ARUP Assessment Tests

ARUP Situational Judgement Test

1. Question 1 of 10

   You are an administrator at a community sports centre. Reconciling bookings you notice that the same coach has been booking the sports hall at the discounted community rate for what your records show are commercial sessions he charges participants for. Nobody has asked you to check this. He books again next week. Your centre manager is on site today. Which response below would be most effective, and which would be least effective?

   1. Take the booking records to your centre manager today, show her the pattern and the rate that has been applied, and let her decide what happens before next week's booking.
   2. Change next week's booking to the commercial rate so the centre is charging correctly, and mention it to your manager afterwards.
   3. Leave it, since checking booking entitlements is not part of your role and the centre manager approves the bookings anyway, so she has presumably accepted them.
   4. Ask the coach directly whether his sessions are commercial, so that you understand the position before raising anything with your manager.
   Show the answer

   Most effective: A. Take the booking records to your centre manager today, show her the pattern and the rate that has been applied, and let her decide what happens before next week's booking.

   Least effective: C. Leave it, since checking booking entitlements is not part of your role and the centre manager approves the bookings anyway, so she has presumably accepted them.

   B: Substitutes own judgement for the stakeholder's: the coach may have an agreement you do not know about, and re-rating his booking without checking commits the centre to a position and a charge nobody has approved.

   C: Fails to escalate a genuine risk: the centre may be losing income on a repeating booking, and the reason for silence is that the manager must have noticed, when the records you have just reconciled are what show she has not.

   D: Acts on assumptions without checking the right source: the person benefiting from the rate is the least reliable place to establish whether he is entitled to it, and asking warns him before anyone with authority has seen the records.

   The most effective response is to take the booking records to your centre manager today, show her the pattern and the rate applied, and let her decide before next week’s booking: you have found a pattern in the centre’s own records, you cannot know whether there is an agreement behind it, and she can settle it in time. Taking her the evidence is both the fastest and the fairest route. It beats changing next week’s booking to the commercial rate and mentioning it afterwards, because that decides an entitlement question you have not checked, and may be wrong. It beats asking the coach directly whether his sessions are commercial, because the person who benefits is the least reliable source on entitlement, and it tips him off before anyone with authority has looked. The least effective response is leaving it because checking entitlements is not part of your role: it lets a possible loss of income run on a repeating booking, on the assumption that the manager approving them must have noticed, which the reconciliation you have just done contradicts. That is worse than the other two, which act clumsily but bring it into the open. The principle: take what the records show to whoever owns the decision, before the next occurrence, and before speaking to the person concerned.

2. Question 2 of 10

   You are an assistant coach at a swimming club. Swimmers must record their qualifying times at officially timed sessions to enter a regional gala. A swimmer misses the qualifying time by half a second at the last session. Her parent asks you to write down the faster time she achieved in training last week, saying she is plainly capable of it and one entry form will not matter. The head coach is at the poolside. Which response below would be most effective, and which would be least effective?

   1. Tell the parent that the time cannot be changed and that she should raise it with the head coach if she wants to challenge how qualifying works.
   2. Tell the parent you can only record officially timed results, and ask the head coach whether there is another qualifying session before the gala entry closes.
   3. Record the official time but add a note to the entry that she swam faster in training, so the organisers can take that into account when they consider the entry.
   4. Write the training time on the entry form, since the swimmer has genuinely swum it and the qualifying session was only half a second out.
   Show the answer

   Most effective: B. Tell the parent you can only record officially timed results, and ask the head coach whether there is another qualifying session before the gala entry closes.

   Least effective: D. Write the training time on the entry form, since the swimmer has genuinely swum it and the qualifying session was only half a second out.

   A: Passes responsibility to others: the refusal is right and it leaves the swimmer's real question, whether another qualifying session exists, unasked, when the head coach is standing at the poolside.

   C: Acts on assumptions without checking: the entry rules ask for an officially timed result, and appending an unofficial one invites the organisers to weigh something the rules exclude, which is the same request in a politer form.

   D: Falsifies a competition record: an official qualifying time is a statement that a swim happened under timed conditions, and entering a training time is a false declaration that displaces another club's swimmer. That is dishonesty, not a technicality.

