2026 edition · Three dimensions · Fourteen sub-dimensions

The rubric we mark against

The same scoring framework MBB interviewers use in real first-round debriefs, printed here in full. Every score you receive links back to one of these anchors

01 · How it works

Three dimensions. Each rolls up from a set of sub-dimensions. Each sub-dimension is scored on a 5-point scale.

Every MBB first-round interview produces a single overall score, derived by averaging fourteen sub-dimensions into three dimensions, then weighting the three. The weights are Track record & drive 25%, Analytical thinking 50%, Presence & communication 25%. An overall above 3.5 is a strong pass at first round.

We mark to this framework end-to-end. No vibes, no unstated criteria. Every score on your feedback page references one of the fourteen sub-dimension anchors below, and each is grounded in a quoted moment from your transcript.

02 · Track record & drive

Weight 25% · 5 sub-dimensions

Past evidence that the candidate has owned outcomes, delivered under pressure, learned from setbacks, and acted as a real contributor on teams.

Self-direction

Whether the candidate moves under their own steam without needing to be told

  • Starts things without being asked
  • Pursues an outcome past the point of comfort
  • Holds their own opinion under pushback

Collaboration

Whether the candidate is a real contributor on a team

  • Names their specific role and contribution
  • Credits teammates by name and by what they actually did
  • Describes how they handled disagreement on a team

Depth

Whether the candidate can back up their claims with substance and specifics

  • Numbers, dates, names, sizes of impact
  • Holds up to two layers of probing without retreating
  • Distinguishes their action from the team's action

Growth mindset

Whether the candidate seeks feedback and acts on it without defensiveness

  • Names a real failure, not a humble-brag
  • Describes what they actually changed after the failure
  • Open to disagreement in the conversation itself

Results delivered

Whether the candidate has actually shipped outcomes, not just had ambitions

  • Quantified results (revenue, time saved, headcount, conversion)
  • Outcome traceable to their action, not to circumstance
  • Pattern of delivery across multiple examples

03 · Analytical thinking

Weight 50% · 5 sub-dimensions

Whether the candidate can structure a problem, reason through it quantitatively, and arrive at a defensible recommendation.

Framing

Whether the candidate builds a structure that is MECE, hypothesis-led, and adaptive

  • Buckets are mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive
  • Names the hypothesis before testing it
  • Adapts the frame when an exhibit doesn't fit, rather than anchoring

Commercial judgement

Whether the candidate's assumptions reflect real business logic and the candidate makes reasonable trade-offs

  • Assumptions are plausible and named explicitly
  • Sensible trade-offs between competing priorities (cost vs. speed, risk vs. return)
  • Picks the right branch to explore first, not just the easiest

Rigor

Whether the candidate's quantitative work is precise, traceable, and sense-checked

  • Numbers correct or order-of-magnitude correct on the first pass
  • Talks through assumptions out loud; the chain is auditable
  • Sense-checks against an exhibit or a real-world reference before moving on

Creativity

Whether the candidate brings non-obvious ideas to the case

  • Surfaces an angle the interviewer didn't seed
  • Connects across domains (e.g., applies a retail insight to a logistics problem)
  • Pushes back on the obvious answer when it deserves pushing back

Synthesis

Whether the candidate closes the case with a partner-grade recommendation

  • Recommendation first, reasons second, risk third, next step fourth
  • Quantified ask included when relevant
  • Synthesis reflects the actual case work, not a generic template

04 · Presence & communication

Weight 25% · 4 sub-dimensions

Whether the candidate is calm under pressure, precise in delivery, listens well, and builds rapport with the interviewer.

Presence

Whether the candidate fills the room without dominating it

  • Calm pace and audible confidence
  • No upward inflection on assertions
  • Comfortable with silence; doesn't fill it with hedging

Precision

Whether the candidate gets their point across cleanly

  • One idea per sentence
  • Signposts before drilling in
  • Uses real numbers and named entities, not generic placeholders

Listening

Whether the candidate reflects what the interviewer said before responding

  • Plays back the question in their own words before answering
  • Catches small corrections from the interviewer and incorporates them
  • Does not steamroll the interviewer's pushback

Relationship-building

Whether the candidate would feel like a real teammate to work with

  • Warm but professional register, not transactional
  • Asks for help where appropriate without losing momentum
  • Shows curiosity about the case beyond the test itself

05 · The five-point scale

Every sub-dimension is scored on the same 5-point scale, calibrated to first-round MBB hire-readiness. Three is the bar that advances a candidate to the second round.

5Outstanding — in line with the top 10–15% of the cohort. Very high potential to succeed at MBB.
4Strong — in line with the next 25–30% of the cohort. High potential to succeed at MBB.
3Adequate — average performer in the cohort, with potential to succeed at MBB.
2Inadequate — below average; unlikely to succeed at MBB without further development.
1Very inadequate — well below average; very unlikely to succeed at MBB.

06 · How it's marked

Every case on MBB Ready is marked end-to-end against this rubric. The fourteen sub-dimensions are scored independently, averaged into the three dimensions, then weighted 25 / 50 / 25 into the overall.

Every sub-dimension comes with a one-sentence rationale and a short quote from your transcript with the timestamp. You see what cost you the score, not just the number.

Two boundary rules sit on top of the scale. First, a sub-dimension with any usable evidence of the skill earns at least a 2 — we never bottom out at 1 unless there's no signal at all. Second, the scorer marks for what was actually probed in the interview, not for unprompted detail the candidate had no chance to provide.

Read the rubric on your own work

Solve one case, get the rubric back

Solve a case