Here is a made-up example to show how a selection panel might grade the evidence in your self-assessment using the the skills and abilities framework (JSAF).
Weak example (Grade D)
Skill and ability – personal qualities
- Adheres to the Bangalore Principles of independence, impartiality, integrity, propriety and equality of treatment, appreciating the importance of high standards of conduct and of maintaining public trust in the judiciary.
- Possesses sufficient resilience for the role and an ability to remain calm in challenging situations.
- Has a practical, common-sense approach to problem solving.
- Shows open-mindedness and self-awareness.
“I was acting for a mother in a complex and challenging case that ran for three years. She showed challenging behaviour and was well known to my firm. I was allocated the case by my Partner after a colleague went off long-term sick. From the outset the mother was aggressive, vocal, suspicious; I had some sympathy as she was angry and distressed that my colleague had ‘abandoned her without warning’. She challenged my ability to do a good job, and I carefully reassured her of my strong grip of her case. I worked with her for several months and I felt we made progress but suddenly I was informed that she had complained about me to another Partner. We were a long way into proceedings, and I didn’t want to leave her in a difficult position, but it didn’t feel professional to blindly continue. I had to consider the pros and cons of continuing to act, in an open-minded way. I calmly spoke with her about the complaint, but she denied it completely. While I tried to work things through with her, she also complained in similar terms to my own Partner and again denied doing so when I asked about it. Reluctantly, I decided to end the retainer because I felt I could not act for her whilst she openly lied to me.”
How the panel assess applications
Here are example notes of how a selection panel might assess the evidence above. They show what can hold a candidate back.
| Sentences from the example | Panel analysis |
| “I was acting for a mother in a complex and challenging case that ran for three years. She showed challenging behaviour and was well known to my firm. I was allocated the case by my Partner after a colleague went off long-term sick. From the outset the mother was aggressive, vocal, suspicious; I had some sympathy as she was angry and distressed that my colleague had ‘abandoned her without warning’.” | This sets out the background to the example, but it could have been much shorter. The candidate does not explain how the case was ‘complex and challenging’ so that sentence adds little. Similarly, the second sentence is not needed as it appears to summarise the third and fourth sentences. The third and fourth sentences are more useful as they highlight key background information and the way the candidate was thinking, but it is not yet clear how this example relates to Personal Qualities. |
| “She challenged my ability to do a good job, and I carefully reassured her of my strong grip of her case. I worked with her for several months and I felt we made progress but suddenly I was informed that she had complained about me to another Partner.” | This sets out what happened and some of the candidate’s actions, but the information on making progress is vague – what progress was made and how? It is not clear which part of Personal Qualities the candidate is trying to evidence. |
| “We were a long way into proceedings, and I didn’t want to leave her in a difficult position, but it didn’t feel professional to blindly continue. I had to consider the pros and cons of continuing to act, in an open-minded way.” | This sets out the candidate’s thought process but again it is unclear which part of Personal Qualities the candidate is trying to evidence – possibly the fourth bullet point as it mentions ‘open-minded’? |
| “I calmly spoke with her about the complaint, but she denied it completely. While I tried to work things through with her, she also complained in similar terms to my own Partner and again denied doing so when I asked about it.” | This part sets out some action taken by the candidate, but again it is unclear which part of Personal Qualities the candidate is trying to evidence – possibly the second bullet point as it mentions ‘calmly’?” |
| “Reluctantly, I decided to end the retainer because I felt I could not act for her whilst she openly lied to me.” | Personal Qualities includes problem solving but the candidate was ultimately unable to solve the problem and work with the client. Again, it is unclear which part of Personal Qualities the candidate is trying to evidence in this final sentence. |
In summary:
- It is not at all clear how this example demonstrates Personal Qualities.
- It sets out some of the candidate’s actions and thoughts, but it is difficult to relate these to specific parts of Personal Qualities.
- There is too much background information, and this too fails to link to specific parts of Personal Qualities.
- This example would likely be graded as D (insufficient evidence) by the panel.
- The candidate could have achieved a higher grade by choosing an example with a more positive outcome, and by more clearly describing their actions with obvious links to particular parts of Personal Qualities.
The example above is just to help you understand how a panel would find (or fail to find) evidence. Copying them and changing a few words to make it personal to you will not guarantee a high grade. It is much better to create your own examples from scratch, using these tips.
More help with an example of a strong self-assessment.