   The most effective response is to tell the parent you can only record officially timed results, and ask the head coach whether there is another qualifying session before entries close: only official results can go on the form, and the swimmer’s actual problem may still be solvable if another session falls in time. Refusing clearly and asking addresses both. It beats telling her the time cannot be changed and that she should raise it with the head coach herself, because that gives the same refusal and then leaves her to pursue the useful question alone, when the person who can answer it is at the poolside. It beats recording the official time with a note that she swam faster in training, because attaching that invites the organisers to consider something the rules exclude, which is the original request with a note on it. The least effective response is writing the training time on the entry form: it puts a time on an official entry that was never officially swum, which is a false declaration and takes a place from another swimmer. That is worse than the other two, which keep the entry honest. The principle: refuse to record what did not officially happen, and put the swimmer’s real problem to whoever can solve it.

3. Question 3 of 10

   You work in the goods-out office of a brewery. A pallet of bottled beer is due to leave this afternoon for a wholesaler. Checking the paperwork you see the batch has a best-before date four days away, while the customer’s standing agreement requires at least thirty days’ shelf life on delivery. Your team leader says the wholesaler never checks, the beer is perfectly good, and the pallet should go as planned. The transport is booked. Which response below would be most effective, and which would be least effective?

   1. Hold the pallet back yourself and tell transport the load is cancelled, since sending stock that breaches the customer's shelf- life agreement is not something you are prepared to process.
   2. Send the pallet as instructed but attach a note to the delivery paperwork recording the short shelf life, so that the wholesaler can see the dates when the load arrives.
   3. Tell your team leader you are not comfortable sending stock that breaches the agreed shelf life, and ask him to check with the customer account manager before the load goes.
   4. Send the pallet as your team leader instructs, since he has more experience of what this wholesaler accepts and the beer is well within its best-before date.
   Show the answer

   Most effective: C. Tell your team leader you are not comfortable sending stock that breaches the agreed shelf life, and ask him to check with the customer account manager before the load goes.

   Least effective: D. Send the pallet as your team leader instructs, since he has more experience of what this wholesaler accepts and the beer is well within its best-before date.

   A: Substitutes own judgement for the stakeholder's: the conclusion is sound and the route is not. Cancelling a booked load without telling anyone who can decide leaves the customer with no delivery and nobody aware of why.

   B: Passes responsibility to others: it moves the problem onto the customer's goods-in desk to discover on arrival, which meets the letter of disclosure while still knowingly breaching the agreement your employer signed.

   D: Breaches confidentiality or process: it knowingly ships against a signed customer agreement on the basis that the customer will not notice. Deferring to seniority does not make it the brewery's decision to take.

   The most effective response is to tell your team leader you are not comfortable sending stock that breaches the agreed shelf life and ask him to check with the customer account manager: the agreement is the customer’s, not the brewery’s to waive, and there is time before the load leaves to put it to the person who owns the account. It raises the objection with the person who gave the instruction rather than going around him. It beats holding the pallet back and telling transport the load is cancelled, because that leaves the customer with no delivery and no explanation, when a check with the account manager might have produced an agreed answer. It beats attaching a note to the delivery paperwork recording the short shelf life, because that discloses the breach at the moment it is too late to prevent, and makes the customer’s goods-in team deal with a decision the brewery took knowingly. The least effective response is sending the pallet on the grounds that the beer is well within its best-before date: it ships against a signed agreement on the reasoning that the customer will not check, which is the logic that turns a one-off into a practice. That is worse than the note on the paperwork, which at least records the dates, and worse than cancelling the load, which at least stops it. The principle: when an instruction breaches a commitment your employer made, raise it with the person who gave it and get the decision to the person who owns the relationship.

4. Question 4 of 10

   You work in a procurement office. You are collecting quotes for a printing contract. One of the bidders is a company owned by your brother-in-law; he did not know you were involved and submitted through the normal channel. His quote is genuinely the cheapest. The evaluation is due next week and your procurement manager does not know of the connection. Which response below would be most effective, and which would be least effective?

