SJT Examples Mapped to Real Public Service Scenarios
Original Irish public-service judgement examples, with discussion of each action and links to free six-point rating practice.
The situational judgement test is the part of the Executive Officer assessment candidates talk about most after the fact, and usually not in a positive way. Plenty of people got solid scores on verbal and numerical and still ended up lower than expected on the Order of Merit because the SJT pulled them down. The first time I sat it, I was answering on instinct and I am fairly sure that cost me. Instinct is not always what the civil service is looking for.
This post discusses original workplace scenarios and the reasoning behind possible actions. They are independent learning examples, not official or recalled questions. Try the linked interactive taster for suggested ratings and a PSP practice score.
What format does the publicjobs SJT use?
PSP uses independent six-point ratings: five actions, each rated from 1 (highly inappropriate) to 6 (highly appropriate). You may use the same rating more than once. Your competition invitation establishes the actual assessment format.
Do not force the actions into a unique order. Compare each one with the facts, authority and consequences described. Several actions may be equally appropriate or inappropriate.
The examples below are text-based discussions. Other assessments may use different presentation and response methods. Read your own familiarisation material before choosing how to practise.
Free practice · no card
Try original Irish-format practice before your test.
Six-point SJT ratings, numerical and verbal practice, with PSP scoring explained. Check your competition booklet for the official format and timing.
What do the scenarios actually look like?
Below are three worked examples. These are not taken from any published test; they are illustrative scenarios that reflect the types of situation reported by candidates and grounded in the 2024 Capability Framework dimensions the SJT is designed to measure, particularly Evidence Informed Delivery and Communicating and Collaborating.
Example 1: The deadline nobody told you about
Scenario: You are an Executive Officer in a government department. A colleague from another team sends you a message at 4:15 pm on a Friday saying they need a completed briefing note from your team by 9 am Monday. You were not previously aware of this deadline. Your line manager is on annual leave until Tuesday.
Possible responses: consider a six-point rating for each action. Repeated ratings are allowed.
A. Reply to the colleague to confirm you have seen the message, then complete the briefing note yourself over the weekend if needed.
B. Forward the message to your line manager’s personal mobile number so they can deal with it on their day off.
C. Do nothing until your manager returns on Tuesday, then explain you were not informed in time.
D. Contact a senior colleague within your team to make them aware and agree a plan between you before end of business Friday.
E. Reply to the colleague and ask them to extend the deadline given the short notice.
How to assess each action:
The scenario is testing whether you take ownership of a time-sensitive problem, communicate proactively, and identify the right escalation level without dumping the problem on someone else or abandoning it.
Response D is close to the top. You are flagging the situation to a relevant colleague before the window closes and making a shared plan. That is collaborative, proportionate, and shows initiative without overstepping.
Response A is also strong. You are taking responsibility and following through. The only risk is that you are acting entirely alone on something that could benefit from a second pair of eyes.
Response E is middling. Asking for an extension is not unreasonable, but doing it as your first move without checking whether the deadline is genuinely fixed or flexible looks like avoidance rather than problem-solving.
Response B scores poorly. Interrupting a manager on annual leave when a peer-level solution is available shows poor judgement about escalation.
Response C scores lowest. Doing nothing when a deadline is known and the window is still open is the opposite of what Evidence Informed Delivery asks for.
Example 2: The citizen complaint that is not yours to answer
Scenario: A member of the public calls your office. They are upset and explain they have been waiting three months for a decision on an application. The application is handled by a different section. You can see in the shared system that the case is still open but you cannot see the detail.
Possible responses: consider a six-point rating for each action. Repeated ratings are allowed.
A. Tell the caller it is not your section and ask them to call the correct number.
B. Acknowledge the caller, check what information you are permitted to share, and give them a realistic explanation of who to contact and what to expect.
C. Promise the caller you will personally escalate the case and have someone call them back today.
D. Take the caller’s details and pass them to the correct section by email after the call, flagging the wait time.
E. Tell the caller the system shows the case is still open and that you cannot help further.
How to assess each action:
This scenario tests Communicating and Collaborating alongside the civil service values of impartiality and service.
Response B is the highest. You are neither dismissing the caller nor overstepping your remit. You acknowledge, signpost accurately, and leave the caller with something useful. That is what a competent EO does.
