How assessors judge Developing Self and Others
Assessors score your Developing Self and Others statement against positive and negative indicators drawn from the level descriptor for the grade. Knowing what counts for and against you — and what lifts a 4 to a 5 — is the fastest way to improve your score.
How sift scoring works for this behaviour
At the sift, trained assessors read each behaviour statement against the level descriptor in the job advert. They look for evidence matching the positive indicators for that level, note anything matching the negative indicators, and award a score on the 1–7 scale. They score what is written, not what they guess about you.
That has two practical consequences. First, your personal actions must be explicit: writing 'we' throughout forces the assessor to guess your contribution, and they will not guess generously. Second, the result must be stated, because impact is part of the indicator set.
From the official guidance
The indicator-based approach is described in the Success Profiles guidance on GOV.UK: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/success-profiles. Departments choose which behaviours and levels apply to each role, so always read the advert first.
Positive indicators assessors reward
Positive indicators for this behaviour cluster around seeking growth and growing others. Strong statements usually show several of these:
- Naming a genuine development need and doing something deliberate about it
- Asking for feedback — or receiving tough feedback — and changing behaviour because of it
- Structuring support for someone else: a mentoring plan, coaching sessions, shadowing or a development plan
- Creating something that outlasts you, such as a skills matrix, guide or training session others now use
- Sharing learning so the whole team benefits, not just you
- A result with numbers: people trained, time saved, errors reduced, scores improved
For example, 'I asked my manager what I should improve, worked on it for a month and cut my error rate to zero' hits three positive indicators in two sentences: seeking feedback, acting on it and a measured result.
Negative indicators that drag scores down
Negative indicators are the habits that tell an assessor you do not really value development. Watch for these in your draft:
- Listing courses attended with no application or outcome
- Describing team development without your personal role in it
- Treating feedback as something you received politely rather than acted on
- Claiming you 'always' develop others with no specific example
- A result that is vague ('it went well') or missing entirely
- Sounding defensive about mistakes or criticism
Common mistake
The most common self-inflicted problem in this behaviour is the training list. Three sentences naming courses tells the assessor you attended, not that you developed. One applied example beats five certificates.
What separates a 4 from a 5
On the 1–7 scale, 4 means you met the level with acceptable evidence and 5 means you met it fully with good, specific evidence. For this behaviour, the gap is usually specificity and ownership, not a bigger story.
| In the statement | A 4 looks like | A 5 looks like |
|---|---|---|
| Your development need | Vaguely mentioned ('I wanted to improve') | Named precisely ('my refund handling caused till errors') |
| Feedback | Mentioned in passing | Sought out, quoted or paraphrased, then visibly acted on |
| Developing others | Helped a colleague | Structured support over weeks, adapted to how they learn |
| Result | Outcome stated | Outcome measured, with at least one number and a lasting change |
To reach 6 or 7 you need more again: evidence above the level, scale beyond your immediate desk, and impact that persisted after you moved on.
Check your draft against the indicators
- My development need (or the other person's) is named in the first half of the statement
- Feedback appears, and I show exactly what I changed because of it
- At HEO and above, most of my Action is about developing someone else
- The Result has at least one number and says what lasted
- Every 'we' that should be 'I' has been fixed
- The statement matches the level descriptor for the grade in the advert
Frequently asked questions
Positive indicators are the behaviours assessors are trained to look for at each level of a behaviour. For Developing Self and Others they include seeking feedback, acting on it, building your own skills and helping others build theirs. Statements matching several indicators with specific evidence score highest.
Usually vagueness: an unnamed development need, feedback that disappears from the story, 'we' instead of 'I', or no measured result. At HEO and above, a common cause is writing only about your own learning when the descriptor expects you to develop others.
The evidence. A modest story told with specific personal actions and a numbered result outscores a dramatic story told vaguely. Assessors cannot award marks for what they must infer, so spell out your actions, reasoning and outcome.
There is no fixed quota, and departments score holistically. As a working rule, a 250-word statement should clearly show three or four positive indicators for the level. Chasing every indicator produces a cramped, box-ticking statement that reads worse.
Next step
Get the free STAR template — the same structure used in every example on this site.
Download the template pack