Seeing the big picture – Winning Answer:

“I formulated the UK’s voting position on the sensitive issue of a nation’s attempts to change international law on drugs. I identified and analysed the political, economic and scientific benefits and risks. I balanced the risks and benefits by gaining a full understanding of them and then deciding which were the most likely to meet the Home Secretary’s priority to control drugs. For example, I judged that the benefits of this legal change for our bilateral cooperation with the country on controlling the issue at hand were outweighed by the risks of increasing the problem addressed by the legislation and undermining international law. I negotiated at EU level and with the US to reach a common position. I then recommended that ministers vote against this change, based on my assessment of the policy options and the level of international support. I proposed an innovative solution to manage the threat to co-operation with the nation in question through an agreement on drugs co-operation. The minister agreed this and I supported him in a difficult meeting with the other nation’s foreign minister when the agreement was signed. UK interests were protected by deterring an increase in drugs, maintaining a strong anti-drugs position with the US and mitigating damage to the bilateral relationship.”

This answer clearly demonstrates evidence of meeting the ‘seeing the big picture’ behaviour. He sets the scene (the need to take a voting position), explains what he was asked to do (formulate that position), details the actions he took (analysis and recommendation, followed by supporting the minister) and the outcome (UK interests protected). He doesn’t go into too much detail but includes just enough to allow the vacancy holder to assess his suitability against the behaviour.