Assessments
List of All Assessments
The following assessments will be used to measure progress towards learning outcomes and to assign grades. Assessments are organized by track: Recruiting (interview preparation) and Client Work (consulting projects).
| Goal | Assessment | % | Pts | OS Actions | LOs |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Both | Reading Quizzes (10) | 10 | 50 | Varies by week | 1,2,3 |
| Recruiting | Resume & Networking | 12 | 60 | 1.4, 1.6, 2.2, 4.4 | 5 |
| Recruiting | Practice Interviews | 42 | 210 | 1.1–1.7, 2.4, 2.6, 3.6, 4.1–4.4 | 1,3,4,5 |
| Client Work | P1: Intelligence Brief | 8 | 40 | 1.1, 1.2, 2.2, 2.3 | 1,2,3 |
| Client Work | P2: Point of View | 8 | 40 | 1.4, 1.5, 4.1 | 1,2,3 |
| Client Work | Capstone: Conversation Deck | 20 | 100 | 1.1–4.8 | 1,2,3,4 |
| TOTAL | 100 | 500 |
Notes
Table of Learning Outcomes
| # | Learning Outcome | BYU Aims Supported |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Apply The Consultant’s OS to define and solve client problems using MECE logic, issue trees, and hypothesis-driven analysis | Intellectually Enlarging |
| 2 | Use AI-assisted tools (e.g., Claude, Copilot) to gather outside-in insights, build models, and test hypotheses with transparency and integrity | Lifelong Learning and Service; Character Building |
| 3 | Communicate clear, executive-level recommendations using the Pyramid Principle and visual slide design | Intellectually Enlarging; Character Building |
| 4 | Demonstrate Christlike professionalism through humility, judgment, and trustworthiness in team and client interactions | Spiritually Strengthening; Character Building |
| 5 | Prepare for consulting interviews and internships by articulating a clear value proposition through resumes, networking, and behavioral interviews | Lifelong Learning and Service; Spiritually Strengthening |
Reading Quizzes
Points: 50 (10% of grade)
Overview
Reading quizzes ensure you come to class prepared and have internalized core concepts before applying them. Quizzes are administered on Thursdays and cover that week’s readings.
Requirements
- 10 quizzes throughout the semester (5 points each)
- Quizzes are administered at the start of class on Thursday
- Cover the assigned readings for that week’s OS concept
- No quizzes on weeks when major projects are due (P1, P2, Capstone)
- Quizzes are closed laptop and closed note
Grading Rubric
| Component | Points |
|---|---|
| 10 quizzes × 5 points each | 50 |
| Total | 50 |
Resume & Networking
Points: 60 (12% of grade)
Overview
A consulting-ready resume and active networking are essential for landing interviews.
Requirements
Resume (35 points)
Submit two versions of your resume throughout the semester:
- Resume v1 (Week 5): Initial consulting-formatted resume
- Resume v2 (Week 7): Revised resume incorporating TA feedback
Your resume should:
- Follow consulting resume format (1 page, action-oriented bullets)
- Quantify scope and impact for each experience
- Use strong action verbs and demonstrate leadership
- Be error-free and professionally formatted
The Resume Bible from Management Consulted includes consulting-specific templates and formatting guides. Access free through BYU Marriott registration.
Networking Tracker (25 points)
Maintain a networking tracker documenting your outreach throughout the semester:
- 5 networking conversations with consulting professionals (5 points each)
- Track: Name, company, date, key insights, follow-up actions
- Include a mix of informational interviews, smoothie chats, and firm events
Grading Rubric
| Component | Points |
|---|---|
| Resume v1 (Week 5) | 15 |
| Resume v2 client-ready (Week 7) | 20 |
| 5 networking conversations (5 points each) | 25 |
| Total | 60 |
Practice Interviews
Points: 210 (42% of grade)
Overview
Interview mastery requires deliberate practice of both behavioral and case components. You’ll practice as both interviewee and interviewer throughout the semester, starting with a goals conversation to set your development focus. Each practice interview mirrors common consulting interview compoents: behavioral/fit question and cases. Exact interview format at different firms will vary but this structure will prepare you well for whatever exact structure you will encouter.
