================================QUESTION 3After reviewing the basics of Magna's business, your team believes that one of the root causes of Magna's financial problems is how it manages medical costs, particularly the cost of referrals to specialists outside of its physician network. Your team has gathered the following information on Magna and its primary competitor, Sunshine HMO:Number of patientsAverage cost of referral(per member per month)Magna Health300,000$20Sunshine HMO500,000$15What are the most likely reasons that the average cost of referral at Magna is higher than at Sunshine? (At this point you should feel free to offer hypotheses, and you could ask your interviewer questions to clarify the information)ANSWER 3Although there are a number of possible responses, you might have the following suggestions:Referral pricing: Magna might be paying more than Sunshine for specialist services (e.g., its outside contracts with oncologists might be at higher rates than Sunshine's contracts).Number of referrals: Magna's physicians might have different practice patterns than Sunshine physicians, i.e., they may be less comfortable treating heart disease patients or have different training/protocols.Mix of specialties: Magna's mix of specialties that requires referrals (cardiology and neurosurgery) are probably more expensive specialties (than cardiology and psychiatry, Sunshine's referral specialties).Mix of patients: Magna has sicker or older (>65) patients (individuals over 65 are more likely to need medical care in the specialty areas outside of Magna's network, particularly cardiology).====================================================================== =======================================QUESTION 4What analyses would you do if the things you suggest were contributing to this problem? ANSWER 4In giving the answer, it's useful if you are clear about how the analysis you are proposing would help to answer the question posed.You might take the following approach, where we’ve outlined different areas of analysis:Referral pricing:Gain data on prices currently being paid by Magna for a sample of common specialtiesGain similar data for a competitor if possible for an industry average (perhaps through interviews with non-Magna specialists)Number of referrals:Interview Magna physicians and non-Magna physicians to see if any obvious behavioral differences existConsult industry publications on this issueMix of specialties:Check number of referrals by specialty for Magna and estimate similar for SunshineInterviews with external specialties used by Sunshine may help again hereMix of patients:Compare demographic data for Magna and Sunshine: should be easy to obtain from Magna; a scan of the employee schemes covered by Sunshine should give a good general picture of their demographic profileSee if Magna's referral cost has increased in line with the change in demographics of the subscribers====================================================================== =======================================QUESTION 5Magna's CEO has a hypothesis that Magna is paying too much in cardiology referral costs for its patient population. He asks the McKinsey team to look at Magna's cardiac patient population more closely and tell him how many referrals he should expect on an annual basis. Assume the following:Magna has 300,000 patients in any one year20 percent of its patients are age 65 or olderIn the U.S., patients with serious heart disease visit specialists (cardiologists) on average of five times per yearYou should always feel free to ask your interviewer additional questions to help you with your response. In this case, you should recognize the need to know the prevalence rate of serious heart disease to complete this calculation. Once asked, your interviewer would provide you with the following information:The prevalence rate of serious heart disease in the 65+ population is 30 percentThe prevalence rate of serious heart disease in the under age 65 population is 10 percentANSWER 5While you may find that doing straightforward math problems in the context of an interview is a bit tougher, you can see that it is just a matter of breaking the problem down. We are looking for both your ability to set the analysis up properly and then to do the math in real time.Based on the correct calculations, your response should be as follows: Magna should expect210,000 cardiac referrals annually based on its patient population. You should have approached the calculations as follows to arrive at that answer:300,000 total patients20 percent x 300,000 = 60,000 patients age 65+18,000 x 5 = 90,000 referrals per year240,000 Magna patients under the age of 65240,000 patients x 10 percent = 24,000 patients under age 65 with serious heart disease and 24,000 x 5 visits peryear = 120,000 visits per year total90,000 + 120,000 visits per year = 210,000 total Magna patient external