How to Structure Well: 5 Critical Tests
Structuring is an essential skill in consulting. It turns chaos into clarity and builds partners' trust through sharp, logical, and disciplined thinking. Learn how you can improve your structuring
Structuring! Arghhh!
In my first year at McKinsey, I often got feedback on my poor structuring.
It drove me crazy.
But I knew that I couldn’t keep struggling with structuring. It was just too damaging for my career.
So, I did my best to learn it. I tried everything.
I asked my managers how to structure well. But they couldn’t really explain to me how to do it practically and reliably. They could do it intuitively. They could criticize it. But they couldn’t teach me how to do it well.
I tried to learn it on my own. I completed all available online training on the structuring topic within the firm. But they seemed too theoretical and far from the practical realities I faced on projects.
I used every opportunity to structure everything. I was obsessing over it, trying to define some reliable rules and methods that I could use.
Eventually, it took me almost a year of constant experimentation until structuring became my second nature.
In this post, I will share my approach to structuring. Specifically, I will discuss 5 critical tests I use to ensure that my structures are logically sound and can withstand pressure from my partners.
The first two tests are fairly well-known to consultants. But the remaining three tests are not discussed widely, but they are critical nevertheless.
Why structuring is important
But first, let’s discuss why structuring is important in the first place.
You know, in MBB consulting, we are obsessed with structuring. And I am guilty myself of doing that.
Partners believe that structuring is a fundamental consulting skill.
To you, it may seem like a minor issue. But your partners will be extra demanding of your structuring skills. They recognize that poor structuring can erode the client’s trust and jeopardize any project.
Please, understand that your partners have worked many years in this profession. They developed instant partner recognition of any logical inconsistencies or mistakes. Basically, your poor structuring will be the first thing they see on your slides. And that would be an instant destruction of trust. Everything else you do becomes irrelevant.
That’s why, if you hear feedback on your structuring, that means you are in serious trouble. If partners question your fundamental consulting skills, you simply can’t be successful in MBB consulting.
So why is it difficult to structure well?
Most consultants know MECE structuring. They make their structures ‘Mutually Exclusive’ (don’t overlap) and ‘Collectively Exhaustive’ (cover everything).
And that’s correct, but it’s not a full picture.
In MBB consulting, real structuring is far more nuanced.
Let’s explore that in detail.
For the purpose of this post, to make it more practical and illustrative, let me use a tangible example. Let’s imagine we want to structure the topic of cars (automobiles).
How would you go about creating a structure from scratch?
Create your initial structure
First, let’s start with creating an initial structure.
I had this approach.
I would take a piece of paper and start writing all my ideas on it.
You know, our brains are natural structuring machines. It just can’t help but structure information.
So, that’s how I used my natural tendencies by writing all my random ideas. Then my brain would come up with some ideas on how to structure that information.
It’s really important to gather all your ideas, ensuring that you have a comprehensive view. Otherwise, you might miss something important, and your structure will be incomplete. We will circle back to that point later.
Once you have the initial structure, you need to stress test it to ensure it’s logically sound.
Here are 5 logical tests I used.
5 Critical Tests
Once you create your initial structure, you want to test it against these five critical principles. If your structure passes them successfully, it’s solid enough to build analysis, storylines, and recommendations on top of that.
Test 1: Mutually Exclusive (ME)
The first test is the simplest one to perform.
Make sure elements of your structure don’t overlap with each other.
For example, let’s say we want to structure different types of cars.
Sedan, Hatchback, Convertible, SUV, Crossover, etc…
If you list both SUV and Crossover separately, they in fact overlap with each other because a crossover is a type of SUV.
You can fix it by merging them into one category: SUV / Crossover.
Example:
Sedan, Hatchback, Coupe, Convertible, Wagon
SUV / Crossover, MPV / Minivan, Pickup Truck
Sports / Supercar, Off-road / 4x4, Microcar / City Car
Test 2: Collectively Exhaustive (CE)
The second test is harder to perform.
