Police Tests

Police Situational Judgement Test

1. Question 1 of 10

   You are a shift team member at a police force. You keep the swap list for your team, and the stated rule is that a swap has to be requested three days ahead so the person who runs the rota can check the cover. You have turned two people down this week for asking late. Now a colleague you get on with well asks for a swap tomorrow, says nobody will notice, and points out that the cover is obviously fine. The two you refused are on shift with you tonight. Which response below would be most effective, and which would be least effective?

   1. Put the swap through, and if the two you refused ask, assure them that this request came in within the three days, which is not what happened.
   2. Put the swap through quietly and say nothing to anybody, on the basis that the cover really is fine tomorrow and no harm is done by one late request.
   3. Refuse the swap and tell the colleague that you will report the request to the person who runs the rota, since they asked you to break a rule you have just enforced twice.
   4. Tell the colleague the same as the other two, that a swap tomorrow is outside the three days, and offer to put it to whoever runs the rota, since they check the cover.
   Show the answer

   Most effective: D. Tell the colleague the same as the other two, that a swap tomorrow is outside the three days, and offer to put it to whoever runs the rota, since they check the cover.

   Least effective: A. Put the swap through, and if the two you refused ask, assure them that this request came in within the three days, which is not what happened.

   A: Gives an assurance you know is untrue: the favour is bad enough on its own, but defending it with a false account of the timing means the two people you turned down are lied to by the person who applied the rule to them.

   B: Breaches a stated rule for a quiet life: the rule exists so the cover is checked by the person who runs the rota, and two colleagues who accepted the same answer this week are now on a different footing from this one.

   C: Escalates prematurely: a late request from a colleague who has been told no is an ordinary exchange, and turning it into a report makes an incident out of something that ended the moment you said no.

   The most effective response is to tell the colleague the same as the other two and offer to put the request to the person who runs the rota to decide: the rule is applied consistently, the colleague is not simply shut down, and the person whose job it is to check the cover gets to make any exception rather than you. That is better than putting the swap through quietly on the basis that the cover is fine, because whether the cover holds is exactly the judgement the rule reserves for somebody else, and two colleagues have already been held to it this week. It is also better than refusing and telling the colleague you will report the request, since a late ask is an ordinary thing to try and reporting it makes an incident out of a conversation that ended with your answer. The least effective response is to put the swap through and then assure the two you refused that it came in within the three days: on top of an inconsistent decision, the people who accepted your answer are told something untrue by the person who gave it. The principle: apply the rule the same way to everybody, and push any exception to the person who owns it rather than inventing cover for your own.

2. Question 2 of 10

   You are a data quality assistant at a police force. A colleague has sent a letter containing another person’s details to the wrong address. The written rule is that a letter sent to the wrong person is logged the same day with the person who keeps the correspondence log, who then writes to the person whose details went out. The colleague asks you to leave it, because they will get the letter back themselves. Which response below would be most effective, and which would be least effective?

   1. Give the colleague until the end of the week to log it themselves, and check on Friday whether they have, so that they get the chance to put their own mistake right.
   2. Tell the colleague you will log it with them today, because the rule exists so that the person whose details went out gets written to, and offer to write the entry together.
   3. Ring the address that received the letter yourself, ask them to destroy it, and treat the matter as closed once they agree, since getting the letter back is what the rule is for.
   4. Report the colleague to their supervisor before saying anything to them, and describe it as a mistake they tried to bury, so that the letter is dealt with quickly.
   Show the answer

   Most effective: B. Tell the colleague you will log it with them today, because the rule exists so that the person whose details went out gets written to, and offer to write the entry together.

   Least effective: C. Ring the address that received the letter yourself, ask them to destroy it, and treat the matter as closed once they agree, since getting the letter back is what the rule is for.

   A: Delays the decision: the rule says the same day, and the person whose details went to a stranger gains nothing from four more days of not being told.

   C: Breaches the stated rule with a private arrangement: nothing is logged, the promise of a stranger stands in for the process, and the person whose details went out is never written to.