   1. Continue with the evaluation and score strictly on price and quality, since his quote is genuinely the cheapest and the process will produce the right answer anyway.
   2. Tell your procurement manager about the family connection now and ask to be taken off the evaluation of this contract.
   3. Say nothing about the connection and let the evaluation run, since he submitted through the normal channel and had no idea you would be involved in assessing it.
   4. Exclude your brother-in-law's quote from the shortlist so there is no question of favouritism, and evaluate the remaining bids as normal.
   Show the answer

   Most effective: B. Tell your procurement manager about the family connection now and ask to be taken off the evaluation of this contract.

   Least effective: C. Say nothing about the connection and let the evaluation run, since he submitted through the normal channel and had no idea you would be involved in assessing it.

   A: Substitutes own judgement for the stakeholder's: whether you can fairly evaluate a relative's bid is not yours to decide. Even a perfectly scored outcome is unsafe if the connection is only discovered afterwards.

   C: Breaches confidentiality or process: it conceals a conflict of interest from the people running a competitive tender. The innocence of how the bid arrived does not cure the fact that only you know, and you are scoring it.

   D: Removes the cheapest compliant bid: it removes a compliant and cheapest bid on your own authority, which is as much an unauthorised intervention as choosing it would be, and it costs the employer money.

   The most effective response is to tell your procurement manager about the family connection now and ask to be taken off the evaluation: you have a conflict of interest, the remedy is to declare it and step back, and doing so now leaves time before next week for someone else to take it on. It protects the process, the employer and your brother-in-law’s legitimate bid. It beats continuing the evaluation and scoring strictly on price and quality, because a fair score does not fix an undeclared conflict; if the connection emerges later, the whole award is open to challenge however well it was scored. It beats excluding his quote from the shortlist to remove any question of favouritism, because that is an intervention of your own that drops the cheapest compliant bid and costs the employer money. The least effective response is saying nothing about the connection and letting the evaluation run: it hides a conflict from the people running a tender while you continue to score it, the one response that leaves nobody able to protect the process. That is worse than the other two, which act wrongly but at least without concealment. The principle: declare a conflict of interest to the person running the process, and let them decide what you should and should not touch.

5. Question 5 of 10

   You work in a hospital outpatient booking office. At 11am three things need you. A consultant’s clinic next Tuesday has been cancelled and forty patients need contacting before letters go out tomorrow. A patient is on hold asking to move an appointment scheduled for tomorrow. And your manager wants the weekly waiting-time return by 2pm, which takes an hour. Contacting forty patients takes most of the day. Which response below would be most effective, and which would be least effective?

   1. Start ringing the forty patients immediately since that is the largest task and the letters go out tomorrow, and deal with the waiting patient and the return when you can.
   2. Take the patient off hold and move tomorrow's appointment, do the waiting-time return before 2pm, then spend the rest of the day on the forty cancellations.
   3. Let the cancellation letters go out as they are and contact the forty patients afterwards, so that today's shorter tasks can all be completed properly.
   4. Do the waiting-time return first since it has the earliest deadline, then the patient on hold, then start the cancellation calls.
   Show the answer

   Most effective: B. Take the patient off hold and move tomorrow's appointment, do the waiting-time return before 2pm, then spend the rest of the day on the forty cancellations.

   Least effective: C. Let the cancellation letters go out as they are and contact the forty patients afterwards, so that today's shorter tasks can all be completed properly.

   A: Splits effort so nothing finishes: it starts the long job while leaving a patient on hold and an hour-long return due at 2pm, so the waiting-time deadline is put at risk by a task that has until tomorrow.

   C: Hides the problem: it lets forty patients receive letters for a clinic that has been cancelled, which generates forty wasted journeys and forty calls back. Knowingly sending wrong information is worse than mis-sequencing it.

   D: Ignores the customer's actual need: an hour of reporting is put ahead of a patient already holding on the line about an appointment tomorrow, when her call takes a few minutes.

   The most effective response is to take the patient off hold and move tomorrow’s appointment, do the waiting-time return before 2pm, then spend the rest of the day on the forty cancellations: the patient takes a few minutes and concerns tomorrow, the return takes an hour against a fixed deadline, and the calls have until the letters go out. Doing the two short fixed items first leaves the whole afternoon for the long one. It beats starting the forty calls immediately as the largest task, because that puts an hour-long 2pm deadline at risk for work that has until tomorrow. It beats doing the waiting-time return first because it has the earliest deadline, because that leaves a patient holding on the line while an internal report is prepared. The least effective response is letting the cancellation letters go out as they are and contacting the forty afterwards: it sends letters for a clinic that will not happen, producing wasted journeys and forty return calls. That is worse than the other two, which order the day badly but do not knowingly send wrong information. The principle: clear the short items with fixed deadlines, then give the long task the time it needs, and never let known wrong information go out.

