Centrica Assessment Tests

Centrica Situational Judgement Test

1. Question 1 of 10

   You work for a tour operator. A group of twenty-four is flying out on Saturday on a walking holiday. On Wednesday the mountain hut booked for two nights closes after a water supply failure. An alternative hut is available but is four hours’ walk further on, which changes two days of the itinerary. The group leader is contactable. Your operations manager is available today. Which response below would be most effective, and which would be least effective?

   1. Rebook the alternative hut and send the group leader a revised itinerary, so the holiday is secured and everyone knows the new plan before they fly.
   2. Wait until the water supply position is clearer later in the week, since the hut may reopen before Saturday and a change of itinerary would unsettle the group unnecessarily.
   3. Let the group travel as booked and have the guide explain the change of route when they reach the mountain, since the alternative hut will be arranged by then anyway.
   4. Ring the group leader today, explain the hut closure and what the alternative would mean for two days of walking, and agree the plan before anything is rebooked.
   Show the answer

   Most effective: D. Ring the group leader today, explain the hut closure and what the alternative would mean for two days of walking, and agree the plan before anything is rebooked.

   Least effective: C. Let the group travel as booked and have the guide explain the change of route when they reach the mountain, since the alternative hut will be arranged by then anyway.

   A: Substitutes own judgement for the stakeholder's: adding four hours' walking to two days changes what the group signed up for, and some members may not be able to do it. That is the group leader's call, not a booking amendment.

   B: Delays the decision: the alternative hut may be taken by another group while you wait, and the leader loses the days in which walkers could have prepared or withdrawn.

   C: Hides the problem: twenty-four people are told on the mountain that two days now involve four hours' more walking, when some may be unable to manage it and none of them can do anything about it there. That is concealment with a safety dimension.

   The most effective response is to ring the group leader today, explain the hut closure and what the alternative would mean for two days of walking, and agree the plan before anything is rebooked: four extra hours on two days is a material change, some of twenty-four people may not manage it, and only he can judge that for his group. Wednesday leaves time to prepare, adjust or withdraw. It beats rebooking the alternative hut and sending a revised itinerary, because that presents the change as settled when its acceptability depends on the group. It beats waiting until the water supply position is clearer later in the week, because that risks losing the alternative hut and burns the days the group needs. The least effective response is letting them travel as booked and having the guide explain the change of route on the mountain: it tells twenty-four walkers the route has lengthened substantially at the one point where nobody can opt out. That is worse than the other two, which decide or delay but do not spring it on people in the field. The principle: when a change affects what people are physically committing to, tell whoever speaks for them while they can still choose.

2. Question 2 of 10

   You are a claims assistant at an insurance company. Reviewing a routine file you notice that a customer’s subsidence claim was declined last year on the basis of a policy exclusion that, reading it now, does not appear to apply to her circumstances. The claim is closed and nobody has asked you to look at it. The customer has not appealed. Your claims manager is in the office. Which response below would be most effective, and which would be least effective?

   1. Take the file to your claims manager, show her the exclusion and why it may not apply, and ask whether the decision should be reviewed.
   2. Write to the customer explaining that the decline may have been wrong and inviting her to appeal, so that the case is reopened through the proper route.
   3. Reopen the claim in the system and reassess it against the policy wording yourself, so that the correct decision is on file before anyone needs to be told.
   4. Leave the file closed, since the claim was decided by someone more senior, the customer accepted it and did not appeal, and it is not your case to reopen.
   Show the answer

   Most effective: A. Take the file to your claims manager, show her the exclusion and why it may not apply, and ask whether the decision should be reviewed.

   Least effective: D. Leave the file closed, since the claim was decided by someone more senior, the customer accepted it and did not appeal, and it is not your case to reopen.

   B: Substitutes own judgement for the stakeholder's: telling a customer her claim was wrongly declined commits the company to a position nobody has agreed, on your reading of an exclusion you have not had checked.

   C: Breaches confidentiality or process: reopening and reassessing a closed claim is not a claims assistant's authority, and doing it before telling anyone means a decision is remade with no oversight.

   D: Fails to escalate a genuine risk: a customer may have been wrongly refused a subsidence claim, and the reason for saying nothing is that somebody senior decided it and she did not argue. Her not appealing is not evidence the decision was right.

