EDF Energy Assessment Tests

EDF Energy Situational Judgement Test

1. Question 1 of 10

   You are a fundraising assistant at a charity. You and your colleague Callum jointly prepare the monthly donor report. For three months he has sent you his figures late on the afternoon they are due, leaving you to reconcile them in a rush, and last month an error reached the trustees. Today he has done it again. He is friendly and busy, and has never been told this causes a problem. The next report is due in four weeks. Which response below would be most effective, and which would be least effective?

   1. Reconcile the figures again without saying anything, and build in extra checking time next month so that a late hand-off cannot produce another error in the trustee report.
   2. Copy your line manager into your reply to Callum today, noting that the figures have arrived late for the fourth month running and that this caused last month's error in the trustee report.
   3. Reply to Callum today setting out that you will not be able to include his figures in future if they arrive after midday on the due date, so that the deadline is unambiguous from now on.
   4. Reconcile today's figures, then speak to Callum this week, explain what the late hand-off costs at your end, and agree a date each month by which his figures will reach you.
   Show the answer

   Most effective: D. Reconcile today's figures, then speak to Callum this week, explain what the late hand-off costs at your end, and agree a date each month by which his figures will reach you.

   Least effective: A. Reconcile the figures again without saying anything, and build in extra checking time next month so that a late hand-off cannot produce another error in the trustee report.

   A: Avoids the difficult conversation: absorbing it silently for a fourth month guarantees a fifth, hides from Callum that his habit has consequences, and leaves the trustees relying on you never having a bad day. Silence is the failure here, not the extra checking.

   B: Escalates prematurely: Callum has never been told there is a problem, so the first he hears of it is in front of his manager. That makes an ally into a defendant over something a direct conversation has not yet been given the chance to fix.

   C: Personalises the conflict: it opens with a sanction rather than a conversation, and a donor report missing his figures punishes the trustees for a problem between the two of you.

   The most effective response is to reconcile today’s figures, then speak to Callum this week and agree a date each month by which his figures will reach you: this month’s report still has to be right, and the recurring cause needs raising with the person who can fix it, directly and once the immediate work is done. Agreeing a date turns a grievance into a working arrangement. It beats copying your line manager into the reply today, because Callum has never been told there is a problem, and involving his manager first turns a fixable habit into a formal complaint. It beats replying that you will exclude his figures in future if they arrive late, because leading with that threat makes the trustees pay for a disagreement between two colleagues. The least effective response is reconciling again in silence and building in extra checking time: it is the only response where Callum never learns anything is wrong, so the pattern is guaranteed to continue, and the trustees’ report stays safe only for as long as your extra checking holds. That is worse than the other two, which are clumsy about how they raise it but do raise it. The principle: fix today’s report, then have the conversation with the person whose behaviour causes it, before involving anyone else.

2. Question 2 of 10

   You are a property manager for a block of flats. A leaseholder has been chasing you for three weeks about a leak into her flat from the roof. Today the contractor confirms the roof needs a full repair costing more than the reserve fund holds, which means a consultation with all leaseholders and no repair for at least two months. She has already reported damage to her ceiling. Your director is available. Which response below would be most effective, and which would be least effective?

   1. Ring the leaseholder today, explain the roof needs full repair, that consultation means at least two months, and what will be done about her ceiling and the leak meanwhile.
   2. Wait until the consultation is under way before contacting her, so that you can give her firm dates rather than an open-ended answer she will only chase you about again.
   3. Write to all leaseholders with the consultation notice, so that everyone including her receives the same information about the roof at the same time.
   4. Tell her the roof repair has been approved in principle and that you will confirm timescales once the consultation process has been worked through.
   Show the answer

   Most effective: A. Ring the leaseholder today, explain the roof needs full repair, that consultation means at least two months, and what will be done about her ceiling and the leak meanwhile.

   Least effective: B. Wait until the consultation is under way before contacting her, so that you can give her firm dates rather than an open-ended answer she will only chase you about again.

   B: Hides the problem: she has water entering her flat and has chased for three weeks. Waiting for tidier information leaves her with no information at all, and the silence is chosen to avoid being chased rather than to help her.