cardiology visits====================================================================== =======================================QUESTION 6When the team tells Magna's CEO that based on Magna's patient population he should expect about 210,000 cardiology referrals a year he exclaims, "We currently pay for 300,000 annual cardiology referrals for our patient population!"Why might Magna's annual cardiology referrals be significantly higher than U.S. averages?What would you do to try to verify if any of these were a key cause of this problem?ANSWER 6We would not expect you to come up with all of these answers, but we hope some of your answers head in the same direction as ours. Yours may bring some additional insights. In either case, be sure that you can clearly explain how your reasons will bring you closer to why the referrals might be higher.There are a number of answers to these questions, and you are on the right track if your responses included some of the ones below:The prevalence rate of heart disease in Magna's patient population is higher than average. To see if this was a cause of the problem, McKinsey should audit the internal data on heart disease prevalence and compare it to US National data.Magna's primary care physicians are referring patients who do not have serious heart disease to specialists. The team should interview specialists to get their opinion, or follow through a sample of patients who were referred.Primary care physicians are not comfortable (e.g., they are poorly trained or inexperienced) treating cardiac patients, even those with minor problems; they want to avoid malpractice suits. McKinsey should interview Magna physicians and institute an external review.Magna doesn't have clear guidelines on when physicians should be referring patients to specialists (or if guidelines exist, physicians are not complying with them). The team should gain an expertopinion on the current guidelines to see if this was a key cause of the problem.There are no incentives or penalties to prevent physicians from referring patients with less serious problems to specialists. In order to verify this is a key cause of the problem, the team should review incentive schemes if they exist. They should also compare similar companies/situations (e.g., prescription control mechanisms, etc.).====================================================================== =======================================QUESTION 7At this point in the study, you bump into Magna's Head of Health Services in the corridor. He is responsible for all matters related to the provision of services to subscribers, both inside and outside the Magna Network. He asks you if you have made any progress. How would you respond?ANSWER 7Think about the person you are talking with, and how best to communicate the findings you have come up with so far.The ability to come to a logical, defensible synthesis based on the information available at any point in an engagement is critical to the work we do. Even though we'd consider ourselves to be early in the overall project at this point in the case, we do want to be able to share our current perspective. One ideal answer would include the following points:FindingsWe have investigated all the drivers of profit for Magna. Although there is likely to be room for improvement in a lot of areas, it seems the claims cost is a big area for improvement.Relative to the market and to competitors, Magna seems to have high claims cost per patient. Our initial indication is that there may be highest room for improvements in the cost of referrals outside the network.There are a number of reasons as to why this may be happening (list as in previous question). Next StepsWe are working to pin down the most significant reasons why Magna has high claims cost per patient.We are going to be looking into other areas such as reduction potential in other costs, as well as improvement potential in terms of premiums or other sources of revenue.====================================================================== =======================================QUESTION 8After some additional investigation, your team thinks that changing the behavior of Magna'sprimary care physicians has potential to reduce cardiac referral costs while maintaining high-quality care. The team believes that introducing some sort of incentive plan for physicians might help reduce the referral rate.The team's idea for a pilot plan is to increase overall fees that Magna pays to primary care physicians to handle more of their patients' basic cardiology needs. Overall fee increases would total $1 million.In addition to the team's proposal, Magna's medical director wants to pilot the following idea: Magna pays bonuses of $100,000 per year to each of the 10 primary care physicians with the lowest cardiac referral rates consistent with good patient outcomes.Although the team mentions to the medical director