   The most effective response is to take the file to your claims manager, show her the exclusion and why it may not apply, and ask whether the decision should be reviewed: you may have found a wrongly declined claim, you are not the person who can determine that, and she is in the office and can. Raising it with the file and the reasoning puts it in front of the right authority immediately. It beats writing to the customer to say the decline may have been wrong and inviting her to appeal, because that commits the company to a view on your reading of the policy before anyone has checked it. It beats reopening the claim and reassessing it against the policy wording yourself, because that is beyond your authority and removes the oversight that should sit over a reversal. The least effective response is leaving the file closed because it was decided by someone more senior and she did not appeal: it leaves a customer possibly out of pocket on a claim that may have been wrongly refused, for reasons that are exactly why nobody else will ever find it. That is worse than the other two, which overstep but act. The principle: when you find a possible error in a decision you cannot overturn, take it to whoever can, rather than acting on it or leaving it.

3. Question 3 of 10

   You work in guest services at a theme park. A ride has broken down, queues everywhere have lengthened and you have been dealing with complaints for four hours without a break. A visitor tells you, in front of a crowd, that the park is a rip-off and that you personally have been useless. His family have queued ninety minutes for a ride that then closed. Your duty manager is contactable by radio. Which response below would be most effective, and which would be least effective?

   1. Explain that the ride closed for safety reasons entirely outside guest services' control, and that everyone in the park has been affected in the same way today.
   2. Radio the duty manager to come and speak to him, and move on to the next guest while he waits for her to arrive.
   3. Tell him that the closure is nobody's fault, that shouting at staff will not reopen the ride, and ask him to move aside so you can help other guests.
   4. Acknowledge the ninety minutes his family lost, explain what is known about the ride, and offer the compensation the park provides for a closure of this kind.
   Show the answer

   Most effective: D. Acknowledge the ninety minutes his family lost, explain what is known about the ride, and offer the compensation the park provides for a closure of this kind.

   Least effective: C. Tell him that the closure is nobody's fault, that shouting at staff will not reopen the ride, and ask him to move aside so you can help other guests.

   A: Defends the park to an audience: it is accurate and it answers his insult rather than his ruined ninety minutes, in front of a crowd who are equally frustrated.

   B: Passes responsibility to others: it hands over a complaint you are able to settle and makes a family who have already queued ninety minutes wait again.

   C: Personalises the conflict: it rebukes a guest in front of a crowd and offers his family nothing at all for a wasted queue, which is the one response that adds a grievance rather than settling one.

   The most effective response is to acknowledge the ninety minutes his family lost, explain what is known about the ride, and offer the compensation the park provides: that answers the complaint without engaging the insult, and it gives his family something for the queue. It beats explaining that the closure was for safety reasons outside guest services’ control, because defending the department, however fairly, argues with his anger while offering his family nothing. It beats radioing the duty manager to come and speak to him, because that makes a family who have already queued twice wait a third time for something you can resolve. The least effective response is telling him that shouting at staff will not reopen the ride and asking him to move aside: it corrects his behaviour publicly and offers nothing for the lost queue, so he leaves with both the original grievance and a new one. That is worse than explaining the closure, which at least explains, and worse than fetching the duty manager, which at least routes him to someone. The principle: acknowledge what the person actually lost, then give them the remedy your organisation already provides.

4. Question 4 of 10

   You are a quality assistant at a food manufacturer. Routine testing shows a batch of sauce with a slightly higher salt reading than the declared label value, above the tolerance in your own specification but not a safety issue. The batch is due to leave for a supermarket customer this afternoon. Your quality manager is at another site but reachable by phone. The production supervisor tells you it is within normal variation. Which response below would be most effective, and which would be least effective?

   1. Put the batch on hold, ring the quality manager with the reading and the specification tolerance, and let her decide whether it ships this afternoon.
   2. Accept the production supervisor's view that it is within normal variation, let the batch go, and say nothing further since it is not a safety concern.
   3. Retest the batch yourself to confirm the reading before involving anyone, since a single result outside tolerance may simply be a testing error.
   4. Release the batch and note the reading in the quality log, so that the trend is recorded and can be reviewed at the next specification meeting.
   Show the answer

   Most effective: A. Put the batch on hold, ring the quality manager with the reading and the specification tolerance, and let her decide whether it ships this afternoon.

   Least effective: B. Accept the production supervisor's view that it is within normal variation, let the batch go, and say nothing further since it is not a safety concern.

