APS4 roles sit at the level where you're expected to work with some independence within established guidelines, and increasingly support less experienced colleagues. Selection panels at this level are checking that you can apply judgement to routine situations without constant supervision — not that you can lead a whole team or set strategy. Criteria are usually drawn from the APS Work Level Standards and typically cover supporting change, delivering results, working with others, and communicating clearly.
| Typical Criterion | What Panels Are Looking For |
|---|---|
| Supports strategy and change | Evidence you can adapt to new processes or priorities and help colleagues understand why a change is happening, even if you didn't set the change yourself. |
| Achieves results | A concrete example of managing your own workload, meeting deadlines, and following through on a task without being chased. |
| Cultivates productive working relationships | Proof you can work well within a team and with people outside it — internal stakeholders, other teams, or the public. |
| Communicates with influence | An example of explaining something clearly to someone who didn't already understand it, whether in writing or in person. |
Criterion: "Achieves results"
In my role processing incoming correspondence for a small team, our queue regularly built up during end-of-month reporting periods, and overdue items were starting to affect the team's service standards.
I needed to find a way to keep the queue under control during peak periods without dropping accuracy on more complex items.
I reviewed three months of queue data to identify which correspondence types were quick to process and which needed more time, then proposed batching the quick items each morning before tackling complex cases in the afternoon, when I had fewer interruptions.
Average processing time dropped from four days to two, overdue items during peak periods fell by more than half, and my team lead adopted the batching approach as the standard process for the rest of the team.
Criterion: "Cultivates productive working relationships"
My team relied on data provided by another branch that was frequently late or formatted inconsistently, which caused rework on our end every month.
I wanted to fix the recurring problem without escalating it as a complaint, since we needed an ongoing working relationship with that branch.
I arranged an informal call with my counterpart in the other branch, explained the impact the delays were having on our reporting, and together we agreed on a simple shared template and a earlier internal deadline on their end.
Data started arriving on time and in a consistent format for the following six reporting cycles, rework on our side dropped significantly, and the relationship became one we could rely on for other cross-branch requests.
Use these as a guide for structure and depth — your own response should be built from your own situation, task, action, and result.
Most APS4 applications ask for a one- or two-page pitch addressing all criteria together, rather than a separate response per criterion — check the job ad carefully, since agencies vary. Where a specific word limit is given per criterion, 200–300 words is typical; panels are reading dozens of applications and a tightly written response reads better than a long one.
Give the AI your real experience and let it structure the STAR response for you.
Write My Response — FreeBrowse All ExamplesCommon questions about APS4 selection criteria.