Dear
@Amma Usman,
@Andrei Radu and
@Ram Sabaratnam,
I hope you guys are well and enjoying this sunny day.
I am trying to prepare for an upcoming written exercise, which is my weakness during AC.
I would like to ask if you could advise me on how to structure my thoughts in an organised manner without allowing my anxiety to take over.
How do you think I should organise my time when tackling the case?
Thank you in advance for your help.
Hey
@AS24 I definitely am, their scarcity here has really taught me their value 🥲. On this brighter note, I will split up my thoughts between how to organize your time and then your ideas.
Organizing Time
To ensure you are managing your time well, before you start working through the exercise I advise you to take a few minutes to make a plan. First, take a look at the number of tasks and read the prompts. Then, briefly skim the annexed briefs and readings - but only very briefly. You want to see how many pages of readings you will have per task and how dense those look. Based on this information, make an estimation as to how much time each task or part of the exercise will take compared to the others - ie you might see the first task as requiring about twice the workload of the second and that the third is roughly the same as the second. Then, you should spend around 1/2 of your time on the first, around 1/4 on the second and another 1/4 on the third. However, before dividing the time using the relevant fractions, subtract around 10 minutes from the initial total time: 5 to account for the planning part at the beginning and 5 for contingencies and reviewing spelling and grammar at the end. I think this should be your basic approach, but do keep in mind these further considerations:
- You may want to make a further separation between the estimated necessary time to do the reading and the estimated necessary time to write your analysis for each part. One of the most significant issues I have had with written exercises has been giving in to the temptation to take more time than I should reading and taking notes; and simultaneously underestimating the time it would take me to write my analysis. In my experience, the materials in these exercises are not that difficult to work through and do not attempt to trip you up, so they do not require that much time. Thus, it might be a good idea to plan ahead how much you want to take on them: it should help you keep yourself in check during the exercise and not let your anxiety and overthinking make you waste precious time by reading the same passages again and again.
- You may not be able to estimate such a simple fraction split as in my aforementioned example. That is fine, and you definitely should not spend time overthinking this element. Simply go with your gut in making some judgement about the relative workloads and move forward with that. The most important part of this planning is not maximum accuracy in representation of the time each should take, but in providing a rough framework which will enable you to keep yourself to account and thus improve efficiency.
- If your tasks/parts of the exercise have different priority levels you should adjust your time allocation fractions. I would still aim to have a rough representation of what the workload of each involves but I would also allow adjustments to that to ensure a high quality work product for the most important ones.
Organizing Ideas
As for structuring your thoughts, it is unfortunately more difficult to give very concrete advice, as the right way to go about it will be highly dependent on the details of the exercise. My main advice is to find multiple distinctions between the different categories of information that you will be presenting ; and to organize them under multiple headings. The last thing you want is a huge block of text. It will almost always be more difficult to read and understand and will often also end up confusing your analysis as well. To give some examples of how you can go about this:
- Split the descriptive part of your writing (where you are essentially summarizing uncontroversial facts) and the analytic one (where you are advancing your opinion based on the aforementioned facts);
- If your argument is more complex, separate the analysis of the different inferential steps necessary to establish the conclusion;
- Separate the pros considerations, the cons considerations, and the synthesis view;
- Split your analysis of the different alternatives based on the facts;
- Separate your analysis of the relevant considerations based on their class (financial, legal, social, reputational etc) and based on the relevant class of stakeholders (shareholders, clients, the government, the public etc).
Of course, no piece of writing in an AC will need or be capable of supporting categorizations based on all the above. I have only listed some ideas to keep in the back of your mind; once you go through the actual exercise, you should be able to intuitively decide which is the most appropriate and easy for you to use.