   B: Substitutes own judgement for the stakeholder's: the specification tolerance is the customer's and the label is a declaration to consumers, so neither the supervisor nor you can decide it is close enough. Letting it go unrecorded is the one option that leaves nobody aware at all.

   C: Delays the decision: a retest is sensible and the batch is loading this afternoon. Confirming the number before telling anyone spends the decision window on work the quality manager could have directed in a minute.

   D: Fails to escalate a genuine risk: it ships a batch that misses the declared label value and records the fact afterwards. A log entry documents the decision without anyone having made one.

   The most effective response is to put the batch on hold and ring the quality manager with the reading and the tolerance: the result is outside your own specification, the label is a declaration to consumers, and she owns that judgement and is a phone call away with the batch still on site. Holding it costs an afternoon; shipping it wrongly cannot be undone. It beats retesting the batch yourself before involving anyone, because that is reasonable work in the wrong order: she can direct a retest in a minute, and the batch is loading. It beats releasing the batch and noting the reading in the quality log, because that records a decision nobody actually took. The least effective response is accepting the production supervisor’s view that it is within normal variation and letting the batch go: it accepts a production judgement about a quality specification, ships against a declared label value, and leaves no record and no one informed. That is worse than retesting, which delays but checks, and worse than logging it, which at least documents it. The principle: when a result falls outside a specification you do not own, stop the goods and get the decision to whoever owns it, while stopping is still possible.

5. Question 5 of 10

   You work on the service desk of a bicycle hire scheme. A customer has been charged a £120 late return fee. The app’s GPS shows his bike was returned two hours late, but he says he docked it on time and the dock was faulty. Docking faults are logged by the system and you can see the maintenance log. Your supervisor can authorise refunds. Which response below would be most effective, and which would be least effective?

   1. Explain that the system shows the bike as returned two hours late and that the charge is applied automatically, and give him the address for written appeals.
   2. Tell him the GPS data is definitive, that the system does not make mistakes of this kind, and that the charge will stand.
   3. Refund the £120 now, since a faulty dock is a plausible explanation and £120 is a lot to charge a customer for a fault that may not be his.
   4. Apologise, check the maintenance log for a fault on that dock at that time, and take the result to your supervisor so the charge can be refunded if the dock failed.
   Show the answer

   Most effective: D. Apologise, check the maintenance log for a fault on that dock at that time, and take the result to your supervisor so the charge can be refunded if the dock failed.

   Least effective: B. Tell him the GPS data is definitive, that the system does not make mistakes of this kind, and that the charge will stand.

   A: Ignores the customer's actual need: the maintenance log that would test his account is available to you now, and he is sent to write a letter about something you could check in a minute.

   B: Acts on assumptions without checking: it asserts the system is infallible while a maintenance log exists precisely because docks fail, and it rules against the customer without opening the one record that would test his account.

   C: Breaches confidentiality or process: refunds need supervisor authorisation, and granting one on plausibility rather than on the log that would settle it removes the control and skips the evidence.

   The most effective response is to apologise, check the maintenance log for a fault on that dock at that time, and take the result to your supervisor so the charge can be refunded if the dock failed: he has made a specific, checkable claim, the log will show whether that dock faulted, and your supervisor can refund on the strength of it. Checking first means the decision rests on evidence rather than on who insists harder. It beats explaining that the charge is automatic and giving him the address for written appeals, because that defers a check you can do immediately. It beats refunding the £120 now because a faulty dock is plausible, since that skips both the evidence and the authorisation, so a genuine dock fault still goes unrecorded and unfixed. The least effective response is telling him the GPS data is definitive and the system does not make such mistakes: it declares the system incapable of the error he describes, when the maintenance log exists because docks do fail, and refuses him without looking. That is worse than the appeals address, which at least leaves a route, and worse than the immediate refund, which at least resolves it in his favour. The principle: when a customer’s account is checkable, check it, then take the evidence to whoever authorises the outcome.

6. Question 6 of 10

   You are a scheduler for a solar panel installer. A customer’s installation is booked for Monday and he has arranged scaffolding at his own cost for that day. On Friday you learn the inverter for his system is out of stock for two weeks. The panels themselves could be fitted on Monday, with the inverter added later, but that would need the scaffolding twice. He is contactable. Your installations manager is available. Which response below would be most effective, and which would be least effective?