6. Question 6 of 10

   You work in a field sales team and process your colleagues’ expense claims. A colleague submits mileage for a client visit on a day you know he was at the regional office, because you saw him there. The amount is small. He is popular and has just had a difficult quarter. The expenses policy is clear that claims must reflect actual journeys. Your sales manager is available. Which response below would be most effective, and which would be least effective?

   1. Process the claim and mention to your sales manager that the mileage looked unusual, so that she can look into it if she thinks it is worth it.
   2. Go back to the colleague, tell him the claimed journey does not match the day he was at the regional office, and ask him to correct or explain it before you process it.
   3. Reject the claim in the system with a note that the journey could not have taken place, and let him take it up if he disagrees.
   4. Process the claim as submitted, since the amount is small, he has had a hard quarter and querying it would be awkward and probably damage your working relationship.
   Show the answer

   Most effective: B. Go back to the colleague, tell him the claimed journey does not match the day he was at the regional office, and ask him to correct or explain it before you process it.

   Least effective: D. Process the claim as submitted, since the amount is small, he has had a hard quarter and querying it would be awkward and probably damage your working relationship.

   A: Passes responsibility to others: it pays the claim first and raises a vague concern afterwards, so the money has gone and the manager is given a hint rather than a fact.

   C: Escalates prematurely: a formal rejection recorded against a colleague is a serious step taken before he has been asked, when there may be a simple explanation such as a wrong date.

   D: Breaches process to protect a colleague: it knowingly pays a claim for a journey that did not happen, because the sum is small and the conversation would be uncomfortable. That is dishonesty by omission, not discretion.

   The most effective response is to go back to the colleague, tell him the claimed journey does not match the day he was at the regional office, and ask him to correct or explain it: the discrepancy is a fact, there may be an innocent explanation such as the wrong date entered, and the person who can settle it in a sentence is the one who made the claim. Asking him first is both fairer and faster than any other route. It beats rejecting the claim in the system with a note that the journey could not have taken place, because a formal rejection on his record is a heavy step before he has had the chance to explain a possible typing error. It beats processing it and mentioning to your sales manager that the mileage looked unusual, because that pays out first and passes her a suspicion instead of a question that could already have been answered. The least effective response is processing the claim as submitted because the amount is small and querying it would be awkward: it knowingly pays for a journey that did not take place, which is precisely the reasoning that makes small false claims routine. That is worse than the other two, which act clumsily but do not knowingly pay. The principle: put the discrepancy to the person who created it before either paying it or recording it against them.

7. Question 7 of 10

   You work on the security desk of an office building. A contractor asks to be let into the server room, saying he is booked to replace a faulty switch and is running late. He has no work order and is not on today’s authorised list, but he knows the IT manager’s name and is wearing a company uniform. The IT manager is contactable by phone. Your security supervisor is on site. Which response below would be most effective, and which would be least effective?

   1. Escort him to the server room and stay with him while he works, so that access is supervised even though he is not on the authorised list.
   2. Let him in, since he knows the IT manager by name, is in company uniform and is clearly expected, and note the visit in the log for the record.
   3. Turn him away and tell him to rebook through the proper channel, since he is not on the authorised list and has no work order.
   4. Ask him to wait in reception while you ring the IT manager to confirm the visit, and tell your security supervisor what you are doing.
   Show the answer

   Most effective: D. Ask him to wait in reception while you ring the IT manager to confirm the visit, and tell your security supervisor what you are doing.

   Least effective: B. Let him in, since he knows the IT manager by name, is in company uniform and is clearly expected, and note the visit in the log for the record.

   A: Breaches confidentiality or process: supervision is not authorisation. An unverified visitor is in the server room either way, and standing beside him does not establish that he should be there.