Response D is solid but slightly weaker than B, because you are taking the right action without fully resolving the caller’s immediate confusion on the call itself.
Response C sounds helpful but it is not. You are making a promise you cannot keep and potentially creating a bigger problem. Integrity means not overpromising.
Response A is low. Redirecting without any acknowledgement or help is technically correct in terms of remit but signals no customer focus or initiative.
Response E is the weakest. Telling someone the system shows their case is open and then offering nothing more is unhelpful and likely to inflame the situation.
Example 3: The colleague who is cutting corners
Scenario: You notice that a colleague on your team has been submitting summary reports that appear to be missing required sign-off steps. The submissions are going through unchallenged. Your colleague is friendly and more experienced than you. There is no direct harm visible yet but the procedure exists for a reason.
Possible responses: consider a six-point rating for each action. Repeated ratings are allowed.
A. Raise the issue informally with the colleague directly before escalating anywhere.
B. Say nothing because the colleague is more experienced and may have a reason you are not aware of.
C. Raise it with your line manager, citing the specific procedure and what you have observed.
D. Check whether there is a formal reporting mechanism and use it immediately without speaking to the colleague first.
E. Mention it to a different colleague casually to see if they have noticed.
How to assess each action:
Integrity is explicitly listed as one of the values publicjobs.ie says the SJT assesses. This scenario is testing it directly.
Response A is probably the top response. Raising it informally first is proportionate, gives the colleague a chance to explain, and respects the working relationship. If the conversation does not resolve it, escalation is still available to you.
Response C is also strong. Going directly to your line manager is appropriate, and depending on the severity of the breach, it may be the correct first step. Whether it ranks above or below A depends on how serious the procedure gap is.
Response B is clearly low. Deferring to experience when you have seen a potential breach is not impartiality, it is avoidance.
Response D may feel like integrity in action but skipping any direct communication and going straight to a formal mechanism for what may be an oversight reads as disproportionate. Context matters.
Response E scores lowest. Gossiping about a compliance concern instead of addressing it is contrary to integrity and achieves nothing.
What is the SJT actually measuring at EO level?
The 2024 Capability Framework replaced the older Competency Framework and organises behaviours across dimensions including Evidence Informed Delivery, Leading and Empowering, and Communicating and Collaborating. The SJT scenarios are designed to surface how you naturally respond to workplace situations that map to these dimensions.
At EO level, the biggest clusters being assessed appear to be:
- Ownership and initiative: do you act when it is your job to act, or do you pass the problem up or along?
- Proportionate escalation: do you know when to involve a manager and when that would be disproportionate?
- Integrity under social pressure: do you follow the correct procedure even when it is slightly uncomfortable?
- Citizen and colleague communication: do you acknowledge, signpost, and close loops?
For the full picture of how these map to the test structure, the publicjobs situational judgement test guide covers format, scoring, and where the SJT fits in the competition process. To understand the framework behind each scenario type, the 2024 Capability Framework behind every SJT scenario goes through each dimension.
Frequently asked questions
Does the SJT count toward the Order of Merit ranking?
The contribution of each assessment depends on the competition. Check your official instructions for qualifying standards, ranking and later stages. Neither earlier candidate reports nor PSP practice scores establish your current progression rules.
Why do two SJT options often feel equally valid?
Two actions can both be reasonable, while differing in timing, evidence or responsibility. They can also deserve the same rating. In independent rating practice, assess each action on its own merits rather than forcing a unique order or using the middle of the scale automatically.
Is the job simulation test the same as the SJT?
An SJT is one kind of workplace simulation. Other exercises may involve an inbox, written responses or different response controls. Do not infer the stage, format or timing from the label alone; follow your own invitation.
Can I practice with materials that actually resemble the publicjobs format?
Compare any provider’s samples with your official familiarisation material. PSP offers original Irish public-service scenarios and six-point ratings with worked explanations. These are independent learning aids, not official questions, human expert validation or a guarantee of the format you will sit.
Try a real practice session before your test date
If reading through these worked examples made you realise you had been approaching the SJT differently, that is useful information and it is not too late to recalibrate. PublicServicePathway has a free taster with no card required so you can see what Irish-format practice actually feels like before you commit to anything.
Try the free six-point SJT taster, rate five actions independently and compare them with PSP’s suggested ratings and explanations. No account or card is required. The suggestions are AI-authored and reviewed, not official answers or human expert validation.