   1. Ring the customer today, explain the inverter delay and that fitting the panels on Monday would mean paying for scaffolding twice, and let him choose what to do.
   2. Postpone the whole installation until the inverter arrives, and tell the customer so he can cancel his scaffolding before Monday.
   3. Leave Monday's booking in place and say nothing, since the panels can go up as planned and the inverter question can be dealt with once the installation has started.
   4. Send the team on Monday to fit the panels as planned, and tell the customer on the day that the inverter will follow in two weeks.
   Show the answer

   Most effective: A. Ring the customer today, explain the inverter delay and that fitting the panels on Monday would mean paying for scaffolding twice, and let him choose what to do.

   Least effective: C. Leave Monday's booking in place and say nothing, since the panels can go up as planned and the inverter question can be dealt with once the installation has started.

   B: Substitutes own judgement for the stakeholder's: the scaffolding is his cost and his arrangement, so whether to use Monday's booking for the panels alone is his call, not a scheduling decision to be announced.

   C: Hides the problem: he is paying for scaffolding on the strength of a complete installation, and the plan is to let him find out mid-job. Withholding a known two-week gap from someone spending his own money is concealment.

   D: Commits the customer to a second cost: it commits him to a second scaffolding hire without asking, and he learns of the two-week gap only once the team is on his roof.

   The most effective response is to ring the customer today, explain the inverter delay and that fitting on Monday would mean paying for scaffolding twice, and let him choose: the scaffolding is his cost, the choice between one visit later and two visits with double hire is financial and belongs to him, and Friday leaves him time to cancel or keep the booking. Giving him the facts and both options is the whole job. It beats postponing the whole installation until the inverter arrives, because cancelling on his behalf decides how his own money is spent without asking. It beats sending the team on Monday and telling him on the day that the inverter follows in two weeks, because that commits him to a second hire and tells him afterwards. The least effective response is leaving Monday’s booking in place and saying nothing: it lets him pay for scaffolding believing the system will be complete, and plans to explain mid-installation. That is worse than the other two, which decide for him but at least tell him. The principle: when the trade-off costs the customer money, put the facts and the options to them while they can still change the arrangements.

7. Question 7 of 10

   You are a receptionist at a medical centre, sharing the front desk with your colleague Daniel. You disagree about how patient booking notes should be handed over between shifts, and mistakes have crept in from both sides. This morning Daniel posted in the team messaging channel that he is “tired of clearing up” your booking errors, naming two recent examples. Colleagues have seen the message, and you feel it is unfair. Which response below would be most effective, and which would be least effective?

   1. Let the message go unanswered and quietly double-check your own bookings from now on, hoping the friction fades once Daniel has fewer errors to point to.
   2. Conclude that Daniel has a problem with you personally and ask the practice manager to reorganise the rota so the two of you rarely share the desk.
   3. Ask Daniel to talk privately, say the public post felt unfair, and suggest going through the recent mistakes together to agree one clear handover routine for both of you.
   4. Reply in the team messaging channel with a list of Daniel's own recent booking mistakes, so colleagues can see that the errors have come from both sides.
   Show the answer

   Most effective: C. Ask Daniel to talk privately, say the public post felt unfair, and suggest going through the recent mistakes together to agree one clear handover routine for both of you.

   Least effective: D. Reply in the team messaging channel with a list of Daniel's own recent booking mistakes, so colleagues can see that the errors have come from both sides.

   A: Avoids the difficult conversation: quietly tightening your own bookings addresses only half the problem. The disputed handover routine and the public accusation are left untouched, so the friction and the mistakes are likely to continue.

   B: Personalises the conflict: treating a fixable disagreement about the handover routine as a clash of personalities asks the manager to separate you instead of solving anything, and leaves the underlying process producing mistakes for whoever shares the desk.

   D: Retaliates publicly: answering a public accusation with a public counter-attack escalates the conflict in front of the whole team and turns a solvable process disagreement into a personal feud. That is a category failure, not a defensible reply.