Practice Interview Format
You should schedule 1 hour for each interview session: Each practice interview includes:
| Component | Time |
|---|---|
| Behavioral/Fit Question(s) | 15-20 min |
| Case | 25-30 min |
| Feedback | 5-10 min |
| Total | ~60 min |
Requirements
Complete 10 practice interviews as the interviewee:
| Source | Sessions | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Pod peers | 7 | Practice with pod members |
| TA | 3 | TA Sessions (Weeks 4-5, 9-10, 14) |
| Total | 10 |
You will also complete 7 additional practice interviews as the interviewer.
TA Sessions
Your TA meets with you four times during the semester:
- Goals Chat (Week 2): Set recruiting goals and development focus using the Goals Worksheet
- Session 1 (Weeks 4-5): Baseline interview assessment against those goals
- Session 2 (Weeks 9-10): Progress check toward goals
- Session 3 (Week 14): Final evaluation with full semester context
Make a copy of the Goals Worksheet to create your own version. Complete it before your Week 2 chat with your TA.
Interview Feedback
Each student creates their own copy of the feedback form. This ensures your interview feedback remains private. Only you, your TA, and Professor Murff can see your scores and comments.
Setup (do this before your first practice interview):
- Make a copy of the Practice Interview Feedback Form
- Open the linked response spreadsheet (Responses tab > click the spreadsheet icon)
- Share the spreadsheet with your TA and Professor Murff (View access)
- Share your form link with your interviewers—they’ll submit feedback after each practice interview
Grading Rubric
| Component | Points |
|---|---|
| Goals Chat (Week 2) | 10 |
| 3 TA Interviews and Coaching sessions (20 points each) | 60 |
| 7 peer interviews as interviewee (10 points each) | 70 |
| 7 peer interviews as interviewer (10 points each) | 70 |
| Total | 210 |
Points awarded for completion. Feedback is captured in the feedback form to track your growth over time.
Behavioral & Fit Interviews
The behavioral and fit portion of consulting interviews (typically 15-20 minutes) evaluates who you are beyond the case. Firms want to know: Do you have a track record of delivering strong results? Are you someone we’d want to work with on our team?
What Firms Are Assessing
While individual firms vary, behavioral response are generally evaluated on three main dimensions:
| Dimension | What Firms Want to See |
|---|---|
| Impact & Ownership | You drove results, took accountability, and can articulate YOUR contribution |
| Teamwork & Collaboration | You work effectively with others, navigate conflict, and elevate teams |
| Presence & Fit | You communicate clearly, come across as authentic, and are someone they’d want to work with |
Behavioral Questions
“Tell me about a time when…”
Behavioral questions use your past experiences to predict future performance. Firms believe the best indicator of how you’ll handle a situation is how you’ve handled similar situations before.
The STAR Framework
The STAR framework can be a helpful tool to structure responses to behavioral questions:
| Element | What to Include | Tips |
|---|---|---|
| Situation | Brief context: when, where, what was at stake | a few sentences; don’t over-explain the setup |
| Task | Your specific responsibility or challenge | What were YOU accountable for? |
| Action | What YOU did (not “we”) | Be specific: decisions made, steps taken, how you influenced others |
| Result | Quantified outcome and what you learned | Numbers matter: %, $, time saved, people impacted |
You won’t necessarily address all of these points in a single stream of consiousness, but each element should come out naturally during the conversation with your interviewer, thank ques from them for dynamic back and forth.
