APC Acceleratorβ’ β Module 9 Supporting Materials
Case Study Mastery
Scoping Worksheet Β· Writing Framework Β· Questioning Prep Β· Question Bank
Knight Khonje FRICS | Knight Khonje APC Advisory
Module 9 Supporting Materials
Lessons 9.1 & 9.2 Β· Worksheet
Project Selection and Scoping Worksheet
Complete before drafting the case study document. This worksheet is required for the Knight review submission alongside your draft.
Part 1 β Project Evaluation Against Four Criteria
Score your candidate project(s) against the four selection criteria. Use 1β5 (1 = weak, 5 = strong). Choose the project with the highest total β but also consider where your depth of knowledge is greatest.
| Criterion | What to assess | Score (1β5) |
|---|---|---|
| Professional challenge depth | Does the project contain a complex problem requiring genuine professional judgement β not just competent administration? Could the situation have been managed without your professional contribution? | |
| Competency coverage | Does the project allow you to demonstrate professional judgement across at least 3 core competencies? Does it provide natural bridges into areas the assessors are likely to probe? | |
| Depth of knowledge | Were you professionally engaged in the key decisions β as the person who made recommendations or gave advice? Or were you peripheral to the decisions that mattered? | |
| Defensibility under pressure | Can you answer deep follow-up questions on every professional judgement decision you would describe? Are there any decisions in the project that you are not confident defending? | |
| Total (max 20) | ||
Part 2 β Project Confirmation
Selected project name and client
Contract form and procurement route
Your role and specific professional responsibilities
Competency areas the project covers (list at least 3)
Part 3 β Scoping Decision
Scoping instruction
Your case study must focus on one specific professional challenge β not the whole project. The challenge should be the moment where your professional judgement was most consequential. Everything else in the document is context for that challenge.
The specific professional challenge your case study will focus on
Why this challenge required professional judgement (not just competent administration)
What you scoped out β and why
Note what you are NOT including in the case study, even if it was part of the project. Be deliberate about this β scope creep is the most common structural failure in case study drafts.
Competency bridges β where do you expect the assessors to go in the breadth testing layer?
Based on your scoping, what wider themes or competency areas does your case study open up? Are you comfortable being questioned in those areas?
Lesson 9.3 Β· Writing Framework
Five-Section Case Study Writing Framework
Work through each section in order. The prompts are not a checklist β they are thinking prompts to ensure the professional judgement is made explicit. The quality check at the bottom of each section is the test to apply before moving on.
Before you write
Write in the active, first-person voice throughout. "I advised," "I identified," "I recommended" β not "advice was given" or "it was identified." The passive voice distances you from your professional contribution. Every sentence should either establish context, describe professional judgement, or reflect on it. If it does neither, remove it.
1
Project Context
~300 words
Purpose: give the assessor the minimum context needed to understand the professional challenge that follows. Nothing more.
Project type, location, approximate value, and stage when the professional challenge arose
Contract form and procurement route β name them specifically
Your role and your specific professional responsibilities on this project
The client's primary objectives β what they were trying to achieve and why it mattered
One sentence flagging that a specific professional challenge arose β this creates the bridge into Section 2
Draft Section 1 hereβ¦
Quality check: Could you cut 100 words from this section without losing anything that sets up the professional challenge? If yes, do it.
2
Professional Challenge
~500 words
Purpose: describe the professional challenge with precision β what it was, why it was genuinely complex, and what was at stake for the client if it was not addressed professionally.
What specifically happened β name the event, the decision point, the conflict, or the risk that created the professional challenge
Why was it complex β what made it require professional judgement rather than routine administration?
What were the stakes for the client β contractual, commercial, programme, regulatory, reputational?
What would the consequence of an inadequate professional response have been?
Why was your professional involvement specifically necessary?
Draft Section 2 hereβ¦
Quality check: Would an assessor finish reading this section thinking "this is genuinely complex β I want to know how this candidate responded"? If not, you have not yet captured the professional challenge with sufficient precision.