   The most effective response is to ask Daniel to talk privately and agree one clear handover routine: it takes the dispute out of the public channel, names the impact honestly, and moves both of you toward the real fix while preserving the working relationship. It beats leaving the message unanswered and quietly double-checking your own bookings, because that leaves both the disputed routine and the public accusation unaddressed, so the mistakes and the resentment are likely to continue. It beats asking the practice manager to reorganise the rota, because that treats a solvable process disagreement as a personality clash and asks for the two of you to be separated, fixing nothing for whoever staffs the desk next. The least effective response is replying in the team channel with a list of Daniel’s own mistakes: unlike saying nothing, which at least does no further damage, and unlike going to the practice manager, which at least involves someone who could help, it escalates the conflict publicly and converts a disagreement about process into a personal feud in front of the team. The principle: take conflict out of public view, address the issue rather than the person, and fix the process that is generating the friction.

8. Question 8 of 10

   You are a ground handling agent at an airport. Fog has delayed several flights and the desk is surrounded by passengers. You have been on your feet for six hours. A passenger who has missed a connection tells you, in front of the crowd, that you are incompetent and have ruined his trip. He is not going to make the last flight tonight. Your duty supervisor is nearby. Which response below would be most effective, and which would be least effective?

   1. Acknowledge that missing the connection is a serious problem for him, tell him what tonight's and tomorrow's options actually are, and start arranging whichever he chooses.
   2. Tell him there is nothing you can do tonight and ask him to step aside so you can help the other passengers who are waiting.
   3. Tell him the delays are caused by fog rather than by anything the ground staff have done, and ask him not to speak to you like that in front of other passengers.
   4. Apologise and ask your duty supervisor to come and take over the conversation, then move on to the next passenger in the queue.
   Show the answer

   Most effective: A. Acknowledge that missing the connection is a serious problem for him, tell him what tonight's and tomorrow's options actually are, and start arranging whichever he chooses.

   Least effective: B. Tell him there is nothing you can do tonight and ask him to step aside so you can help the other passengers who are waiting.

   B: Ignores the customer's actual need: it is not true that nothing can be done, since tomorrow's flights and overnight arrangements exist, and it dismisses a stranded passenger in order to clear him from the desk.

   C: Personalises the conflict: it is accurate and it answers his insult instead of his missed connection, in front of an audience that will take sides.

   D: Passes responsibility to others: it hands off a passenger you are able to rebook, and takes a supervisor off the floor during a major disruption when you can resolve it yourself.

   The most effective response is to acknowledge that missing the connection is a serious problem for him, tell him what tonight’s and tomorrow’s options actually are, and start arranging whichever he chooses: he is stranded overnight, so what he needs is the real list and someone starting on it, and giving him that answers the complaint without engaging the insult. It beats telling him the delays are caused by fog and asking him not to speak to you like that, because correcting his manner, however fairly, argues with his tone in front of a crowd and leaves him no closer to a flight. It beats asking your duty supervisor to come and take over the conversation, because that confirms you could not help and removes a supervisor from the floor during a disruption. The least effective response is telling him there is nothing you can do tonight and asking him to step aside: it tells a stranded passenger something that is not true, and moves him aside to clear the desk. That is worse than correcting his manner, which at least engages, and worse than fetching the supervisor, which at least routes him to help. The principle: under personal criticism, answer the problem rather than the tone, and give the person the concrete options that still exist.

9. Question 9 of 10

   You are a commis chef working the dessert section of a busy restaurant on a Saturday night. A faulty oven has put you twenty minutes behind, six tables are waiting on desserts, and new orders keep arriving. The head chef, reorganising the kitchen around the delay, asks where your section stands and offers to move a colleague across from the quieter starters section to help you. Which response below would be most effective, and which would be least effective?

   1. Tell the head chef the backlog will be cleared in ten minutes without extra help, so the starters section stays intact and her re-plan of the kitchen stays simple.
   2. Start components for all six tables' desserts at once so every order shows progress, and send each dessert out as soon as it looks close enough to finished, plating whichever is quickest first.
   3. Give the head chef the honest position, table by table, with realistic times for each, and accept the extra pair of hands, setting the colleague to specific tasks while you work through the backlog in order.
   4. Reply that your section is recovering and decline the help for now, pushing on alone at full speed and raising it again only if the backlog is still there in twenty minutes.
   Show the answer

   Most effective: C. Give the head chef the honest position, table by table, with realistic times for each, and accept the extra pair of hands, setting the colleague to specific tasks while you work through the backlog in order.

   Least effective: B. Start components for all six tables' desserts at once so every order shows progress, and send each dessert out as soon as it looks close enough to finished, plating whichever is quickest first.