Creating a Story Bank
You will be served well by preparing 3-5 stories covering different topics. Common behavioral question topics include stories that showcase:
- Leadership/Initiative
- Problem-Solving Ability
- Teamwork/Collaboration
- Overcoming Challenges or Conflict
- Impact/Achievement
Each story should demonstrate capability across all 3 dimensions (ownership, teamwork, presence). A “leadership” story still needs to show how you worked with others and should be told with confidence and authenticity.
Sample Questions by Topic
Leadership/Initiative
- Tell me about a time you took initiative on something that wasn’t your responsibility.
- Describe a situation where you had to lead without formal authority.
- Tell me about a time you identified a problem before others did and took action.
Problem-Solving
- Tell me about a complex problem you solved. Walk me through your approach.
- Describe a time you had to make a decision with incomplete information.
- Tell me about a time you had to change your approach mid-way through a project.
Teamwork/Collaboration
- Tell me about a time you had to work with someone difficult.
- Describe a situation where you had to influence someone without authority.
- Tell me about a time a team project didn’t go as planned. What did you do?
Overcoming Challenges
- Tell me about your biggest professional failure and what you learned.
- Describe a time you received tough feedback. How did you respond?
- Tell me about a time you had to persevere through significant obstacles.
Impact/Achievement
- What’s your most significant professional accomplishment?
- Tell me about a time you exceeded expectations.
- Describe an impact you made that you’re particularly proud of.
Behavioral Scoring
Your TAs and peers will use the following rubric to assess your behavioral responses:
| Dimension | 1 - Not Yet | 2 - Developing | 3 - Solid | 4 - Strong |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Impact & Ownership | Vague story, no clear results, says “we” throughout | Has a story but results aren’t quantified, unclear personal contribution | Clear personal actions, quantified results, demonstrates initiative | Compelling ownership, impressive results with scale, clearly drove outcomes |
| Teamwork & Collaboration | No evidence of collaboration, or throws others under the bus | Others mentioned but unclear how they worked together | Clear collaboration, navigated different perspectives, elevated the team | Sophisticated influence, resolved real conflict, made others better |
| Presence & Fit | Rambling (3+ min), nervous/robotic, hard to follow | Too long or short, filler words, comes across as rehearsed | Concise, confident, natural delivery, likable | Crisp, engaging, authentic, memorable |
Before the Interview
During the Interview
- Listen carefully to the question and answer what’s being asked
- Use STAR but don’t be robotic—let it flow naturally
- If you’re rambling, wrap up: “The key result was…”
- If asked a follow-up, answer directly, don’t restart the whole story
Mindset
| Do | Don’t |
|---|---|
| Create realistic interview conditions | Make it artificially easy or hard |
| Stay engaged and present throughout | Check your phone or appear distracted |
| Let silence work—candidates need thinking time | Fill every pause with hints |
| Remain neutral; evaluate, don’t coach mid-interview | React visibly to good or bad answers |
| Treat every candidate like a future colleague | Condescend or intimidate |
Running the Behavioral Section
Setup: State the question clearly, let them choose their story, set expectations (is this a deep dive an single experience or a 2-3 minute summary).
Note “I” vs. “we.” Listen for specific actions and quantified results.
Probing Questions
- “What was your specific role in that outcome?”
- “What would you do differently if you faced this again?”
- “How did that experience change how you approach similar situations?”
- “What was the hardest part for you personally?”
Red Flags
- Can’t explain their personal contribution when pressed
- Story lacks specific details (names, numbers, timelines)
- Takes credit for team outcomes without acknowledging others
- Gets defensive when probed
Fit Questions
“Why consulting?” “Why our firm?” “Walk me through your resume”
Often part of behavioral interviews (usually at the end), fit questions test your motivation, self-awareness, and genuine interest in the firm. Unlike behavioral questions, these aren’t about past stories, they’re about your personal narrative and career intentions.
