In a group assessment, four candidates get 30 minutes and a data pack on an entrepreneur with Rs 40 crore and five candidate funds, and must agree a portfolio. What structure does a strong group follow, and what portfolio should it reach?

Clarify for five minutes, compute for ten, agree for ten, present for five, and let the client's needs set most of the answer. Put the Rs 8 crore venture money in Fund E and two years of spending plus the long-term debt, Rs 12.8 crore, in Fund D. Put Rs 19.2 crore in equity: Rs 10 crore in A, Rs 6.8 crore in B and Rs 2.4 crore in C. A worst-case fall costs the long-term money about -19%, inside his 20% limit.

Two things at once: the portfolio and the way four strangers reached it. A kitchen with four cooks and one order does best when someone reads the ticket aloud, the jobs are split, and one person plates. In a group case the structure is scored as much as the answer: who clarifies the brief, whether the group uses the data, how disagreements are settled, and whether one clear recommendation comes out. Talking most is not the same as leading; the candidate who proposes the time plan and brings a quiet member in is usually the one remembered.

The needs, turned into rupees. Rs 8 crore is needed within two years, so it goes to Fund E, arbitrage, which barely moves. Two years of spending, Rs 2.4 crore, goes to Fund D. That leaves Rs 29.6 crore of long-term money, and the only real debate is how much of it can be equity without breaking the 20% loss limit. Use the pack's worst falls as the test. If equity is split Rs 10, 6.8 and 2.4 crore across A, B and C, a repeat of each fund's worst fall costs Rs 5.62 crore, -19.0% of Rs 29.6 crore. That is about 65% equity in the long-term money, and the remaining Rs 10.4 crore joins the spending reserve in Fund D.

On Fund C. Its 21% five-year return is the brightest number in the pack, and someone always argues for a large slice. A past return is a description of one period, not a plan; Fund C also has the pack's worst fall, 45%, which alone would eat most of the loss budget if it were a large holding. Keeping it to Rs 2.4 crore, 6% of the total, lets the group acknowledge the argument without breaking the client's limit. A good way to settle the disagreement is to test each proposal against the 20% limit out loud, so the data decides rather than the loudest voice.

Close the presentation with one voice and one page: the needs, the portfolio, the loss test and the costs. The blended cost of 0.47% is worth saying, because leaning on Fund A as the core keeps it low. Say the limit too: five-year figures describe a single stretch of markets, and the worst-fall test is a stress test, not a ceiling on what can happen.