   D: Goes straight past the colleague: they can still do the right thing today and have been given no chance to, and the account you give of them is harsher than what happened.

   The most effective response is telling the colleague you will log it with them today so that the person whose details went out is written to: the rule fixes the day, and the person affected is the one who does not yet know where their details went. It beats giving the colleague until the end of the week to log it themselves, because the rule says the same day and the person waiting to be written to gains nothing from the delay. It beats reporting the colleague to their supervisor before saying anything to them, since the colleague can still put it right today and has been given no chance to. The least effective response is ringing the address that received the letter and asking them to destroy it: it swaps a written rule for a private arrangement, leaves nothing logged, and leaves the person whose details went out with no letter and no idea. The principle: a mistake with consequences for somebody outside the team goes through the process that exists to tell them.

3. Question 3 of 10

   You are a trainee at a police force, six weeks into your course. Over the weekend another trainee, Sam, talked at length in a pub about a matter your team is dealing with, and afterwards told you it was harmless because no names were used. You were told at the start of the course that anything to do with your team’s work stays inside it, and that the person who runs your training course must be told about any breach. Sam says he will not do it again. Which response below would be most effective, and which would be least effective?

   1. Hand the whole thing over to a colleague on the course who knows Sam better and ask them to raise it with the person who runs the course, then leave it with them from there.
   2. Accept Sam's word for now and raise it with the person who runs the course first thing tomorrow, once this evening's assessment is over and you have slept on what you heard.
   3. Tell Sam you will report it and why, then tell the person who runs the course today what was said, including that Sam believes no names were used, since that duty is yours.
   4. Tell Sam to report himself to the person who runs the course by the end of the day and check with him afterwards that he has, without raising it yourself if he says he did.
   Show the answer

   Most effective: C. Tell Sam you will report it and why, then tell the person who runs the course today what was said, including that Sam believes no names were used, since that duty is yours.

   Least effective: A. Hand the whole thing over to a colleague on the course who knows Sam better and ask them to raise it with the person who runs the course, then leave it with them from there.

   A: Hands a judgement to somebody with no standing in it: you are the one who heard it, the rule puts the telling on you, and a second-hand account arrives days later if it arrives at all.

   B: Delays a report the rule wanted promptly: the duty is yours and it is not conditional on being certain, so a night's wait buys nothing the report needed and the course hears about it a day after it could have.

   D: Makes the breach the other person's to declare: the obligation the course gave you does not transfer, and his account of whether he went is the only evidence you would have.

   The most effective response is to tell Sam you are going to report it and why the rule exists, then tell the person who runs the course today what was said: the course put the telling on you, and saying it to Sam first is what separates reporting from going behind him. It is stronger than accepting his word and waiting until tomorrow morning, because the duty is not conditional on being sure of every word, and a night’s wait buys the report nothing it needed. It is stronger than telling him to report himself, because the duty does not move with the instruction and his word is all you would ever have that he went. The least effective response is to hand the whole thing over to a colleague who knows Sam better and ask them to raise it: reporting it a day late at least gets a first-hand account to the right person, and sending him to declare it at least gets the right facts there if he goes, whereas a relayed account spreads the matter to a third trainee and reaches the course second hand, from somebody who was not there. The principle: a duty to tell somebody sits with the person who saw it, and telling the person concerned first is part of doing it well.

4. Question 4 of 10

   You are an enquiry desk assistant at a police force. The person who runs the enquiry line has asked you to sit in on a briefing at ten on Wednesday to explain how the desk logs calls. The person who runs the training timetable has asked you to help run a session at the same hour, and says the trainees have no other date. Each of them has told you that their own is the one that matters. A decision has to be made by Monday. Which response below would be most effective, and which would be least effective?

   1. Decide yourself that the briefing matters more because the enquiry line asked you first, and let the training timetable know on Monday that you will not be at the session after all.
   2. Agree to both and plan to slip out of the briefing after twenty minutes to join the session late, telling neither of them that you will be splitting the hour between the two.
   3. Write to both together on Monday setting out the clash and what each would lose, and ask them to settle which one you attend, since neither has yet heard the other.
   4. Reply to the person who runs the training timetable and criticise the enquiry line for booking over trainees at the last minute, copying in the people who were asked to the briefing.
   Show the answer

   Most effective: C. Write to both together on Monday setting out the clash and what each would lose, and ask them to settle which one you attend, since neither has yet heard the other.