   C: Tells the wrong audience first: she has been chasing for three weeks and has water coming into her flat, so receiving a standard notice with everyone else answers none of her particular questions.

   D: Over-promises: describing it as approved in principle implies more certainty than a consultation that has not started, and it withholds the two-month timescale she needs to plan around.

   The most effective response is to ring the leaseholder today, explain the roof needs full repair, that consultation means at least two months, and what will be done about her ceiling and the leak meanwhile: she has been chasing for three weeks, has an active leak and ceiling damage, and the news is bad in a specific way she needs to plan around. That treats her as someone with a live problem rather than one of a list. It beats writing to all leaseholders with the consultation notice, because a general notice answers the block’s question and not hers. It beats telling her the repair is approved in principle with timescales to follow, because that overstates where things stand and still leaves out the timescale. The least effective response is waiting until the consultation is under way so you can give her firm dates: it delays telling her anything until the information is neater, while water continues to come into her flat, and the reason is to avoid being chased. That is worse than the other two, which communicate partially but do communicate. The principle: tell the person carrying the consequence directly, give them the timescale even when it is bad, and say what happens in the meantime.

3. Question 3 of 10

   You are an account handler at an insurance brokers. You and your colleague Priti share a book of commercial clients. She has twice contacted clients you look after without telling you, and one client has now asked which of you is actually handling his renewal. Renewals for eight of these clients fall in the next three weeks. Priti is senior to you but not your manager. Which response below would be most effective, and which would be least effective?

   1. Email the client to confirm that you are his handler and copy Priti in, so that the position is clear to everyone at the same time.
   2. Speak to Priti this week, agree which of you handles which clients through the renewal period, and confirm it to the client who asked.
   3. Raise it with your manager, explaining that Priti has been contacting your clients and that one has now questioned who is handling his renewal.
   4. Leave it, since Priti is senior and challenging her could be awkward, and simply work round any duplication as the eight renewals come up.
   Show the answer

   Most effective: B. Speak to Priti this week, agree which of you handles which clients through the renewal period, and confirm it to the client who asked.

   Least effective: D. Leave it, since Priti is senior and challenging her could be awkward, and simply work round any duplication as the eight renewals come up.

   A: Personalises the conflict: it settles the question by staking a claim in front of the client, which makes an internal muddle visible to the customer and puts Priti on the spot publicly.

   C: Escalates prematurely: Priti has not been told there is a problem, and the first she would hear of it is from a manager, over something two colleagues could settle before the renewals start.

   D: Avoids the difficult conversation: it accepts that clients will keep receiving conflicting contact through eight renewals, because raising it with a senior colleague feels uncomfortable. The client's confusion is left in place deliberately.

   The most effective response is to speak to Priti this week, agree which of you handles which clients through the renewal period, and confirm it to the client who asked: eight renewals are coming, a client has already noticed the confusion, and the fix is an agreement between two people about who handles what. Confirming it afterwards closes the loop cleanly. It beats raising it with your manager and explaining that she has been contacting your clients, because she has never been told this is causing a problem, and going to a manager first turns a workable conversation into a complaint about a senior colleague. It beats emailing the client to confirm you are his handler and copying her in, because settling it in front of the customer exposes the muddle rather than resolving it. The least effective response is leaving it and working round the duplication because challenging her would be awkward: it lets clients receive conflicting contact through eight renewals, so the problem the client has already flagged is knowingly allowed to continue. That is worse than the other two, which raise it in the wrong place but do raise it. The principle: agree the working boundary directly with the colleague, then tell the client, before the busy period makes it worse.

4. Question 4 of 10

   You are a resourcing coordinator at a recruitment agency. A candidate you placed in a temporary warehouse role two weeks ago rings to say his shifts have been changed to nights without notice and he cannot do them because of childcare. Your agency’s contract with the client says shift patterns are agreed in advance. Your account manager, who owns the client relationship, is in a pitch until 4pm. The candidate is due on a night shift this evening. Which response below would be most effective, and which would be least effective?