   B: Acts on assumptions without checking: a name and a uniform are precisely what someone seeking unauthorised access would present, and the one person who could confirm it is a phone call away. Logging it afterwards records the failure rather than preventing it.

   C: Applies the rule without using it: the list is a control, not the only source of truth, and a genuine engineer is sent away with a failed switch unfixed when a two-minute call would have settled it.

   The most effective response is to ask him to wait in reception while you ring the IT manager to confirm the visit, and tell your security supervisor what you are doing: the authorised list is the control and the IT manager can extend it, so a short wait and a phone call resolves the question either way. Telling your supervisor means the decision is not yours alone. It beats turning him away and telling him to rebook through the proper channel, because that applies the rule correctly and wastes a genuine visit when verification takes two minutes. It beats escorting him to the server room and staying with him, because that grants the access first and verifies nothing; being watched is not the same as being authorised. The least effective response is letting him in because he knows the IT manager by name and is in uniform: it grants server room access on the strength of the two things easiest for an unauthorised visitor to produce, and records it afterwards. That is worse than escorting him, which at least supervises, and worse than turning him away, which at least refuses. The principle: when someone falls outside a control, verify with the person who owns it before deciding either way.

8. Question 8 of 10

   You work in a delivery-only kitchen. Checking the walk-in fridge you find the temperature gauge reading well above the safe limit and the log shows it was last checked twelve hours ago. There is a large quantity of prepared food inside. Orders start in an hour. Your head chef is on site and the food safety procedure requires temperature failures to be reported to him. Which response below would be most effective, and which would be least effective?

   1. Stop the food being used, tell the head chef now that the fridge is above the safe limit and was last checked twelve hours ago, and let him decide what happens to it.
   2. Use the food for tonight's orders since it is still cold to the touch and the gauge may well be faulty, and report the fridge for repair tomorrow.
   3. Move the prepared food to another fridge so it starts cooling again, and tell the head chef once the transfer is done.
   4. Check the temperature again with a probe thermometer to confirm the gauge is accurate before raising it, so the head chef is not called over a faulty gauge.
   Show the answer

   Most effective: A. Stop the food being used, tell the head chef now that the fridge is above the safe limit and was last checked twelve hours ago, and let him decide what happens to it.

   Least effective: B. Use the food for tonight's orders since it is still cold to the touch and the gauge may well be faulty, and report the fridge for repair tomorrow.

   B: Serves food of unknown safety: a fridge above the safe limit for an unknown period is exactly the situation the temperature control exists to catch, and judging it by touch puts customers at risk. That is a safety failure, not a judgement about waste.

   C: Acts on assumptions without checking: moving the food cools it and tells nobody how long it was warm, which is the fact that decides whether it can be used at all.

   D: Delays the decision: verifying the gauge is sensible and takes time the head chef could direct in a moment, with service starting in an hour and food that may already be unsafe.

   The most effective response is to stop the food being used and tell the head chef now that the fridge is above the safe limit and was last checked twelve hours ago: prepared food may have been warm for up to twelve hours, that decision is his under the food safety procedure, and he is on site with an hour before service. Stopping its use first is what makes the decision possible. It beats moving the prepared food to another fridge and telling him once the transfer is done, because cooling it destroys the evidence of how long it was warm, which is the fact the judgement rests on. It beats checking again with a probe thermometer before raising it, because confirming the gauge is work he can direct in seconds, and the clock is running. The least effective response is using the food for tonight’s orders because it is still cold to the touch: it serves food of unknown temperature history to customers on the basis of how it feels. That is worse than the other two, which act imperfectly but do not serve it. The principle: when a safety control has failed, stop the product and get the decision to the person the procedure names, without disturbing the evidence.

9. Question 9 of 10

   You are a quality inspector at a textile manufacturer. Checking a finished batch you notice the same small weaving fault on several rolls from one loom, and looking back at last week’s records you see it on that loom’s output too. Nobody has asked you to review previous batches. Last week’s output has already gone to a customer. Your quality manager is on site. The loom is running now. Which response below would be most effective, and which would be least effective?