3
Options and Evaluation
~700 words
Purpose: demonstrate Level 3 professional judgement β the reasoning that produced your recommendation. This is the most important section. Give it the most attention.
Name at least two options you identified β not just the one you recommended
For each option: what was the contractual or professional basis for it?
For each option: what were the risks and limitations in this specific context?
What information, analysis, or professional knowledge informed your evaluation?
Why did your recommended approach best serve the client's objectives given the risks and constraints?
Were there any professional obligations β ethical, regulatory, duty of care β that shaped the evaluation?
Draft Section 3 hereβ¦
Quality check: Apply the Level 3 test β "if I had not been involved, what would the client not have known, and what would have happened?" If the answer is visible in this section, you are at Level 3. If not, the professional reasoning needs to be made more explicit.
4
Professional Advice and Action
~800 words
Purpose: describe what you recommended, what you did, and the professional responsibility you took. This is the most technically detailed section β write with precision.
What specific advice did you give the client? Use "I advised the client thatβ¦" not "the client was advisedβ¦"
What was the professional basis for that advice β contractual, technical, ethical?
What document, agreement, or action did your advice produce? Be specific.
What professional responsibility did you take in giving this advice?
Were there any competing interests, ethical considerations, or third-party impacts you had to navigate?
How did you communicate the advice to the client β what format, what level of detail, what recommendations?
Draft Section 4 hereβ¦
Quality check: Is it clear from this section that you made the decisions and gave the advice β not that events unfolded and you administered them? Every professional contribution should be visible in the first person.
5
Outcome and Reflection
~700 words
Purpose: describe the outcome specifically and reflect on your professional development. Honesty and insight in this section distinguish the strongest candidates.
What was the specific commercial, programme, or contractual outcome? Quantify where possible.
What would have happened if your professional advice had not been given?
Was the outcome everything you hoped for? If not β why not, and what constrained it?
What would you do differently if you faced this situation again, and why?
What did this experience add to your professional judgement β how does it inform how you approach similar situations now?
How has this experience contributed to your development as a professional?
Draft Section 5 hereβ¦
Quality check: Does the reflection show a professional who has genuinely learned from this experience β not just someone describing a successful outcome? A candidate who acknowledges a limitation or trade-off honestly is more credible, not less.
Level 2 vs Level 3 β Writing Examples
Level 2 β project description
"The Building Safety Regulator approval process took longer than expected. This caused a delay to the programme and the contractor raised a claim for additional costs. We reviewed the contractor's submission and agreed a settlement figure with the client."
Level 3 β professional judgement
"The Building Safety Regulator approval delay created an ambiguous contractual position. The contractor argued the delay constituted a Relevant Event under the JCT ICD, entitling them to both time and loss and expense. I advised the client that the contractual position was not straightforward β the delay arose from a regulatory requirement affecting the CDP scope, creating a potential overlap between the contractor's design liability and the employer's retained design responsibilities. I recommended that we seek legal advice on the design liability interface before accepting the contractor's position on the Relevant Event, and in parallel I prepared a detailed programme analysis showing the delay impact attributable to the regulatory approval versus the delay attributable to the contractor's own CDP design programme. That analysis provided the evidential basis for a commercial negotiation that resulted in a settlement significantly below the contractor's original claim."
Lesson 9.4 Β· Preparation Worksheet
Case Study Questioning Preparation Worksheet
Complete after drafting the case study document. Required for the Knight review submission. One decision entry per professional judgement decision in your document.
Two-Minute Introduction
Draft your two-minute opening statement β your response to "Please introduce your case study." Cover: project, professional challenge, your role and contribution, and why this case study demonstrates your professional competence. Time it. Target 250β300 words.
Draft two-minute introduction hereβ¦
Layer 1 β Document Interrogation
For each professional judgement decision you describe in the case study, complete one entry below. Add as many entries as your document requires.