Key Questions to Prepare
| Question | What They’re Really Asking | What Good Looks Like |
|---|---|---|
| “Why consulting?” | Do you understand what consultants actually do? Is this a thoughtful choice? | Specific reasons tied to your experiences, skills, and goals—not generic prestige |
| “Why [this firm]?” | Have you done your research? Are you genuinely interested in US specifically? | Firm-specific reasons (culture, type of work, people you’ve met), not copy-paste answers |
| “Walk me through your resume” | Can you tell a coherent career story? Do your choices make sense? | A 2-minute narrative showing intentional progression toward consulting |
| “Why should we hire you?” | What’s your unique value proposition? | 2-3 specific strengths with evidence, tied to what the firm needs |
| “Where do you see yourself in 5 years?” | Are you thoughtful about your career? Will you stick around? | Honest ambition that includes growth at the firm |
Crafting Your “Why Consulting” Answer
Structure your answer around three elements:
- The spark: What experience or realization drew you to consulting?
- The fit: What about consulting matches your skills and interests?
- The goal: What do you hope to learn or accomplish?
Avoid generic answers like “I want to learn from smart people” or “I like problem-solving.” Everyone says that. Be specific about YOUR journey.
Crafting Your “Why [Firm]” Answer
Do your research. Reference:
- Specific practice areas or industries that interest you
- People you’ve spoken with and what you learned
- Culture elements that resonate (with specific examples)
- Recent work or thought leadership that impressed you
What to Listen For
- Genuine enthusiasm vs. rehearsed talking points
- Specific, researched reasons vs. generic statements
- Self-awareness about strengths and growth areas
- Coherent career narrative that leads logically to consulting
Red Flags
- Can’t articulate why consulting beyond prestige or pay
- Generic “why firm” answer that could apply to any firm
- Resume walkthrough is disjointed or defensive about gaps
- Seems to be interviewing at every firm with no real preference
Case Interviews
Case interviews test your structured problem-solving ability. You’ll be given a business problem and asked to work through it out loud, demonstrating how you think.
Select a case from the Management Consulted: Case Library – Full library of practice cases by firm, type, and difficulty
Register for an account here if needed: Management Consulted (free with BYU Marriott registration).
Case Scoring
Dimensions
| Dimension | What to Evaluate |
|---|---|
| Structure & Approach | MECE framework, tailored to problem, prioritized |
| Analytical Rigor | Math setup, accuracy, “so what” interpretation |
| Hypothesis-Driven Recommendation | Clear POV, insight-led synthesis, practical and actionable |
Scoring Anchors
Structure & Approach:
- 1 - Not Yet: No framework or completely generic, no prioritization
- 2 - Developing: Has a framework but not tailored, missing MECE
- 3 - Solid: Tailored MECE structure, logical prioritization
- 4 - Strong: Insightful structure that unlocks the case, adapts as new info emerges
Analytical Rigor:
- 1 - Not Yet: Can’t set up the math, significant errors, no interpretation of results
- 2 - Developing: Gets to an answer but messy setup, minor errors, or no “so what”
- 3 - Solid: Clean setup, accurate math, interprets what the numbers mean for the decision
- 4 - Strong: Efficient approach, creative shortcuts, surfaces insights others would miss
Hypothesis-Driven Recommendation:
- 1 - Not Yet: No recommendation, or wishy-washy “it depends,” no point of view
- 2 - Developing: Has a recommendation but just summarizes analysis, no real insight
- 3 - Solid: Clear POV with structured reasoning, acknowledges risks, actionable next steps
- 4 - Strong: Sharp insight that reframes the problem, creative yet grounded, CEO would act on this
Structure Your Approach
- Ask clarifying questions to understand the problem
- Take 60-90 seconds to organize your thoughts before speaking
- Present a MECE framework tailored to the specific problem
- Prioritize: state which branch you’ll explore first and why
Drive the Analysis
- Ask for data; don’t wait for it to be offered
- Set up math clearly before calculating
- Interpret results: always state the “so what”
- Adapt your structure as new information emerges
Synthesize and Recommend
- Lead with your recommendation (answer-first)
- Support with 2-3 key reasons from your analysis
- Acknowledge risks or considerations
- Propose concrete next steps
Prompt Delivery
- Read the prompt clearly, don’t paraphrase or editorialize
- Provide the prompt in writing if it’s complex
- Give 60-90 seconds for initial structuring time
- Say “Feel free to take a moment to organize your thoughts”
Pacing the Case
| Phase | Your Role |
|---|---|
| Structure | Listen without interrupting; let them complete their framework |
| Exploration | Guide them through 2-3 branches; reveal data when appropriate |
| Analysis | Provide data clearly; give time for calculations |
| Synthesis | Push for a recommendation with 5 min remaining |
Data Reveals
- Release data in response to good questions
- Say “What would you want to know?” rather than “Here’s some data”
- If stuck, give one gentle redirect: “What else might drive profitability?”