   1. Get the details from the candidate, check the agreed pattern on the contract file, and put the facts to your account manager before 4pm so she can raise it with the client before tonight's shift.
   2. Tell the candidate that shift changes are between him and the site supervisor and that he should raise it there, since the agency only placed him and does not run the client's rotas.
   3. Ring the client's site supervisor yourself, point out that the contract requires shift patterns to be agreed in advance, and ask for the candidate to be put back on days from tonight.
   4. Tell the candidate not to attend tonight's night shift, since the change breaches the agreed pattern, and confirm to him that the agency will sort it out with the client afterwards.
   Show the answer

   Most effective: A. Get the details from the candidate, check the agreed pattern on the contract file, and put the facts to your account manager before 4pm so she can raise it with the client before tonight's shift.

   Least effective: B. Tell the candidate that shift changes are between him and the site supervisor and that he should raise it there, since the agency only placed him and does not run the client's rotas.

   B: Passes responsibility to others: the agreed pattern is in your agency's own contract, so this is exactly the agency's business. Sending a temporary worker to argue it alone with the site abandons the person you placed.

   C: Substitutes own judgement for the stakeholder's: your account manager owns this relationship and a contractual challenge to the client is hers to frame. Making it yourself commits the agency to a position she has not seen.

   D: Acts on assumptions without checking: it tells a worker to miss a shift before anyone has confirmed the pattern or spoken to the client, which risks his placement on a reading of the contract nobody senior has looked at.

   The most effective response is to get the details, check the agreed pattern on the contract file, and put the facts to your account manager before 4pm: this is a contractual point the agency owns, it needs the person who owns the client relationship, and there is time to reach her before the shift. Gathering the facts first means she can act rather than investigate. It beats ringing the client’s site supervisor yourself, because a challenge to a client about their contract is the account manager’s to make, and pre-empting it commits the agency to a position she has not agreed. It beats telling the candidate not to attend tonight, because that risks his placement on your reading of a contract, before anyone has checked the agreed pattern or spoken to the client. The least effective response is telling him shift changes are between him and the site supervisor: it is the only response that denies the agency has any part in this, when the agreed pattern sits in the agency’s own contract, and it leaves a temporary worker to argue his own case against the site. That is worse than the other two, which are both wrong about who acts, but at least act. The principle: when something is genuinely yours to own, take it to the person who owns the relationship, with the facts, in time for them to use them.

5. Question 5 of 10

   You are a receptionist at an urgent care walk-in centre. Waiting times have reached three hours because two clinicians are off. A man who has been waiting with his young daughter tells you angrily, in front of a full waiting room, that the centre is a disgrace and that nobody has told him anything. His daughter is not seriously unwell but he is exhausted. Your senior receptionist is at the next desk. Which response below would be most effective, and which would be least effective?

   1. Explain that two clinicians are off sick and that reception has no control over waiting times, and ask him to take a seat with the others who are waiting.
   2. Acknowledge the three-hour wait, tell him roughly where his daughter is in the queue and when the next update will come, and check whether she needs to be seen sooner.
   3. Tell him that everyone is waiting and that complaining at reception will not make his daughter be seen any sooner.
   4. Apologise and ask the senior receptionist to come and speak to him, then carry on booking in the patients waiting behind him.
   Show the answer

   Most effective: B. Acknowledge the three-hour wait, tell him roughly where his daughter is in the queue and when the next update will come, and check whether she needs to be seen sooner.

   Least effective: C. Tell him that everyone is waiting and that complaining at reception will not make his daughter be seen any sooner.

   A: Defends the practice to an audience: it answers his frustration with a defence of reception and a comparison with other patients, in front of a full room, which invites him to escalate.

   C: Personalises the conflict: it tells a tired parent that raising a concern is pointless, in front of a full waiting room, and offers him nothing. Dismissing a patient's parent outright is a different order of wrong from explaining badly.

   D: Passes responsibility to others: it hands over a conversation you can have, and makes him wait again for an answer about waiting, which is what he is angry about.

