What actually happens on the day
A typical assessment centre runs three to five hours and contains a written case study, a group exercise built on that case, one or two competency interviews, and often a short technical or numerical element. The group exercise usually seats four to eight candidates around a table with an assessor standing back, silent, holding a scoring sheet. You are given a brief, a pack of information, and a deadline to reach a recommendation.
| Stage | Length | What is being tested |
|---|---|---|
| Case reading | 20-30 min | Prioritisation under incomplete information |
| Group discussion | 30-45 min | Collaboration, influence, commercial judgement |
| Presentation | 5-10 min | Clarity, ownership, handling challenge |
| Competency interview | 30-45 min | Evidence of behaviours, motivation, fit |
| Technical or numerical | 20-30 min | Accuracy under time pressure |
The scoring rubric behind the silence
Assessors mark against a fixed list of competencies, usually teamwork, analytical thinking, communication, commercial awareness and drive. Each competency has behavioural anchors: things they can see or hear you do. Because the sheet is behavioural, credit is only awarded for observable contributions. A brilliant insight you keep in your notes scores zero.
| Behaviour | Scores well | Scores badly |
|---|---|---|
| Airtime | Four or five substantive contributions | Dominating, or fewer than two |
| Building on others | "Building on Priya's point about margin..." | Restating your own idea louder |
| Timekeeping | "We have ten minutes; let's decide on option B or C" | Running out of time with no recommendation |
| Handling disagreement | Naming the trade-off and testing it | Conceding instantly, or refusing to move |
| Use of the data | Citing a figure from the pack | Opinion with no reference to the brief |
A timing plan that works in any group exercise
- 1First two minutes: agree the objective out loud and the time split. Someone has to do this; make it you.
- 2Next five minutes: each person shares the one thing from their section that changes the decision.
- 3Middle third: narrow to two options and name the trade-off between them explicitly.
- 4Final third: stress-test the leading option, note the biggest risk, and assign the presentation.
- 5Last two minutes: state the recommendation, the reason, and the one condition that would change it.
The written case study
The case is usually a short company or transaction scenario with deliberately more information than you can use. There will be a page of financials, a page of market context, and at least one red herring. Assessors want to see whether you can identify the two or three facts that actually move the answer, state an assumption where the data is missing, and commit to a recommendation rather than listing considerations.
- Read the question first, then the pack, so you filter as you read.
- Write the recommendation sentence before you write anything else.
- Support it with three reasons, each tied to a number in the pack.
- Name one risk and one mitigant; this is where most candidates stop short.
- Leave five minutes to check arithmetic; a wrong multiple undermines everything above it.
Why strong candidates still fail this stage
The most common failure is treating the exercise as a competition. Candidates arrive believing they must out-argue the room, so they interrupt, repeat themselves, and defend a position past the point of usefulness. The rubric punishes all three. The second failure is the opposite: staying quiet, listening politely, and producing nothing an assessor can tick. Both look like personality problems from the outside; both are actually strategy problems, and both are fixable in an afternoon of practice.
A third, quieter failure is ignoring the brief's constraints. If the pack says the client will not consider an equity raise, a group that recommends one has failed the exercise regardless of how well it collaborated. Read the constraints twice and repeat them aloud early; you will often be the only person who does.
“The candidates we hire are usually the ones who made the group better, not the ones who were loudest in it.”
What to do in the twenty-four hours before
Re-read your own application. Assessors often interview from your form, and inconsistencies between what you wrote in January and what you say in the room are noticed. Prepare four competency stories that can each be angled two ways, so you are not forced to reuse one. Read the bank's most recent results release and one live market story you can discuss with an actual view.
Then rehearse out loud. Run a mock group exercise with three friends and a timer, or if that is not possible, talk through a case alone against a clock. The physical act of forming a recommendation under time pressure is the skill being tested, and it does not transfer from reading about it.
Key takeaways
| Point | Detail |
|---|---|
| Behaviour beats brilliance | Only observable contributions can be scored |
| Structure the room | Objective, timings and a decision point |
| Commit to a recommendation | A clear answer with a stated risk beats a balanced list |
| Bring others in | Naming and building on a quiet candidate scores twice |
| Respect the constraints | Breaching the brief invalidates the output |
Frequently asked questions
Should you volunteer to lead the group exercise?
Lead the process rather than the content. Timekeeping, summarising and driving to a decision score highly; appointing yourself chair and talking over people does not.
Do assessment centres score candidates against each other?
Usually not. Most banks score against a fixed competency bar, so more than one person in your group can pass, and helping the group perform improves your own marks.
What happens if the group runs out of time?
The whole group loses marks on outcome-focus. If you are two minutes from the deadline with no answer, say so and propose the strongest option available; the intervention itself is credited.