that there are other issues to consider relating to the pilot that are not financial, such as the ethical impact of incentivizing physicians not to refer patients to specialist treatment, he wants the team to do the first calculation including both ideas. How many fewer cardiology referrals will Magna need to have in order to recoup the cost of the pilot incentive plan (including the team's and the medical director's idea)? For simplicity’s sake assume:The cost of a cardiology referral is $200.Magna currently has 300,000 cardiology referrals per year.ANSWER 8If the incentive plan reduces cardiology referrals by 3.3 percent or 10,000 referrals, Magna will recoup the cost of the incentive plan. One potential approach to the calculation:$1 million + (10 * $100,000) = $2 million for incentive plan$2 million/$200 =10,000 referrals10,000 referrals/300,000 total referrals = 3.3 percent reduction would pay for incentive program====================================================================== =======================================QUESTION 9Your team projects that the incentive plan has the potential to reduce referrals by 5 percent in its first year, and an additional 2 percent in its second year. If these projections are correct, how much referral cost could Magna save in total over the first two years of the incentive plan?ANSWER 9Referral costs would be $4.14 million lower in the second year. Over the two years Magna would save $7.14 million. One potential approach to the calculation:Year 1 Savings with Program300,000 total referrals5 percent reduction in referrals = 15,000 referrals15,000 x $200 = $3.0 million in savings in year 1Year 2 Savings with Program285,000 total referrals2 percent reduction in referrals = 5,700 referrals5,700 x $200 = $1.14 million in savings$3 + $1.14 = $4.14 million in savingsTherefore, total cumulative savings over the 2 years = Year 1 savings + Year 2 savings = $3.0m + $4.14m = $7.14m.====================================================================== =======================================QUESTION 10Your team presents its physician incentive proposal to Magna’s CEO. The CEO, in consultation with his medical director, agrees that this is feasible and says that they will definitely pilot the overall higher fees to primary care physicians to handle more of the basic cardiology needs and they will think about the idea with the bonuses again due to the ethical concerns the team raised.At the end of the meeting the CEO says, "I like the work you’ve done, but even if we did implement the bonus payment it's not enough to address our current financial situation. Physicians are professionals who care deeply about patient care and I think there's a limit to how much cost we can expect to reduce utilizing financial incentives exclusively. Besides cardiac financial incentive programs, what other ideas should we consider to reduce the cost of Magna's specialist referrals?"Based on what we have discussed today, and any other ideas you might have, how would you respond to the CEO?ANSWER 10You may have a slightly different list. Whatever your approach, we love to see candidates come at a problem in more than one way, but still address the issue as directly and practically as possible. This question is a good one for demonstrating creativity because there's a long list of possible ideas. You might give the following response:Pursue additional ways to change physician behaviorProvide training on how to treat patients with minor or stable medical problemsDefine and clarify medical guidelines for referrals (e.g., establish a medical committee to define the difference between “serious” and "minor" heart disease)Institute peer review committee charged with approving a subset of referrals (e.g., those that are considered "high cost")Spend time investigating "outlier" physicians (i.e., those who seem to refer patients to specialists at much higher rates than others) to determine how widespread the referral problem is and whether simply focusing on a few physicians will dramatically reduce referral costsDetermine whether Magna can reduce referral costs in the other medical areas where it does not have specialists (i.e., neurosurgery)Look at the contracts Magna has for specialist services to determine if it is paying too much relative to competitorsConsider whether bringing cardiology, neurosurgery, and oncology specialists in-house (i.e., within Magna) might reduce cost转载请注明出自应届生求职招聘论坛,本贴地址:6794-1-1.html。
麦肯锡三层面分析：企业设计战略规划、开拓增长的有效工具.pdf
麦肯锡三层面法--企业设计战略规划、学习、管理并不断开拓增长的有效工具1. 概念含义 (3)2. 内容分析 (4)2.1. 主要内容 (4)2.2. 精髓与要点 (6)2.3. 三层面的增长 (8)2.4. 不健康的增长模式 (9)2.5. 界定三层面是否平衡的要点 (9)3. 分析运用 (10)3.1. 运用步骤 (11)3.1.1. 准备工作 (11)3.1.2. 方法与操作模式 (13)3.1.3. 后台支持 (14)3.2. 意义作用 (15)4. 实例分析 (16)4.1. 案例1：澳大利亚C娱乐公司三层面分析 (16)5. 参考书目 (17)1. 概念含义麦肯锡咨询公司资深顾问梅尔达德·巴格海（Mehrdad Baghai）、斯蒂芬·科利(Stephen Coley)与戴维·怀特(David White) 对世界上不同行业的40个处于高速增长的公司进行研究,提出增长阶梯的概念。