   A: Over-promises: the last twenty minutes give no reason to believe ten minutes is achievable alone, so this trades a moment of reassurance now for a second, larger failure later, and the head chef re-plans the kitchen around a number that was never real.

   B: Splits effort so nothing finishes: working six orders at once in a panic means no dessert gets completed properly, and "close enough to finished" sends substandard plates to paying customers, converting a twenty-minute delay into bad food on every waiting table, which cannot be taken back.

   D: Hides the strain until failure: "recovering" understates a growing backlog and turns down the one resource that would actually shorten it, so the head chef re-plans on soft information and the true position only surfaces once tables have waited another twenty minutes.

   The most effective response is to give the head chef the honest position table by table and accept the extra pair of hands: she is re-planning the whole kitchen around your delay, so she needs the true picture in usable detail, and directing the offered help is the fastest legitimate way to shorten the backlog. It beats telling her the backlog will clear in ten minutes without help, because the last twenty minutes give no reason to believe that promise; when the ten minutes pass, the kitchen must re-plan again, later and with less room. It beats declining the help and pushing on alone at full speed, because that keeps the strain private and refuses the one resource that would shorten the delay, so her re-plan runs on soft information and the failure surfaces only when tables have waited even longer. The least effective response is starting all six tables’ desserts at once and sending each one out as soon as it looks close enough: unlike the optimistic promise, which at least intends to send out finished desserts, and unlike pushing on alone, which at least keeps quality while gambling on time, it abandons both order and standard, so six part- finished desserts reach paying customers, an outcome that cannot be recalled or re-planned around. The principle: under pressure, composure means honest triage. State the real position, take the help on offer, and protect the standard of what goes out.

10. Question 10 of 10

    You are a warehouse operative at a pharmaceutical distributor. Picking an order you notice a pallet of temperature-sensitive medicines standing in the main aisle rather than in the cold room. You do not know how long it has been there. The order it belongs to is due to ship in an hour. The quality supervisor is on site. There is a written procedure for temperature excursions that you have seen but not been trained on. Which response below would be most effective, and which would be least effective?

    1. Leave the pallet where it is, tell the quality supervisor now that temperature-sensitive stock has been out of the cold room for an unknown time, and let her apply the excursion procedure.
    2. Move the pallet into the cold room straight away so the medicines stop warming, and mention it to the quality supervisor when you next see her.
    3. Say nothing, since you do not know how long it has been there, it may have been moved out minutes ago, and you have not been trained on the excursion procedure.
    4. Read the excursion procedure and follow the steps yourself so the pallet is handled correctly before the order ships in an hour.
    Show the answer

    Most effective: A. Leave the pallet where it is, tell the quality supervisor now that temperature-sensitive stock has been out of the cold room for an unknown time, and let her apply the excursion procedure.

    Least effective: C. Say nothing, since you do not know how long it has been there, it may have been moved out minutes ago, and you have not been trained on the excursion procedure.

    B: Removes the evidence: cooling the pallet erases how long it was out, which is the one fact the excursion procedure exists to establish. The stock is no safer for having been put back.

    C: Fails to escalate a genuine risk: medicines whose temperature history is unknown are about to ship to patients, and the reason for silence, that you are untrained, is exactly why it needs to reach someone who is trained.

    D: Acts outside own training: applying a procedure you have never been trained on, to decide whether medicines are still fit to ship, risks a confident and wrong answer within the hour.

    The most effective response is to leave the pallet where it is and tell the quality supervisor now that temperature-sensitive stock has been out of the cold room for an unknown time: that is precisely what the excursion procedure exists to assess, and she is on site and trained to do it before the order ships. Leaving the pallet untouched preserves the information she needs. It beats moving it into the cold room straight away and mentioning it later, because that destroys the evidence of how long it was out, and warmed stock is not made safe by being cooled again. It beats reading the excursion procedure and following the steps yourself, because working through a procedure you have never been trained on, to decide whether medicines are fit for patients, is a decision made on the wrong authority under time pressure. The least effective response is saying nothing because you do not know how long it has been there and have not been trained: it lets medicines of unknown temperature history ship to patients and tells nobody, using your own lack of training as the reason for silence. That is worse than the other two, which act wrongly but bring the problem into the open. The principle: when something is outside your training and about to become irreversible, preserve the situation and get the trained person to it.