Hi Beng:Thanks for that important comment--there is much more to logical thought in a case interview. It wasn't my intention to short-change the importance of persistence, communication skills, etc.The logical thought comment reflected feedback from my own interviewers who saw no issues with communication, etc.You ask rhetorically and somewhat paternalistically (but since you're an insider, I'll forgive you) whether a firm would invite someone without various qualifications to interviews. I don't know which firm you represent, so I'll use the plural pronoun (as you have) to lump firms together.Considering friends, classmates and colleagues, yes, you have invited poor academic performers, many without extra-curricular activities, or leadership experience to interviews. You have invited some without any evidence of ambition, risk, boldness, or courage to interviews. And--in several cases--you've hired them. So it's natural to question the efficacy of the "pre-screen". There is an old logical injunction that the best indicator of future performance is the most recent performance. If that's the case, a candidate's recent performance must bear some testament to his/her skills, capabilities and future performance. MBBB is (take a deep breath) not the only industry which values effective communication skills, leadership, persistence, logical analysis, etc. Believe it or not, energy, pharmaceuticals, medical engineering, automotive, finance, and aeronautics (among others) also require employees with these skills.Finally, to give the dogma one last kick, one could speak so highly of the value of a case interview if it were either an accurate, or the most effective screening tool available. Presumably, a suitable hire is not just one who fits and contributes to the intellectual rigour, but one who contributes to the firm's business development, knowledge resources, mentoring, and value in short, medium, and long-term capacities. Experienced and senior colleagues at some of the larger firms have complained of the poor calibre of new recruits. "Quantatively competent, but functionally incompetent, socially distracted, and uncouth," to paraphrase one.My turn for a rhetorical question:If the case-interview competence is a worthwhile, effective determinant of a candidate's suitability for client projects and the firm's development, why is industry turnover so high, as either attrition or incompetence induce a gutting at the bottom floors of the industry so that recruitment is a distinct process in itself?An interesting comment from a multi-billion dollar BCG client: "The only tangible thing they left us with was a bill for 1 million. Not a single executable idea in the plan. But lots of pretty diagrams."
