We analyse critically: police CVF examples and how to write your answer
Updated · 3 min read
'We analyse critically' is about taking in information, questioning it, weighing up the evidence and making a sound decision, and being able to explain your reasoning. Policing decisions often have to be made quickly with incomplete information, so assessors want to see a clear, logical way of thinking, not just the outcome.
'We analyse critically' is one of the six competencies in the College of Policing's Competency and Values Framework (CVF), updated in 2024. You'll meet it in application forms, assessment processes, interviews and promotion boards. Our main CVF guide covers the whole framework; this page goes deep on 'We analyse critically'.
What assessors look for
- You gathered relevant information and checked how reliable it was.
- You spotted patterns, gaps or things that didn't add up.
- You weighed up options and risks before deciding.
- You can explain your reasoning clearly.
Showing the values at the same time
The three CVF values (courage, respect and empathy, and public service) run through every competency. Critical analysis serves the public when it leads to a fairer or safer decision. Show you considered how your decision would affect people, especially anyone vulnerable.
How the question is usually worded
- Give an example of when you used information to solve a problem.
- Tell us about a time you made a decision with incomplete information.
- Describe a time you noticed something others had missed.
An example answer
Working as a stock controller in a warehouse, our monthly figures showed a small but steady loss of high-value phone chargers. Most people assumed it was theft, and there was talk of searching staff bags. Before anyone acted on that, I looked at the data in more detail. The losses only happened in weeks when one particular supplier delivered, and the missing amount was always a multiple of 12, the number in a box. That pointed to a counting or delivery problem rather than theft, which would be more random. I checked three delivery notes against what had actually arrived. Each time, the supplier had invoiced for one more box than they delivered, and our goods-in team had signed for the invoiced amount without counting the boxes. I presented this to my manager with the delivery notes and a simple chart. We introduced a box count at goods-in for that supplier, and the finance team recovered £3,400 in overcharges. There were no further losses, and no staff were wrongly suspected. I learned to test the obvious explanation before acting on it.
- Questions the easy assumption
- Uses data to spot a pattern
- Tests the theory with evidence before acting
- Protects people from unfair suspicion: public service and fairness
Your examples don't have to come from policing. Most applicants use work, volunteering, sport or study. What matters is that it clearly shows the competency, and what you personally did.
Common mistakes
- Describing a decision without explaining how you reached it.
- Choosing an example where the answer was obvious from the start.
- Forgetting to say how you checked the information was reliable.
The CVF describes each competency at different levels for different roles, so read the indicators for the level on your force's advert, and check which version of the framework they're using. Then save your best 'We analyse critically' answer: it will come up again at interview, and again at promotion. The STAR method is the structure behind every answer on this page.
Frequently asked questions
- Do I need an example with numbers or data?
- No. Analysis can be about people, statements or situations. What matters is that you questioned the information and reasoned your way to a decision.
- What if my analysis turned out to be wrong?
- That can still work if your reasoning was sound at the time and you adapted when new information came in. Explain what you learned.