   Least effective: D. Reply to the person who runs the training timetable and criticise the enquiry line for booking over trainees at the last minute, copying in the people who were asked to the briefing.

   A: Substitutes own judgement for the stakeholders': who asked first is not a reason, and the trainees have no other date while the briefing has not been tested against one.

   B: Splits effort so nothing finishes: half of each leaves both people short of what they asked for, and neither of them knows in time to bring somebody else in.

   D: Personalises the conflict: the clash is a diary problem with a Monday decision on it, and this turns it into a standing dispute between two teams, with an audience.

   The most effective response is to write to both of them together on Monday setting out the clash and what each would lose, and ask them to settle which one you attend: neither has heard the other’s case, the decision belongs to the two people whose work is affected, and Monday is when it has to be made. It is better than deciding yourself that the briefing matters more because the enquiry line asked you first, because who asked first is not a reason and the trainees have no other date. It is better than agreeing to both and slipping out of the briefing after twenty minutes, because half of each leaves both people short of what they asked for and neither of them knows. The least effective response is to reply to the person who runs the training timetable and criticise the enquiry line for booking over trainees at the last minute, copying in the people who were asked to the briefing: the clash is a diary problem, and this makes it a public dispute between two teams that will outlast Wednesday. The principle: put a clash in front of the people who own the priorities, in the same words to each of them, and let them choose.

5. Question 5 of 10

   You are a complaints administration assistant at a police force. A member of the public who has made a complaint rings to say that somebody here told them on the phone they would have a full written answer by Friday. The stated process is that a complaint is acknowledged within ten working days and answered once the review of it is finished, which in this case will take several weeks. The person says they will decide on Friday whether to take the matter elsewhere. The file is not to go outside the organisation until the review is finished. Which response below would be most effective, and which would be least effective?

   1. Apologise for the confusion and say that you will chase the review so that it finishes as quickly as it can, leaving out the ten working days and the several weeks so as not to make the call worse.
   2. Post them a copy of what is on the file so far, so that they have something in writing by Friday, even though the file is not to go outside the organisation until the review has finished.
   3. Tell the person plainly that Friday was never something anybody could offer, set out the ten working days and that the answer follows the review, and give them the date they will next hear from you.
   4. Ask the person who runs the review whether Friday can be met for this one complaint, and tell the caller only that you are looking into it and will come back to them when you know.
   Show the answer

   Most effective: C. Tell the person plainly that Friday was never something anybody could offer, set out the ten working days and that the answer follows the review, and give them the date they will next hear from you.

   Least effective: B. Post them a copy of what is on the file so far, so that they have something in writing by Friday, even though the file is not to go outside the organisation until the review has finished.

   A: Softens the very fact the person needs: they are deciding on Friday whether to go elsewhere, and a decision like that cannot be made on a promise to hurry with no timescale attached to it.

   B: Breaches a stated limit on the file: paperwork from an unfinished review is not the answer they were expecting, and it hands them material the organisation has said may not leave it.

   D: Escalates rather than correcting the expectation: the review takes weeks whoever asks, and the caller spends the days before Friday still believing a written answer is coming.

   The most effective response is telling the person plainly that Friday was never something anybody could offer, setting out the ten working days and that the answer follows the review, and giving them the date they will next hear from you. They are deciding on Friday what to do next, so the one thing that helps them is an accurate picture of when their answer arrives. That is better than apologising and promising to chase, because a vague undertaking to hurry gives them nothing to weigh. It is better than asking whether Friday can be met, because the review takes weeks either way and the question costs the caller the days in which they could have been deciding on the facts. The least effective response is posting them a copy of what is on the file so far: chasing at least keeps the caller in contact and asking about Friday at least tests the possibility, whereas sending out material the organisation has said may not leave it breaks the one stated limit here and still does not tell them when their answer is coming. The principle: a promise somebody else made is corrected with an accurate date, never with a rule bent to cover for it.

