CMI Command Verbs Explained: How to Answer “Analyse”, “Evaluate”, “Discuss” & “Critically Evaluate”

1) “Discuss” - show a range of views, not just your opinion

CMI defines Discuss as giving a detailed account that includes a range of views or opinions, including contrasting perspectives.

What your marker is looking for

• More than one angle (benefits + drawbacks)

• Different stakeholder perspectives (team members, manager, organisation, customers)

• A balanced tone (not a one-sided rant)

Mini example (Discuss)
Hybrid working can improve performance because people often get more focused time at home and waste less time commuting, which can raise morale and reduce absence. On the other hand, some teams struggle with communication gaps, slower decision-making, and weaker relationships, especially when new staff join and do not build trust quickly. From a manager’s view, hybrid working can increase output for independent tasks, but it may reduce teamwork quality if meetings become purely transactional. Overall, hybrid working can support performance, but it depends heavily on how communication routines and collaboration time are planned.

Notice what’s happening: you are not “proving” anything yet, you are showing breadth.

2) “Analyse” - break it down and show why it happens

CMI’s definitions list includes Critically Analyse, but the core idea of analyse in CMI writing is still: break the issue into parts and explain relationships (causes, effects, links). CMI

What your marker is looking for

• Clear components (communication, motivation, output, quality, accountability)

• Cause-and-effect logic (“because… therefore…”)

• A thread that links back to the criterion (not general commentary)

Mini example (Analyse)
Hybrid working affects team performance through communication flow, task interdependence, and motivation. When tasks are independent, performance can rise because individuals can manage time better and reduce interruptions. However, when work is interdependent, performance may drop because quick coordination becomes harder and small misunderstandings multiply. Team motivation can improve due to flexibility, but performance can still suffer if role clarity is weak and accountability becomes “invisible”. In short, hybrid working does not automatically change performance; it changes the conditions that performance relies on, especially coordination and clarity.

This is analysis: not just “pros and cons”, but mechanics.

3) “Evaluate” - weigh evidence and make a reasoned judgement

CMI defines Evaluate as considering strengths and weaknesses, arguments for and against, and/or similarities and differences, then judging the evidence from different perspectives and reaching a valid conclusion (often using current research or theories where applicable).

What your marker is looking for

• A judgement (not a summary)

• “On balance…” reasoning

• Evidence/theory used as support, not decoration

Mini example (Evaluate)
Overall, hybrid working can improve team performance if the organisation deliberately protects collaboration. The strongest advantage is sustained focus time, which supports productivity for analytical tasks. The main weakness is the risk of fragmented communication, which harms performance where tasks require fast coordination. From a team perspective, flexibility can improve motivation, but only when workload and expectations are transparent. On balance, hybrid working is likely to increase performance in roles with measurable individual output, but it may reduce performance in roles requiring continuous real-time teamwork unless strong routines (meeting structure, shared tools, agreed response times) are in place.

Evaluation means you land the plane. You do not leave the reader floating.

4) “Critically evaluate” - evaluate, but harder: test the strength of the evidence

CMI defines Critically Evaluate as evaluation that considers strengths/weaknesses and arguments for/against, judges evidence from different perspectives, and reaches a valid conclusion, supported by current research or theory where applicable. Crucially, “criticality” also involves considering the validity of sources and the strength of the evidence.

What your marker is looking for

• A judgement plus scrutiny (how reliable is the evidence?)

• Recognition that research can conflict

• A conclusion that is reasoned, not loud

Mini example (Critically evaluate)

Hybrid working is often presented as a performance booster, but the evidence is mixed because performance is measured differently across roles and organisations. Where studies focus on short-term productivity metrics, hybrid working can appear strongly positive; however, those metrics can miss slower impacts such as weaker knowledge sharing, reduced innovation, or uneven workload distribution. A critical view is that “hybrid working improves performance” is too broad to be universally true; it depends on task type, team maturity, and management capability. On balance, hybrid working is most defensible as a performance benefit when the organisation sets clear expectations, uses reliable performance measures beyond raw output, and actively supports collaboration, otherwise the apparent gains may be temporary or limited to certain roles.

That is critical evaluation: you are still making a judgement, but you are also showing that you understand limitations and quality of evidence.

A simple way to avoid a “Refer” when command verbs get strict

CMI’s assessment guidance effectively boils down to: structure your work so the marker can see you have met each assessment criterion in full, and use the command verb as your writing “instruction”.

A quick self-check before you submit:

• If it says discuss, have you shown contrasting perspectives?

• If it says analyse, have you explained why/how and linked causes to effects?

• If it says evaluate, have you made a clear judgement based on evidence?

• If it says critically evaluate, have you also challenged the evidence (quality, limits, different viewpoints)?

What You Must Know Before Your Close the Tab

In CMI assignments, command verbs are not decoration, they are the assessment’s steering wheel. Once you treat the verb as the “answer style”, your writing becomes clearer, more targeted, and easier for the marker to pass.

Most CMI students who get a Refer instead of a Pass miss the mark on one thing: understanding what the question is actually asking. Our CMI assignment help shows you exactly what tutors expect when they ask you to `analyse` or `evaluate` in the assignments.