   The most effective response is to acknowledge the three-hour wait, tell him roughly where his daughter is in the queue and when the next update will come, and check whether she needs to be seen sooner: his complaint is that nobody has told him anything, so that answers all of it, and it also does the clinically responsible thing. It beats explaining that two clinicians are off sick and asking him to take a seat, because defending reception, however true, argues with his frustration rather than answering his question, in public. It beats asking the senior receptionist to come and speak to him, because that makes him wait again for information you already have. The least effective response is telling him everyone is waiting and that complaining will not make his daughter be seen sooner: it tells him his complaint is futile and gives him nothing at all, in front of a full waiting room. That is worse than explaining the staffing, which at least explains, and worse than fetching the senior receptionist, which at least routes him to someone. The principle: when the complaint is about not being told, tell them, and check whether the situation itself needs escalating.

6. Question 6 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.

7. Question 7 of 10

   You are an exhibitions assistant at a museum. You and a curator, Helena, disagree about the label text for a display opening in a fortnight. She wants wording you believe overstates what the evidence supports; you have raised it once and she dismissed it. She is far more senior. The head of exhibitions is available. Labels go to print in three days. Which response below would be most effective, and which would be least effective?

   1. Defer to Helena's wording since she is the curator and it is her display, and note your reservation in an email so there is a record of your concern.
   2. Let the label go to print as Helena wants and say nothing further, since you have raised it once, she is far more senior and the distinction is unlikely to be noticed by visitors.
   3. Put your evidence to Helena once more in writing, and if she still disagrees ask the head of exhibitions to look at the wording before it goes to print in three days.
   4. Amend the label text to the wording you believe the evidence supports before it goes to print, since the deadline is close and the change is small.
   Show the answer

   Most effective: C. Put your evidence to Helena once more in writing, and if she still disagrees ask the head of exhibitions to look at the wording before it goes to print in three days.

   Least effective: B. Let the label go to print as Helena wants and say nothing further, since you have raised it once, she is far more senior and the distinction is unlikely to be noticed by visitors.

   A: Prioritises the record over the outcome: an email protects you while the museum publishes a claim you believe the evidence does not support, which is a question about the display rather than about who was right.

   B: Fails to escalate a genuine concern: it lets the museum publish a claim you believe overstates the evidence, and the reasons given are seniority and the hope that nobody will notice. Choosing silence about accuracy is a different order of wrong from raising it clumsily.

   D: Substitutes own judgement for the stakeholder's: it rewrites a curator's label without resolving the disagreement, so the museum publishes text its curator has not agreed.

   The most effective response is to put your evidence to Helena once more in writing, and if she still disagrees ask the head of exhibitions to look at the wording before it goes to print: whether the text is supported by the evidence is a question with an answer, she owns the display so she gets the argument in full first, and the head of exhibitions can settle it inside the three days. Putting it in writing makes the evidence reviewable. It beats amending the label text yourself before it goes to print, because that publishes wording she has not agreed and replaces one unresolved judgement with another. It beats deferring to her and noting your reservation in an email, because a record protects you and lets the overstatement be printed anyway. The least effective response is letting the label go to print and saying nothing further: it allows the museum to publish a claim you believe the evidence does not support, because she is senior and visitors probably will not notice. That is worse than the other two, which are flawed but aimed at the accuracy of the label. The principle: make the evidential case to the person who owns the work, then escalate before the point of no return.

8. Question 8 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.

9. Question 9 of 10

   You are a support worker at a supported living service. A resident tells you that another member of staff has been shouting at him and that he is frightened of her. He asks you not to tell anyone because he does not want trouble. You have not witnessed anything. Your service manager is on duty. The service has a written safeguarding procedure that you have been trained on. Which response below would be most effective, and which would be least effective?

   1. Keep an eye on the situation over the next few shifts and report it if you see the behaviour yourself, so that any report is based on something you have witnessed.
   2. Explain gently that you cannot keep this to yourself, and report it to your service manager today under the safeguarding procedure.
   3. Speak to the member of staff concerned first to hear her account of it, so that you can decide whether there is anything that genuinely needs to be reported.
   4. Respect the resident's wish and say nothing, since he has asked you not to, he is an adult entitled to make his own choices and you did not see anything yourself.
   Show the answer

   Most effective: B. Explain gently that you cannot keep this to yourself, and report it to your service manager today under the safeguarding procedure.