他们认为高速增长的公司每一段时间都会前进步,每一步都会带来新行动和新能力；成功的增长公司强调针对近期和远期的远景和策略,真正伟大的公司是能维持增长同时追求增长的公司。
提出了一套关于了解、准备、启动和保持企业获利性持续增长的方法—— 增长的三层级论,通常称之为三层面论。
三层面论是指把企业的业务持续发展的进程分解成三个阶段。
这三个阶段显示了不同的水平：第一层面是守卫和拓展核心业务,第二层面是建立即将涌现增长动力的业务,第三层面是开造有生命力的未来业务,公司实现增长就必须同时管好增长三层面。
如图1所示。
此后,三层面论在三人的《增长炼金术》一书中得到了进一步的阐述和拓展。
麦肯锡三层面论的核心是企业在确保核心业务的基础上,选择第二层面业务,使其迅速发展为第一层面,同时为未来长远发展选择第三层面业务。
2. 内容分析2.1.主要内容这一理论从三个层面来理解和规划企业的业务进程,每个层面代表了开创和发展业务的不同阶段,而每个阶段也分别要求不同的业务举措和管理技能与之相适应。
麦肯锡实达案例分析
实达销售程序评价综述
销售体系 组织结构
Start/980929/SH-FR(97GB)
现有的销售方法和实践为实达树立了在终端 市场的领先地位，建立了初具规模的PC业务 市场的领先地位，建立了初具规模的 业务 。但其缺乏在直销市场的关键客户管理能力 和程序，及在分销市场的渠道管理程序， 和程序，及在分销市场的渠道管理程序，将 阻碍其现有及新业务的长期获利的发展
• 虽然启动了分公司平台，现有的隶属于各个产
销售程序 市场营 销及销 售体系 市场营销组 织及程序 品线的销售单元之间仍互相独立，且不存在跨 销售单元的交叉销售协调机制
• 这样的结构限制了实达在大行业客户市场充分
挖掘交叉销售和提高客户渗透率的潜力。分析 表明，这种潜力可导致实达现有产品线销售增 长高达70%以上，并随新产品的引入呈现更大 的销售增长机会
项目总结报告 一九九八年十月六日
此报告仅供客户内部使用。未经麦肯锡公司的书面许可，其它任何机构不得 擅自传阅、引用或复制。
本项目的范围及主要成果
Start/980929/SH-FR(97GB)
项目目的：设计能够支持实达集团业务和获利增长的市场营销及销售体系组织结构， 以及与之相关的主要工作程序和业绩管理体系 项目范围 设计最优的市场营销及 销售体系组织结构 具体成果
• 实达缺乏一个有效的业绩管理系统，具体表
销售程序 市场营 销及销 售体系 市场营销组 织及程序 现在缺乏以事实分析为依据的业务计划及目 标设置和考核程序，现有的关键业绩指标无 法培养和促进各级销售人员的与集团整体及 长远利益一致的销售行为，如缺乏对交叉销 售的积极性，不愿或没有积极性向新产品开 放现有渠道
5
项目小组阶段二主要活动及事件
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。
Client Goal: Should Great Burger acquire Heavenly Donuts as part of its growth strategy?Our client is Great Burger (GB) a fast food chain that competes head–to-head with McDonald's,Wendy's, Burger King, KFC, etc.Description of Great BurgerGB is the fourth largest fast food chain worldwide, measured by the number of stores in operation. As most of its competitors do, GB offers food and "combos" for the three largest meal occasions:breakfast, lunch, and dinner.Even though GB owns some of its stores, it operates under the franchising business model with 85 percent of its stores owned by franchisees (individuals own and manage stores, pay franchise fee to GB, but major business decisions (e.g., menu, look of store) controlled by GB).McKinsey studyAs part of its growth strategy GB has analyzed some potential acquisition targets including Heavenly Donuts (HD), a growing doughnut producer with both a U.S. and international store presence.HD operates under the franchising business model too, though a little bit differently than GB. While GB franchises restaurants, HD franchises areas or regions in which the franchisee is required to open a certain number of stores.GB's CEO has hired McKinsey to advise him on whether they should acquire HD or not.QUESTION 1What areas would you want to explore to determine whether GB should acquire HD?ANSWER 1Some possible areas are given below. Great job if you identified several of these and perhaps others.•Stand alone value of HDo Growth in market for doughnutso HD's past and projected future sales growth (break down into growth in number of stores, and growth in same store sales)o Competition – are there any other major national chains that are doing better than HD in terms of growth/profit. What does this imply for future growth?o Profitability/profit margino Capital required to fund growth (capital investment to open new stores, working capital)•Synergies/strategic fito Brand quality similar? Would they enhance or detract from each other if marketed side by side?o How much overlap of customer base? (very little overlap might cause concern that brands are not compatible, too much might imply little room to expand sales by cross-marketing)o Synergies (Hint: do not dive deep on this, as it will be covered later) •Management team/cultural fito Capabilities/skills of top, middle managemento Cultural fit, if very different, what percent of key management would likely be able to adjust•Ability to execute merger/combine companieso GB experience with mergers in past/experience in integrating companieso Franchise structure differences. Detail “dive” into franchising structures. Would these different structures affect the deal? Can we manage two different franchising structures at the same time?The team started thinking about potential synergies that could be achieved by acquiring HD. Here are some key facts on GB and HD.Exhibit 1Stores GB HDTotal5,000 1,020North America3,500 1000Europe1,000 20Asia400 0Other100 0Annual growth in stores10% 15%Financials GB HDTotal store sales$5,500m $700mParent company revenue$1,900m $200mKey expenses (% sales)Cost of sales51% 40%Restaurant operating costs24% 26%Restaurant property & equipment costs 4.6% 8.5%Corporate general & administrative costs 8% 15%Profit as % of sales6.3% 4.9%Sales/stores$1.1m $0.7mIndustry average$0.9m $0.8mQUESTION 2What potential synergies can you think of between GB and HD?ANSWER 2We are looking for a few responses similar to the ones below:•Lower costso Biggest opportunity likely in corporate selling, general, and administrative expenses (SG&A) by integrating corporate managemento May be some opportunity to lower food costs with larger purchasing