- Don’t volunteer data they didn’t ask for
Red Flags
- Generic framework not tailored to the problem
- Can’t do math or interpret what numbers mean
- Avoids taking a point of view
- Doesn’t adapt as new information emerges
Giving Feedback
Feedback Delivery Framework
Use this structure every time:
- Ask first: “How do you think that went? What felt strong? What felt harder?”
- Validate: Acknowledge their self-assessment before sharing yours
- Strengths (2-3 specific): “Your structure was MECE and tailored to problem”
- Development areas (1-2 specific): “The one thing to work on: interpreting the numbers, you got the math right but didn’t say what it meant for the decision”
Delivering Difficult Feedback
| Instead of… | Try… |
|---|---|
| “That was pretty weak” | “There’s room to develop here, let me show you what I mean” |
| “You need to do X” | “Strong candidates typically do X, here’s why it matters” |
| “That’s wrong” | “I’d push back on that assumption, what’s your evidence?” |
Calibration Mistakes to Avoid
- Halo effect: One strong moment doesn’t make everything strong
- Recency bias: Don’t over-weight the recommendation at the expense of the whole case
- Comparison drift: Score against the rubric, not against the last candidate
- Niceness inflation: A 3 means “solid”, reserve 4s for truly standout performance
Client Work
Think of these three projects as “freemium consulting”—like Gmail, you’re giving real value upfront to demonstrate your capability and earn a conversation.
You’ll choose one public company and build toward actual outreach by semester’s end. The deliverables follow the SCQA framework (Situation, Complication, Question, Answer) from the Pyramid Principle:
| Project | SCQA | The Story | The Gift |
|---|---|---|---|
| P1: Intelligence Brief | S + C | “Here’s how the world is, and here’s the tension I noticed” | Informed |
| P2: Point of View | Q + A | “Here’s the opportunity, and here’s what I think you should do” | Compelling |
| Capstone: Conversation Deck | Full SCQA | Synthesized narrative with a clear ask | Credible |
Each deliverable builds on the last. By Capstone, you’ll have a portfolio piece and—with a little luck—a real conversation with a real company.
Pod Presentations: Simulated Client Discussions
Each pod session is a simulated client meeting. You’re not presenting to classmates—you’re pitching to a skeptical executive team. Your pod members play the role of client stakeholders: they’ll ask tough questions, probe your logic, and give you honest feedback.
| Phase | Time | What’s Happening |
|---|---|---|
| Present | 4 min | Deliver your deck as if to a client |
| Q&A | 3 min | Pod asks questions in character |
| Written feedback | 2 min | Everyone completes the feedback form |
| Transition | 30 sec | Next presenter prepares |
| Per student | ~9.5 min |
How Feedback Works
All pod members and your TA complete a feedback form for each presenter. The same form is used for all three projects:
| Project | Ratings Used For | Points |
|---|---|---|
| P1 | Developmental feedback only | 25 present + 15 feedback |
| P2 | Developmental feedback only | 25 present + 15 feedback |
| Capstone | Averaged → deck grade | 60 deck + 20 feedback + 20 outreach |
Feedback points require submitting forms for all pod members. Missing any form = 0 feedback points for that round.