Layer 1 Β· Decision Entry 1
Professional Judgement Decision
Decision 1
The decision or advice you describe in the case study document
Why you made this decision β the professional reasoning
What alternatives you considered and why you ruled them out
The risks of the approach you recommended β and how you advised the client to manage them
The professional basis for the advice β contractual, technical, ethical
Decision 2
The decision or advice
Why β the professional reasoning
Alternatives considered and why ruled out
Risks and how you advised the client to manage them
Professional basis
Decision 3
The decision or advice
Why β the professional reasoning
Alternatives considered and why ruled out
Risks and how managed
Professional basis
Layer 2 β Depth Testing
Based on your case study content, identify the three highest-risk depth questions β the technical or contractual questions most likely to be asked β and prepare structured answers.
Depth question 1 (write the specific question an assessor is likely to ask)
Your answer
Depth question 2
Your answer
Depth question 3
Your answer
Layer 3 β Breadth Testing
Based on the competency bridges your case study opens, prepare a professional perspective on two wider themes.
Wider theme 1 β the question the assessor might ask
e.g. "How do you see the Building Safety Act 2022 changing the role of the quantity surveyor in residential construction?"
Your professional perspective β not a scripted answer, a developed view
Wider theme 2 β the question the assessor might ask
Your professional perspective
Reference Β· Case Study Question Bank
Assessor Question Bank β 30 Questions
These are the most frequently asked case study questions across RICS APC panels. Use to identify gaps in your preparation β not to prepare scripted answers.
Document Interrogation β Standard Opening Questions
1.
Please introduce your case study β tell us about the project and the professional challenge you faced.
2.
Why did you choose this project as your case study?
3.
What was the specific professional challenge that made this project suitable for the APC case study?
4.
What were the options you considered when you identified the professional challenge?
5.
Why did you recommend [your chosen approach] rather than [the most obvious alternative]?
6.
What was the professional basis for the advice you gave the client in this situation?
7.
What professional responsibility did you take in making this recommendation?
Depth Testing β Professional Judgement
8.
If you had given different advice β what would the likely consequence have been for the client?
9.
Were there any competing professional obligations that made this decision more complex?
10.
Were there any points in this project where your professional duty to the client conflicted with other interests?
11.
How did you advise the client when the contractual position was genuinely ambiguous?
12.
What was the most difficult professional decision you had to make on this project and how did you approach it?
13.
Was there a point where you were uncertain about the right course of professional action? How did you manage that uncertainty?
Outcome and Reflection
14.
What was the commercial and contractual outcome of your professional advice?
15.
If you could approach this situation again, what would you do differently?
16.
Were there any limitations in your professional advice β things you were not certain about at the time?
17.
What did this experience teach you about professional practice that you would not have learned from a straightforward project?
18.
How has this experience changed how you approach similar situations now?
Breadth Testing β Wider Professional Context
19.
What do you see as the most significant change affecting the role of the quantity surveyor in the next five years?
20.
How has the Building Safety Act 2022 changed the professional responsibilities of quantity surveyors on residential projects?
21.
How do you see the increasing complexity of regulatory environments affecting procurement strategy in your sector?
22.
What is the most important professional skill for a quantity surveyor advising on high-risk building projects, and how have you developed it?
23.
How do you maintain professional independence when advising a client who has strong pre-existing views about the right course of action?
24.
What do you consider to be your most significant professional development need following this project?
Ethics and Professional Standards
25.
What ethical considerations arose in this project and how did you manage them?
26.
How do you manage a situation where a client instructs you to do something you believe is professionally inadvisable?
27.
What does professional integrity mean to you and how is it demonstrated in this case study?
28.
Were there any third-party interests in this project β beyond the client and contractor β that your professional advice needed to consider?
29.
How do the RICS Rules of Conduct apply to the professional challenge you described in your case study?
30.
How would you describe your professional responsibilities to the public interest in the context of this project?
