Grade 6 Communicating and Influencing interview questions test whether you can turn complex information into clear decisions, build trust with senior stakeholders and influence people who may have different priorities or interests.
At Grade 6, the panel is looking for communication that shapes direction. Strong answers normally involve senior leaders, cross-functional stakeholders or external partners, and they show how you adapted the message, handled challenge and secured a useful outcome.
Preparing for a Grade 6 Civil Service interview?
The Grade 6/7 interview guide contains 250+ sample answers across all nine Civil Service behaviours, including senior-level Communicating and Influencing examples.
What Communicating and Influencing means at Grade 6
The Grade 6/7 criteria focus on communicating clearly, honestly and enthusiastically in order to build trust. You should be able to explain complex issues in simple terms, take account of individual needs, deliver difficult messages sensitively, remain open-minded during disagreement and make effective use of different communication methods.
🗣️ Explain complexity clearly: remove jargon and focus on the information people need to make a decision.
🤝 Build trust: be open about risks, constraints and uncertainty rather than overselling your preferred option.
🎯 Tailor the message: adapt detail, language and channel to the audience.
⚖️ Handle difficult messages: communicate unwelcome information clearly while respecting the people affected.
🌍 Respect different interests: stay impartial and open-minded when stakeholders disagree.
📊 Improve communication: monitor whether messages are landing and change your approach if they are not.
The key difference at Grade 6 is impact. The panel should be able to see that your communication changed understanding, secured agreement or enabled a significant decision.
Grade 6 Communicating and Influencing interview questions
❓ Tell us about a time you had to explain a complex issue so senior stakeholders could make a decision quickly.
❓ Describe a time you persuaded a senior leader to change their preferred course of action.
❓ Give an example of when you had to deliver a difficult message to a team or stakeholder group.
❓ Tell us about a time you influenced people with strongly competing priorities.
❓ Describe a situation where you changed your communication approach because the original message was not landing.
❓ Give an example of how you used data or visual information to make a complex recommendation easier to understand.
❓ Tell us about a time you had to remain impartial while managing a contentious discussion.
How to answer with B-STAR
💭 Belief: give one short sentence on how you approach communication and influence.
📍 Situation: identify the issue, audience and why the communication mattered.
🎯 Task: state the decision, agreement or understanding you needed to secure.
🛠️ Action: show how you simplified the issue, tailored the message, handled objections and checked understanding.
📈 Result: explain what changed because of your communication.
Avoid turning the Action into a diary of meetings. Strong Grade 6 evidence explains why you chose a particular communication method and how you changed your approach when stakeholders challenged the message.
Example answer: explaining a complex issue to senior stakeholders
Belief: I believe senior communication is most effective when complex detail is translated into clear choices, risks and consequences so leaders can make an informed decision quickly.
Situation: I was leading technical delivery on a cloud migration when performance testing showed that a core data service was below the threshold required for a planned public launch. Senior leaders were accountable for the timetable and funding but did not need the technical detail behind every failure.
Task: I needed to explain the issue, set out credible options and secure a decision that protected service continuity without losing stakeholder confidence.
Action: I prepared a short briefing using response-time, error-rate and user-journey data. I removed technical jargon and translated the issue into likely user consequences such as longer waits, failed submissions and increased operational support.
I presented two realistic options: delay the launch while the service was remediated, or proceed with a reduced scope that removed the unstable journey. For each option I set out the impact on cost, timetable, user experience and residual risk.
During the discussion, one senior stakeholder challenged the need for any delay because the programme had already communicated the date externally. I remained clear about the evidence, acknowledged the reputational concern and explained why launching a visibly unstable service would create a larger reputational risk. I used a simple dashboard rather than a long paper and checked understanding by asking leaders to confirm the trade-off they were accepting.
Result: Leaders agreed to a short delay with a defined recovery plan. The service launched after the performance issue was resolved and met the required threshold. The briefing format was later adopted for other technical decisions because it gave senior stakeholders a clearer view of risk and choice.
Why this answer works
The candidate does not try to impress senior leaders with technical language. They simplify the issue around the decision that needs to be made.
The answer also contains genuine resistance. The candidate listens to the reputational concern, responds with evidence and remains persuasive without dismissing the stakeholder's position.
The result demonstrates influence because the communication leads directly to a decision and improves how similar issues are presented in future.
Practise more Grade 6/7 interview questions
The complete guide includes worked answers across Communicating and Influencing and the other Civil Service behaviours.
What interviewers are looking for
✅ A meaningful audience: use stakeholders who had a real decision or interest in the outcome.
✅ Audience adaptation: show how you changed the level of detail or language.
✅ Credible challenge: include disagreement, uncertainty or a difficult message.
✅ Clear influence: explain what people decided or did differently.
✅ Professional judgement: show that you remained honest and balanced rather than simply trying to “win”.
Good scenario ideas
💡 Explaining a technical, financial or policy risk to senior leaders.
💡 Persuading stakeholders to change a planned approach after new evidence emerged.
💡 Communicating an unpopular decision to a large team or partner group.
💡 Building agreement between teams with competing operational priorities.
💡 Reworking a communication campaign after feedback showed that people had misunderstood the message.
Common mistakes
❌ Describing a presentation with no influence: explain what changed because of it.
❌ Using the same message for everyone: Grade 6 evidence should normally show genuine audience adaptation.
❌ Making disagreement sound easy: explain the objection and how you responded.
❌ Overloading the panel with context: keep the story focused on communication choices and outcomes.
❌ Confusing confidence with influence: sounding certain is not enough if nobody changed their view or action.
For written evidence, see the Communicating and Influencing 250-word statement example.
Quick Grade 6 interview check
✅ Is the issue complex enough to demonstrate senior communication?
✅ Have you shown how the audience shaped your approach?
✅ Is there real challenge or disagreement?
✅ Did you check understanding?
✅ Does the result show a decision, agreement or changed behaviour?
Prepare across all nine Grade 6/7 behaviours