Feedback Form
This form is used for all three projects. For P1 and P2, ratings provide developmental feedback. For Capstone, ratings are averaged to determine your deck grade (60 pts).
Put yourself in the shoes of someone at the presenter’s target company — a strategy director, business unit lead, or chief of staff. You’re busy. You get cold outreach all the time. As you watch this presentation, ask yourself: Would I take this meeting?
Informed (40%) — Do they understand my world?
| Rating | Description |
|---|---|
| 4 | Yes — they’ve done their homework and surfaced tensions I’d recognize as real |
| 3 | Mostly — solid understanding with minor gaps or oversimplifications |
| 2 | Somewhat — they get the basics but miss nuances I’d expect them to know |
| 1 | No — this feels like a surface-level read; they don’t really understand my situation |
Compelling (40%) — Would I want to explore this opportunity?
| Rating | Description |
|---|---|
| 4 | Yes — this is worth my time; I want to dig into this with them |
| 3 | Probably — there’s something interesting here worth a conversation |
| 2 | Maybe — I’d need more convincing before I’d give up 20 minutes |
| 1 | No — nothing here makes me want to continue this conversation |
Credible (20%) — Would I trust this person?
| Rating | Description |
|---|---|
| 4 | Absolutely — sharp, prepared, handled my questions like they’ve done the work |
| 3 | Yes — professional and competent, knows their material |
| 2 | Somewhat — a few gaps or shaky moments made me wonder |
| 1 | Not really — I wouldn’t trust them with a real project |
Written Feedback (required)
- One strength: What would make someone at this company say yes?
- One thing to work on: What would most increase their chances of getting the meeting?
The Gut Check (optional, not scored)
If you were at this company, would you take this meeting? ○ Yes — I’d make time ○ Probably — if my calendar allowed ○ Unlikely — I’d need a stronger hook ○ No — I’d pass
Capstone Scoring: Average all raters’ scores, then convert to 60-point scale:
| Dimension | Weight | Max | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Informed | 40% | 24 | 24 | 18 | 12 | 6 |
| Compelling | 40% | 24 | 24 | 18 | 12 | 6 |
| Credible | 20% | 12 | 12 | 9 | 6 | 3 |
| Total | 100% | 60 | 60 | 45 | 30 | 15 |
Project 1 (P1): Intelligence Brief
Points: 40 (8% of grade)
Due: Week 9
Team: Individual
Deliverable: 4-6 slide deck
Overview
Your first “freemium” deliverable. You’ll surface something your target company should be paying attention to, hopefully an insight from public data they might have missed. Think about this as a gift to company of outside-in perspective.
Choose a public company you’d genuinely want to work with or have a real interest in. You’ll build on this company for Project 2 (P2) and the Capstone Conversation Deck, ultimately sending your work to someone at the company and requesting a meeting to discuss it.
Requirements
Produce a 4-6 slide main deck (appendix, header, and transistion slides not counted):
Slide 1: The Company at a Glance
- Brief context: what they do, where they play, recent performance
- Just enough for someone unfamiliar to follow along (keep it tight)
Slide 2: What I Noticed
- One non-obvious pattern, trend, or tension from your outside-in research
- Could be: competitive shift, margin pressure, underexploited opportunity, market timing
Slide 3: Supporting Evidence
- Data that backs up your observation (financials, benchmarks, industry trends)
- Visual where helpful (chart, table, comparison)
Slide 4: Why This Matters
- So what? What’s at stake if they act—or don’t?
- Frame the implication, not the solution (that’s P2)
Sources: Public information (10-K, earnings calls, news, industry reports, expert interviews)
Grading
| Component | Points |
|---|---|
| Present to pod | 25 |
| Submit feedback for all pod members | 15 |
| Total | 40 |
Rubric ratings are collected for developmental feedback but do not determine your grade.