volume on similar food items (e.g., beverages, deep frying oil), however overlaps may be low as ingredients are very differento GB appears to have an advantage in property and equipment costs which might be leveragable to HD (e.g., superior skills in lease negotiation)•Increase revenueso Sell doughnuts in GB stores, or some selected GB products in HD storeso GB has much greater international presence thus likely has knowledge/skills to enable HD to expand outside of North Americao GB may have superior skills in identifying attractive locations for stores as its sales per store are higher than industry average, whereas HD's is lower than industry average; might be able to leverage this when opening new HD stores to increase HD average sales per storeo Expand HD faster than it could do on own–GB, as a larger company with lower debt, may have better access to capitalQUESTION 3The team thinks that with synergies, it should be possible to double HD’s U.S. market share in the next 5 years, and that GB’s access to capital will allow it to expand the number of HD stores by 2.5 times. What sales per store will HD require in 5 years in order for GB to achieve these goals? Use any data from Exhibit 1 you need, additionally, your interviewer would provide the followingassumptions for you:•Doughnut consumption/capita in the U.S. is $10/year today, and is projected to grow to $20/year in 5 years.•For ease of calculation, assume U.S. population is 300m.ANSWER 3You should always feel free to ask your interviewer additional questions to help you with yourresponse.Possible responses might include the following:•Market share today: $700M HD sales (from Exhibit 1) ÷ $3B U.S. market ($10 x 300M people) = 23% (round to 25% for simplicity sake)•U.S. market in 5 years = $20 x 300 = $6B•HD sales if double market share: 50% x $6B = $3B•Per store sales: $3B/2.5 (1000 stores) = $1.2MDoes this seem reasonable?•Yes, given it implies less than double same store sales growth and per capita consumption is predicted to double.QUESTION 4One of the synergies that the team thinks might have a big potential is the idea of increasing the businesses' overall profitability by selling doughnuts in GB stores. How would you assess theprofitability impact of this synergy?ANSWER 4Be sure you can clearly explain how the assessment you are proposing would help to answer the question posed.Some possible answers include:•Calculate incremental revenues by selling doughnuts in GB stores (calculate how many doughnuts per store, times price per doughnut, times number of GB stores)•Calculate incremental costs by selling doughnuts in GB stores (costs of production, incremental number of employees, employee training, software changes, incremental marketing and advertising, incremental cost of distribution if we cannot produce doughnuts in house, etc.) •Calculate incremental investments. Do we need more space in each store if we think we are going to attract new customers? Do we need to invest in store layout to have in-house doughnut production?•If your answer were to take into account cannibalization, what would be the rate of cannibalization with GB offerings? Doughnut cannibalization will be higher with breakfast products than lunch and dinner products, etc.•One way to calculate this cannibalization is to look at historic cannibalization rates with new product/offering launchings within GB stores•Might also cannibalize other HD stores if they are nearby GB store–could estimate this impact by seeing historical change in HD’s sales when competitor doughnut st ore opens nearbyQUESTION 6You run into the CEO of GB in the hall. He asks you to summarize McKinsey’s perspective so far on whether GB should acquire HD. Pretend the interviewer is the CEO–what would you say?ANSWER 6You may have a slightly different list. Whatever your approach, we love to see candidates come at a problem in more than one way, but still address the issue as directly and practically as possible.Answers may vary, but here is an example of a response:•Early findings lead us to believe acquiring HD would create significant value for GB, and that GB should acquire HDo Believe can add $15 thousand in profit per GB store by selling HD in GB stores. This could mean $50 million in incremental profit for North American stores (where immediate synergies are most likely given HD has little brand presence in rest of world)o We also believe there are other potential revenue and cost synergies that the team still needs to quantify•Once the team has quantified the incremental revenues, cost savings, and investments, we will make a recommendation on the price you should be willing to pay•We will also give you recommendations on what it will take to integrate the two companies in order to capture the potential revenue and cost savings, and also to manage the different franchise structures and potentially different cultures of GB and HD。