   1. Reject the current batch and say nothing about last week's records, since that output has already been accepted by the customer and reopening it would cause unnecessary trouble.
   2. Reject the current batch and have the loom stopped for maintenance, then report it once the immediate production problem has been dealt with.
   3. Reject the current batch as faulty and record it in the quality log, since the fault is caught before dispatch and the log is where recurring issues are reviewed.
   4. Take the current batch and last week's records to your quality manager now, show her the fault is recurring on one loom, and let her decide about the loom and the customer.
   Show the answer

   Most effective: D. Take the current batch and last week's records to your quality manager now, show her the fault is recurring on one loom, and let her decide about the loom and the customer.

   Least effective: A. Reject the current batch and say nothing about last week's records, since that output has already been accepted by the customer and reopening it would cause unnecessary trouble.

   A: Hides the problem: it knowingly withholds that a customer has already received cloth with the same fault, in order to avoid trouble. Choosing silence about goods already delivered is concealment, not discretion.

   B: Acts outside own authority on the wider issue: stopping the loom is reasonable and it leaves the shipped batch, which is the part with a customer at the other end, unaddressed and unreported.

   C: Delays the decision: rejecting this batch protects this shipment and the log is reviewed later, so a loom producing faulty cloth keeps running and last week's delivery stays with the customer unmentioned.

   The most effective response is to take the current batch and last week’s records to your quality manager now, show her the fault is recurring on one loom, and let her decide about the loom and the customer: the machine is running now and last week’s faulty output is already delivered, and only she can decide about both. Bringing the batch and the records together makes the pattern visible. It beats rejecting the batch and recording it in the quality log, because that leaves the loom running and the delivered goods unmentioned. It beats rejecting the batch and having the loom stopped for maintenance, because that addresses production while the customer who already has faulty cloth is still not considered. The least effective response is rejecting the batch and saying nothing about last week’s records: it deliberately withholds that faulty goods have already been delivered, to avoid trouble. That is worse than the other two, which act partially but do not conceal. The principle: when a fault turns out to have a history, take the history as well as the sample to whoever can act on both.

10. Question 10 of 10

    You are a process operator at a waste water treatment works. Passing a monitoring screen that is not part of your round, you notice the outflow ammonia reading has been climbing steadily for three days and is close to the permitted limit. Exceeding it is reportable to the environmental regulator. The operator responsible is on leave. Your works manager is on site. Which response below would be most effective, and which would be least effective?

    1. Adjust the aeration settings yourself to bring the ammonia down, since the trend is clear and the limit is close.
    2. Take the three-day trend to your works manager now, show him the readings and how close they are to the limit, and let him decide what to do.
    3. Record the trend in the shift log so the operator responsible picks it up when he returns from leave next week.
    4. Leave it, since the screen is not on your round, the reading is still inside the permitted limit and the plant's alarms would trigger if it went over.
    Show the answer

    Most effective: B. Take the three-day trend to your works manager now, show him the readings and how close they are to the limit, and let him decide what to do.

    Least effective: D. Leave it, since the screen is not on your round, the reading is still inside the permitted limit and the plant's alarms would trigger if it went over.

    A: Acts outside own authority: changing process settings on a plant running near a permitted limit can drive the reading the wrong way, and the works manager has not been told the trend exists.

    C: Delays the decision: the log reaches the right person on the wrong day. The reading is close to a reportable limit now, and next week is after any breach would have happened.

    D: Fails to escalate a genuine risk: a three-day climb towards a reportable limit is exactly the signal that precedes a breach, and relying on the alarm means acting only once the limit has already been exceeded.

    The most effective response is to take the three-day trend to your works manager now, show him the readings and how close they are to the limit, and let him decide: a steady climb towards a reportable limit is a developing breach rather than a stable reading, you are the only person who has noticed with the responsible operator away, and he can act today. It beats adjusting the aeration settings yourself to bring the ammonia down, because that is a process decision beyond your authority on a plant running close to a limit, and could make the reading worse. It beats recording the trend in the shift log for the operator returning next week, because that arrives after the breach it should have prevented. The least effective response is leaving it because the reading is still inside the permitted limit and the alarms would trigger: it waits for an alarm that by definition sounds only once the limit has been exceeded and the breach is already reportable. That is worse than the other two, which act wrongly or slowly but do act. The principle: a trend towards a limit is information somebody needs before the limit is reached, so take it to whoever can act while it is still preventable.