P2: Point of View
Points: 40 (8% of grade)
Due: Week 11
Team: Individual
Deliverable: 5-8 slide deck
Overview
Building on your Intelligence Brief (P1), you’ll now take a position: “Here’s an opportunity I see, and here’s what I believe you should do about it.” This is the core of client work when you can demonstrate insight that earns you a conversation the client finds compelling.
Requirements
Produce an additional 5-8 slides for the same company as P1 (appendix, header, and transistion slides not counted):
Slide 1: The Opportunity
- One sentence: “I believe [Company] should [do X] because [Y]”
- This is your point of view—take a real position
Slide 2: Why This, Why Now
- Build on P1: what’s changed or what did you find that makes this urgent?
- External pressures, competitive moves, market timing
Slide 3: What It Would Take
- High-level approach: how would you structure the work?
- 2-3 key questions to answer or analyses to run
Slide 4: What’s at Stake
- Quantified potential impact (revenue, cost, market share, risk)
- What happens if they act vs. don’t act?
Slide 5: What I’d Want to Discuss
- The 2-3 questions you’d want to explore in a conversation
- Frame it as genuine curiosity, not a sales pitch
Grading
| Component | Points |
|---|---|
| Present to pod | 25 |
| Submit feedback for all pod members | 15 |
| Total | 40 |
Rubric ratings are collected for developmental feedback but do not determine your grade.
Capstone: Conversation Deck
Points: 100 (20% of grade)
Due: Week 14
Team: Individual
Deliverable: 6-10 slide main deck + appendix + outreach
Overview
This is the real thing. You’ll polish your P1 and P2 into a tight deck you’d actually send to someone at your target company—and then send it. The Capstone is about fleshing out your research and analysis and making your work client-ready and putting yourself out there.
Requirements
The Deck (6-10 slides + appendix) (appendix, header, and transistion slides not counted)
Synthesize P1 + P2 into a single, polished conversation deck:
- Opening (1 slide): Who you are, why you’re reaching out, what you’re offering
- What I Noticed (2-4 slides): Your outside-in insight (refined from P1)
- The Opportunity (1-3 slides): Your point of view (refined from P2)
- What’s at Stake (1-2 slides): Quantified impact
- The Ask (1 slide): “I’d love 20 minutes to discuss [specific questions]. Would you be open to a conversation?”
Appendix: Put supporting detail—data tables, methodology notes, additional analysis—in an appendix. Keep the main deck tight and narrative-driven. A busy exec will skim the main slides; the appendix shows you’ve done the work if they want to dig deeper.
This deck should be tight enough to attach to a LinkedIn message or cold email. Every slide in the main deck earns its place.
The Outreach
Send your deck to at least one person at your target company. This could be:
- A LinkedIn message to someone in strategy, corp dev, or a relevant business unit
- A cold email (if you can find a contact)
- A warm intro through your network
What to Submit
- Your final deck (PDF)
- Screenshot or copy of your outreach message
Grading
| Component | Points |
|---|---|
| Deck quality (via Feedback Form Rubric, averaged) | 60 |
| Submit feedback for all pod members | 20 |
| Outreach completed | 20 |
| Total | 100 |
You’re not graded on whether they respond since that’s not in your control. You’re graded on the quality of your work and the courage to put it in front of a real professional. Some of you will get responses. Some won’t. Both outcomes teach you something.
Feedback Surveys
Mid-Semester Feedback Survey
Complete the anonymous mid-semester feedback survey to earn 5 extra credit points added to your final grade. The survey is anonymous, so to receive credit, submit a screenshot of the confirmation page to LearningSuite.
Student Ratings
If you complete the official student ratings survey at the end of the semester, we will add 5 bonus points to your final grade.