Interviewer view · keep this screen to yourself

A furniture retailer in the UAE: which ads really pay?

You run the case. Read the prompt, answer questions from the notes below, and share data only when the candidate asks for it or gets stuck. Score at the end.

Case timer

00:00

Target length:

1. Read the prompt aloud

Read it slowly, then pause. Let the candidate ask questions before they structure.

A fictional online furniture retailer in the UAE has a 40 percent gross margin. Its last-click report says ads on searches for its own brand name returned AED 1.2 million of sales on AED 100,000 of spend, and social media ads returned AED 400,000 on AED 200,000. The marketing team wants to cut social. A holdout test then shows only 10 percent of the brand search sales were extra, while social ads caused AED 600,000 of extra sales (many buyers saw a social ad, then later searched and clicked a brand ad). What should the retailer do?

2. Answers to clarifying questions

This case has no scripted clarifying answers. Answer from the prompt, and say "assume what you think is reasonable" if the prompt does not cover it.

3. A model structure

Compare the candidate's structure with this one. A different split can be just as good if it is clean and fits the problem.

Profit from an ad = incremental sales x gross margin minus spend
- Break-even ROAS = 1 / gross margin
- Key: Last-click ROAS versus incremental ROAS for each channel
- Profit from each channel

4. The working, step by step

Each step shows how a strong candidate works it out. Share a new fact from it only when the candidate asks or is stuck, and let them do the math: the result in the dark box is what they should reach.

Step 1: Break-even ROAS
What a strong candidate does: At a 40 percent margin.
Break-even ROAS: 1 ÷ 0.4 = 2.5
Step 2: Brand search, last-click ROAS
What a strong candidate does: AED 1.2 million of credited sales on AED 100,000.
Brand search last-click ROAS: 1,200,000 ÷ 100,000 = 12
Step 3: Brand search, incremental sales
What a strong candidate does: Only 10 percent of the credited sales were extra.
Brand search incremental sales (AED): 1,200,000 × 0.1 = 120,000
Step 4: Brand search, profit
What a strong candidate does: Margin on the extra sales minus the spend.
Brand search profit (AED): 120,000 × 0.4 - 100,000 = -52,000
Step 5: Social, last-click ROAS
What a strong candidate does: AED 400,000 of credited sales on AED 200,000.
Social last-click ROAS: 400,000 ÷ 200,000 = 2
Step 6: Social, incremental ROAS
What a strong candidate does: AED 600,000 of extra sales on AED 200,000.
Social incremental ROAS: 600,000 ÷ 200,000 = 3
Step 7: Social, profit
What a strong candidate does: Margin on the extra sales minus the spend.
Social profit (AED): 600,000 × 0.4 - 200,000 = 40,000

The recommendation to listen for

At the end, say: "The CEO walks in. What is your recommendation?"

The retailer should keep social ads and cut most brand search spend, the opposite of what the last-click report suggests. First, brand search looks like the star with a ROAS of 12, but only AED 120,000 of its sales were extra, so it loses about AED 52,000. Second, social looks weak at a ROAS of 2, below the 2.5 break-even, but it caused AED 600,000 of sales, an incremental ROAS of 3, and earns about AED 40,000. The risk is that a rival bids on the retailer's brand name once it stops, taking some searches. As a next step, cut brand search in a few test weeks or regions and watch whether total sales move.

Risks a strong answer names: One test is one period; repeat it before moving large budgets; Social ads may also build demand that a short test does not capture.

Score the candidate

Score each criterion from 1 to 5. A 2 or a 4 sits between the descriptions.

This case has no exhibit. Score Exhibit reading on how the candidate used the data you gave them: did they pick out the number that matters and say what it means?

Structuring

1: No clear structure, or a memorized framework that does not fit the problem.
3: A sensible structure, but with some overlap, a gap, or no clear priority.
5: A structure built for this problem, with no overlap and no gaps, a stated hypothesis, and a clear first step.

Math

1: Frequent errors, no units, or needed heavy help to finish.
3: Right answers but slow or messy working, or one error caught late.
5: Accurate and clearly narrated, with units, a sense check, and what the number means.

Exhibit reading

1: Read the chart aloud without finding the number that matters.
3: Found the key number but gave only part of the so-what.
5: Pulled the right number quickly and said what it means for the case.

Synthesis

1: Summarized what was done, with no clear answer.
3: Gave an answer, but with weak reasons or no next step.
5: Answer first, then two or three reasons with numbers, the main risk, and next steps.

Communication

1: Hard to follow: long silences, no signposting.
3: Clear most of the time, with some rambling.
5: Calm and concise, signposted each step, and checked in with the interviewer.

Total

0 out of 25

Score all five criteria to see the band and the feedback template.