EPSOHQ
← COM/AD/108/2026 training hub
4 written · 4 oral · AD5

AD5 written and oral scenario pack

Eight realistic assignments. Each scenario defines the decision context, required product and evidence-based self-review.

Clock: Written stage: train within 90 minutes. Oral stage: train within the published maximum of 60 minutes. These independent scenarios do not reproduce confidential Commission test material.
Written assignments

Analyse, decide, write

01Written assignments

Commissioner briefing note

Brief

New monitoring data shows uneven Member State implementation. The cabinet needs a short note before an interinstitutional meeting.

Deliverable

Draft a briefing that states issue, evidence, legal-policy context, options, recommendation and speaking points.

Self-review
  • Answer the cabinet decision need first.
  • Distinguish EU and Member State responsibilities.
  • Make figures and uncertainties traceable.
02Written assignments

Citizen correspondence

Brief

A citizen alleges unfair treatment by a national authority and asks the Commission to overturn an individual decision.

Deliverable

Draft a clear reply explaining competence, available EU-level action and practical next steps.

Self-review
  • Show empathy without promising an unavailable remedy.
  • Explain competence in plain language.
  • Give concrete signposting.
03Written assignments

Meeting summary and action note

Brief

A technical meeting ends with partial agreement, three unresolved points and overlapping follow-up commitments.

Deliverable

Produce a neutral record of decisions, open issues, actions, owners and deadlines.

Self-review
  • Do not turn proposals into decisions.
  • Use unambiguous action ownership.
  • Flag dependencies and missing confirmation.
04Written assignments

Programme implementation comparison

Brief

Two implementation options meet the legal baseline but differ in cost, timing, accessibility and stakeholder acceptance.

Deliverable

Write a comparative note and recommend one option using explicit criteria.

Self-review
  • Compare like with like.
  • Explain weighting and trade-offs.
  • Add monitoring and review conditions.
Oral-board scenarios

Structure, present, defend

01Oral-board scenarios

EU policy presentation

Brief

Explain a Commission initiative to a mixed internal audience, then answer questions on legal basis, subsidiarity and implementation.

Self-review
  • Use problem-action-impact structure.
  • Separate Commission proposal from adopted law.
  • Answer institutional questions precisely.
02Oral-board scenarios

Prioritisation and intrapreneurship

Brief

Your unit receives an urgent new request while two committed files are approaching deadlines.

Self-review
  • Clarify value, urgency and constraints.
  • Propose a feasible reprioritisation.
  • Secure decision and communicate impact.
03Oral-board scenarios

Team conflict

Brief

Two colleagues disagree publicly about quality responsibility, slowing a common deliverable.

Self-review
  • Address behaviour and underlying task ambiguity.
  • Restore shared outcome and roles.
  • Set follow-up and accountability.
04Oral-board scenarios

Learning after an error

Brief

You published an internal analysis containing a material but correctable error.

Self-review
  • Correct and notify quickly.
  • Own the error without blame shifting.
  • Convert root cause into a stronger control.

Paid-user scenario request

Need another policy area, competency or document format? Paid users can request new scenarios with one message.

Request scenario