6. Question 6 of 10

   You are a contact handling assistant at a police force. A colleague on your desk has found that they were left off the list for the weekly handover meeting for the past two months, and has just told the person who keeps that list, in a raised voice, that it was done deliberately. The person who keeps the list says the name was lost when the list was rebuilt. Both have now asked you separately what you think, and the next handover is tomorrow. Which response below would be most effective, and which would be least effective?

   1. Put the name back on the list for tomorrow, check that nobody else was lost when the list was rebuilt, and leave the argument alone, on the basis that once the meeting invitation arrives the complaint goes away by itself.
   2. Say the same thing to each of them, since they asked separately: that you do not know how the name came off, that it can be put back before tomorrow, and offer both ten minutes with you today.
   3. Take it to your supervisor this afternoon and ask them to decide who is right, setting out what each of them has told you separately, since two people on the desk are now not speaking and the handover is tomorrow morning.
   4. Agree with your colleague that they were pushed out on purpose, and say so at the desk in front of the other colleagues, so that the person who keeps the list hears how it looked.
   Show the answer

   Most effective: B. Say the same thing to each of them, since they asked separately: that you do not know how the name came off, that it can be put back before tomorrow, and offer both ten minutes with you today.

   Least effective: D. Agree with your colleague that they were pushed out on purpose, and say so at the desk in front of the other colleagues, so that the person who keeps the list hears how it looked.

   A: Fixes the diary and leaves the grievance: the invitation settles nothing about whether it was deliberate, and the two of them still have to work the same desk tomorrow.

   C: Escalates before the two people have spoken: there is nothing yet for a supervisor to weigh, and a ruling handed down will not make either of them trust the other.

   D: Personalises the conflict: you do not know that it was deliberate, and saying it publicly turns an oversight one conversation could settle into a charge the other person now has to defend.

   The most effective response is to say the same thing to each of them, that you do not know how the name came off, that it can be put back before tomorrow, and offer to sit with both of them for ten minutes today: you were asked separately, saying the same thing to each is what stops a second version forming, and ten minutes with the two of them is the only route to an account they share before the handover. It is better than putting the name back on the list and leaving the argument alone, because the invitation fixes the diary and not the accusation. It is better than taking it to your supervisor to decide who is right, because nothing has yet been said between the two people involved for anybody to rule on. The least effective response is to agree with your colleague that they were pushed out on purpose and say so at the desk in front of the other colleagues: you do not know that, and saying it publicly hardens an oversight into an accusation with witnesses. The principle: in a dispute you did not see, hold to what you actually know and get the two people into the same conversation.

7. Question 7 of 10

   You are a course administration assistant at a police force. You keep the waiting list for a twelve-place first aid course that runs on Friday, and the written rule is that places go in the order requests arrive. The list is full. Someone whose request came in ninth asks you to move them to the top because they know the person who runs the course, and offers you a forty pound gift voucher for your trouble. Which response below would be most effective, and which would be least effective?

   1. Turn the voucher down and leave the list exactly as it stands, without telling anybody that an offer was made, since nothing has actually changed on the course.
   2. Decline the voucher, explain that places go in the order requests arrive, and tell your supervisor the same day what was offered, since somebody tried buying a place.
   3. Pass the request and the offer straight to your supervisor and let them decide whether the place should move, since a decision like this is above your level.
   4. Accept the voucher and move the request to the top of the list, telling yourself that one swap on a twelve place course makes no real difference to anybody else.
   Show the answer

   Most effective: B. Decline the voucher, explain that places go in the order requests arrive, and tell your supervisor the same day what was offered, since somebody tried buying a place.

   Least effective: D. Accept the voucher and move the request to the top of the list, telling yourself that one swap on a twelve place course makes no real difference to anybody else.

   A: Avoids reporting the offer: the places are still in the right order, but the one new fact, that somebody tried to buy a place on a full list, stays with you alone.