Here, you need to make sure you cover all relevant and important elements.
Using the same example, if you list all of the car types but omit to add the Pickup Truck type, then the structure isn’t exhaustive.
If even one crucial element is missing, partners instantly lose trust in your structure.
Why is this test difficult?
Well, because you need to think hard about whether all relevant elements are included. And it’s fairly easy to miss something. That’s why you need to be particularly careful with this test and make sure you exhaust all potential options.
Example:
Sedan, Hatchback, Coupe, Convertible, Wagon
SUV (includes Crossover), MPV / Minivan, Pickup Truck
Sports / Supercar, Off-road / 4x4, Microcar / City Car
Test 3: Logically Aligned (LA)
The third test is an invisible one.
But consultants often make mistakes here.
I see consultants add elements that are from different levels of abstraction. Some elements are higher-level categories, while others are lower-level.
So, ensure that your elements in the structure belong to the same category and sit on the same logical level.
For example, if you list CyberTruck in the list of car types, although technically it’s a Pickup Truck, but it’s not a car type. It’s a specific car model within the Pickup Truck category.
It may seem easy to see the difference in this simple example. But when it comes to more conceptual topics, it can be quite difficult to identify. So, be diligent and ensure you don’t break the logic here.
Example:
Sedan, Hatchback, Coupe, Convertible, Wagon
SUV (includes Crossover), MPV / Minivan, Pickup Truck,
CyberTrackSports / Supercar, Off-road / 4x4, Microcar / City Car
Test 4: Belonging Test (BT)
This one is another invisible test.
But consultants often make mistakes here as well. They add elements to the structure that don’t logically belong to it.
For example, in your example, if you add a horse carriage to the list. Although it’s also a type of transportation, but it’s not a type of car.
Example:
Sedan, Hatchback, Coupe, Convertible, Wagon,
Horse CarriageSUV (includes Crossover), MPV / Minivan, Pickup Truck
Sports / Supercar, Off-road / 4x4, Microcar / City Car
Test 5: Purpose-Aligned (PA)
Mistakes in the final test are rare, but if you make them, it renders your structuring absolutely useless.
It happens when your structure is technically correct, but it answers the wrong question.
So, check that your structure actually answers the problem you’re solving.
For example, if the question is “how to increase EV adoption,” a structure listing car body types would fail. It’s neatly organized but irrelevant to the real problem at hand.
Use of AI in Structuring
Should you use AI in making your structures?
Actually, ChatGPT is very good at structuring.
You can ask it to create the first version of your structure. Then, you can use it to stress-test it using five critical tests.
But be careful!
ChatGPT has one problem. If you ask generic questions, you will get generic answers.
Therefore, it’s up to you to ensure that you maintain logical consistency when using AI.
For example, instead of asking ChatGPT:
“Is my structure MECE?”
Ask questions for every single logical test and see what it answers. Check if the answers make sense, and you can take any ideas to strengthen your logic.
The Takeaway
Creating a solid structure doesn’t require a unique talent or an intrinsic quality.
It’s actually quite logical and learnable skills.
But don’t underestimate the importance of solid structuring in your work. Ensure that you bring discipline, logic, and rigor to your thought process.
Once you master these five critical logical tests of structuring, no partner will ever question your structuring again.
I hope it makes your structuring a little bit easier.
Knowing theory is very helpful. But putting it into practice is often very hard. I know it firsthand, struggling with it for many months.
That is why consultants in my coaching program complete the practical exercises. They solve real problems and produce real slides to test their skills and learn new ones.
In that process, I provide them with tangible feedback on how to improve their skills, including structuring.
If you’re an MBB consultant and want personalized coaching to improve your performance and become a confident consultant:
We will discuss your pain points, challenges, and aspirations. No strings attached, just straight answers to your biggest questions.
If you want to learn more about my coaching program, read this post:
The coaching program for MBB consultants.