   Least effective: D. Respect the resident's wish and say nothing, since he has asked you not to, he is an adult entitled to make his own choices and you did not see anything yourself.

   A: Fails to escalate a genuine risk: the procedure asks you to report what is disclosed, not what you have seen, and waiting to witness it leaves a frightened resident in the same position for days.

   C: Breaches confidentiality or process: approaching the person a disclosure is about, before it is reported, warns her and puts the resident at risk of exactly the trouble he is afraid of.

   D: Breaches a safeguarding duty: a disclosure of frightening behaviour by a staff member cannot be held in confidence, and framing silence as respecting his choice leaves him alone with the person he is afraid of. That is a different order of failure from reporting it clumsily.

   The most effective response is to explain gently that you cannot keep this to yourself, and report it to your service manager today under the safeguarding procedure: the procedure exists for exactly this disclosure, confidentiality cannot be promised where a resident says he is frightened of a member of staff, and she is on duty. Telling him honestly that you must pass it on keeps his trust better than a promise you would have to break. It beats keeping an eye on it over the next few shifts and reporting only what you witness, because that substitutes your own evidence threshold for the procedure’s and leaves him frightened meanwhile. It beats speaking to the member of staff first to hear her account, because that alerts her and exposes him to the very consequence he fears. The least effective response is respecting his wish and saying nothing: it leaves a resident who has disclosed being frightened alone with the person concerned, and dresses that up as respecting his autonomy. That is worse than the other two, which act too slowly or in the wrong order but do act. The principle: a safeguarding disclosure goes to the person the procedure names, today, and you never promise a confidence you cannot keep.

10. Question 10 of 10

    You work behind the bar of a pub and cash up at the end of your shift. Tonight the till is £40 over. Your colleague says the float is often out, that putting the extra through as a correction creates paperwork for the landlord, and suggests you simply put the £40 in the staff tips jar since nobody will claim it. The landlord is upstairs and available. Which response below would be most effective, and which would be least effective?

    1. Record the £40 surplus on the cash sheet and tell the landlord tonight, so the discrepancy can be investigated properly.
    2. Leave the £40 in the till without recording it, so the money stays in the business and the discrepancy will show up in the next cash count.
    3. Adjust the cash sheet so the takings balance exactly and set the £40 aside in the safe, so the paperwork is clean and the money is secure.
    4. Put the £40 into the staff tips jar as your colleague suggests, since the float is often out and nobody is going to come back for it.
    Show the answer

    Most effective: A. Record the £40 surplus on the cash sheet and tell the landlord tonight, so the discrepancy can be investigated properly.

    Least effective: D. Put the £40 into the staff tips jar as your colleague suggests, since the float is often out and nobody is going to come back for it.

    B: Hides the problem: leaving an unexplained surplus unrecorded keeps the money in the right place and removes the signal. A £40 discrepancy is exactly what the landlord needs to see to find its cause.

    C: Falsifies the cash record: the money is safe and the sheet now says something untrue, so the discrepancy that would have led the landlord to a mis-rung sale or a short-changed customer disappears.

    D: Misappropriates business takings: an unexplained surplus is the pub's money until it is accounted for, and moving it into the tips jar takes it and destroys the record that would have explained it. That is theft, not tidying.

    The most effective response is to record the £40 surplus on the cash sheet and tell the landlord tonight: a surplus means something went wrong, a mis-rung sale or a customer given the wrong change, and the cash sheet and the landlord are how that gets found. Recording it and telling him is the whole job. It beats adjusting the sheet to balance and setting the money aside in the safe, because that makes the paperwork tidy and erases the very signal that would identify the cause. It beats leaving the money in the till unrecorded so it shows up at the next count, because that is the same erasure with the money in a different place. The least effective response is putting the £40 into the staff tips jar because nobody will come back for it: it takes money belonging to the business, which is appropriation rather than a record-keeping shortcut. That is worse than the other two, which mishandle the record but keep the money in the business. The principle: record a discrepancy exactly as you found it and tell whoever can find out why.