   C: Escalates a decision the rule already makes: the written rule settles the order of the list, so the only part that needs another pair of eyes is the offer itself.

   D: Takes a gift the role forbids: the voucher buys a Friday place that the written rule had already given to somebody else, and eight people ahead of the ninth lose a place without knowing why.

   The most effective response is to decline the voucher, explain that places go in the order requests arrive, and tell your supervisor the same day what was offered. The rule is written down, the person asking is ninth on a full list, and the offer is something the people who set that rule need to know about. Turning the voucher down while leaving the list untouched and saying nothing about the offer is weaker, because the offer is the one thing that has changed and nobody else can see it. Sending the request and the offer straight to your supervisor to decide is weaker too, because the rule already settles the place and only the offer needs another pair of eyes. The least effective response is to accept the voucher and move the request to the top of the list: it takes a benefit the role forbids, and eight people ahead of the ninth lose a Friday place to it without ever knowing. A small favour bought with a gift is still bought, which is why the answer is no before the size of the gift is discussed.

8. Question 8 of 10

   You are a reception desk assistant at a police force. Every enquiry at the desk goes into the desk log with the name of the person who made it, and the team works from that log the next morning. This afternoon a neighbour you have known for years comes to the desk with an enquiry about a matter your team is dealing with. They ask you to leave their name out of the log, because they would rather nobody knew they had been in. The person who runs your team is in the office. Which response below would be most effective, and which would be least effective?

   1. Remove your neighbour's name from the log entry after they leave, and record the visit as a general question, leaving the entry nameless in the log the team works from.
   2. Put the enquiry in the log in full but keep to yourself that you know the person, since the connection makes no difference to what the team does with it tomorrow.
   3. Ask the person who runs your team whether an enquiry can ever go in the log without a name, without saying who has asked, and hold the entry until they answer.
   4. Write the enquiry into the log with your neighbour's name, as you would for anybody else, and tell the person who runs your team today that you know the person who came in.
   Show the answer

   Most effective: D. Write the enquiry into the log with your neighbour's name, as you would for anybody else, and tell the person who runs your team today that you know the person who came in.

   Least effective: A. Remove your neighbour's name from the log entry after they leave, and record the visit as a general question, leaving the entry nameless in the log the team works from.

   A: Alters a record to suit somebody you know: the log then describes a visit that did not happen, and everybody who works from it in the morning is working from something you made untrue.

   B: Leaves your own connection undeclared: whoever picks the enquiry up cannot weigh your part in it if nobody has told them there is one, and they will hear about it eventually from somebody else.

   C: Asks the question without the facts: the answer to a general question cannot settle this one, and the log stays incomplete overnight while the team is meant to work from it.

   The most effective response is writing the enquiry into the log with your neighbour’s name and telling the person who runs your team that you know them: the log is what the team works from tomorrow, and a connection declared today costs nothing while one discovered later costs a great deal. It is stronger than logging it in full and keeping the connection to yourself, because whoever picks the enquiry up cannot weigh your involvement if nobody has told them there is any. It is also stronger than asking whether an entry can ever go in without a name while holding the entry back, since the question you would be asking is not the question in front of you and the log is wrong overnight either way. The least effective response is removing your neighbour’s name and recording the visit as a general question: the log then says something that did not happen, and every later reader is misled by it. The principle: declare a personal connection early and keep the record straight, because the two protect each other.

9. Question 9 of 10

   You are a duty team member at a police force. Your supervisor has asked you to rewrite the whole of last week’s handover notes by tomorrow morning and has given no reason for it. The notes looked fine to you, the work will take most of a day, and you already have a report due on Friday that she is expecting. A colleague on the same shift asks why you look so fed up. Which response below would be most effective, and which would be least effective?

   1. Ask the supervisor what the rewritten notes are needed for and by when, and tell her that Friday's report will slip if the notes take a full day.
   2. Criticise the request to the rest of the shift, saying the supervisor never explains herself and hands out pointless work, rather than asking her what the notes are for.
   3. Rewrite all of last week's notes tonight and hand Friday's report in late, on the basis that the supervisor asked for the notes and she can sort the report out afterwards.
   4. Rewrite the parts of the notes you think were weak, leave the rest as they are, and hand them in tomorrow without saying which parts you changed.
   Show the answer

   Most effective: A. Ask the supervisor what the rewritten notes are needed for and by when, and tell her that Friday's report will slip if the notes take a full day.

   Least effective: B. Criticise the request to the rest of the shift, saying the supervisor never explains herself and hands out pointless work, rather than asking her what the notes are for.

   B: Personalises the frustration: the shift ends up with a view of the supervisor instead of an answer, the notes are still due tomorrow, and the one person who knows what they are for has not been asked.

   C: Abandons your own committed work: the report is due on Friday and is expected, so a second deadline is quietly broken to protect the first without anybody being told.

   D: Substitutes your own judgement for the supervisor's: you do not know what the rewrite is for, so guessing at which parts matter risks handing back exactly the pages she needed done.

   The most effective response is asking the supervisor what the rewritten notes are needed for and telling her that Friday’s report will slip. One question turns an unexplained task into a job you can size, and the person who set both deadlines is the only one who can choose between them. That is better than rewriting everything tonight and handing the report in late, because that quietly breaks a deadline she is expecting you to meet and she never gets the chance to move it. It is also better than rewriting only the parts you think were weak, since without knowing the purpose you may leave undone the very pages the rewrite exists for. The least effective response is criticising the request to the rest of the shift: it turns a question about the work into a verdict on a colleague, spreads it through the team, and leaves both the notes and Friday’s report exactly where they were, which is worse than doing too much or doing the wrong half. The principle: when a task arrives without a reason, ask the person who set it before you judge either the task or them.

10. Question 10 of 10

    You are a complaints administration assistant at a police force. A letter closing a complaint goes out today, and it was written on the basis that the complainant never replied to two requests for information. This morning you find their reply sitting in a shared inbox, dated before the second request was sent. The stated standard is that the complainant hears the outcome today. The person who signed the letter is in the building. Which response below would be most effective, and which would be least effective?

    1. Hand the whole thing to your supervisor with the letter still due today, leaving the reply and its date in the shared inbox, and get on with the rest of the post.
    2. Ring the complainant today because the standard requires an outcome today, tell them their reply has been found, and say the closing letter is on hold until it is considered.
    3. Rewrite the closing letter yourself to take account of the reply and send it today, without going back to the person who signed the original version.
    4. Hold the letter, tell the person who signed it that the reply arrived before the second request, and ask whether the complaint should be reopened before today's standard runs out.
    Show the answer

    Most effective: D. Hold the letter, tell the person who signed it that the reply arrived before the second request, and ask whether the complaint should be reopened before today's standard runs out.

    Least effective: A. Hand the whole thing to your supervisor with the letter still due today, leaving the reply and its date in the shared inbox, and get on with the rest of the post.

    A: Passes the problem on without owning it: the deadline is still running, and it arrives on somebody else's desk without the reply, its date, or any account of what you have already checked.

    B: Commits the organisation without authority: the person who signed the letter is in the building and has decided nothing yet, so a promise that the closing is on hold runs ahead of anybody's decision.

    C: Substitutes own judgement for the stakeholder's: the decision the letter records belongs to the person who signed it, and a rewrite goes out in their name without their knowledge.

    The most effective response is holding the letter and telling the person who signed it that the reply arrived before the second request: they wrote it on the basis that nothing came back, that is no longer true, and only they can decide whether the complaint reopens. It beats ringing the complainant to say their reply has been found and the closing letter is on hold, because that promises a change of course before the person who signed the letter has decided there will be one. It beats rewriting the closing letter yourself without going back to the person who signed the original, since the decision it records is theirs and a rewrite still goes out in their name. The least effective response is handing the whole thing to your supervisor and getting on with the rest of the post: today’s standard is still running, and the problem lands on somebody else without the reply, its date, or any account of what you already know. The principle: when the basis of a decision changes, take it back to the person who made it, with the change stated.