We may earn a commission from some links on this page. Recommendations remain editorially independent.
The Civil Service Management Judgement Test is an online situational judgement assessment used in UK Civil Service recruitment for roles that need day-to-day line management judgement. Official Government People Group guidance on GOV.UK explains that it measures judgement and decision-making about managing others. The behaviours assessed have been selected as important for line management success in the job applied for.
Behaviours are one of the five elements in Success Profiles. Official preparation guidance states that the test is used for people applying for roles between Executive Officer and Senior Executive Officer levels. There are 15 scenarios in total. For each scenario you choose one action you would be most likely to take and one you would be least likely to take from four options. Some behaviour scenarios appear as short videos; others are text. The test is not timed. Most people take about two to four minutes per scenario, and GOV.UK recommends allowing at least an hour.
Some links on this page are affiliate links. We may earn a commission if you purchase through them, at no additional cost to you. See our Affiliate Disclosure.
The exercises below are original educational prompts for managers and aspiring line managers. They are not official Civil Service, Cabinet Office, Civil Service Jobs or JobTestPrep items. “Most defensible” and “Least defensible” labels are for learning discussion only. They are not official Management Judgement scoring keys.
Start with the free official Civil Service Management Judgement practice test. After that, some candidates also use independent third-party familiarisation such as the JobTestPrep UK Civil Service Management Judgement Test page. JobTestPrep UK is not the employer, assessment publisher, government body or official recruitment administrator. Check the current UK price and access period on the product page before purchase. Preparation cannot guarantee a pass, interview invitation or job offer.
Quick facts
| Item | Detail |
|---|---|
| Assessment name | Civil Service Management Judgement Test (Management Judgement Test) |
| Framework | Success Profiles - Behaviours (management-related aspects) |
| Typical grades | Used for roles between EO and SEO levels (per GOV.UK preparation guidance) |
| Format | Situational judgement: most likely and least likely action from four options |
| Number of scenarios | 15 scenarios; each has four actions |
| Timing | Not timed; about 2-4 minutes per scenario for many people; allow at least an hour |
| Media | Mix of text and short videos (subtitles, BSL, transcripts) |
| Specialist knowledge | None required |
| Official practice | Free Management Judgement practice test (not scored) |
| Scoring | Percentile vs a comparison group; feedback in Civil Service Jobs |
| Banked scores | Current Management Judgement preparation page does not describe banked scores for this test |
| Integrity | Your own answers only; supervised retest may be required at interview |
The vacancy and invitation control. Confirm instructions in your Civil Service Jobs invite before preparing.
What the Management Judgement Test measures
Official preparation guidance lists five aspects of behaviour:
| Aspect | Official focus (summary) |
|---|---|
| Collaborative | Empowering and developing others, working as a team, sharing knowledge |
| Decisive | Using evidence to make effective and fair decisions |
| Empathetic | Considering others’ needs and feelings, acting in a calm and resilient manner |
| Confident | Having courage in your convictions, taking responsibility and setting expectations |
| Agile | Self aware and able to adapt quickly to change |
These aspects relate to Civil Service Behaviours and have been selected as important for roles requiring line management. The quality of management judgement assessed is described as the same across the job levels that use the test. You are only invited if the vacancy needs this level of capability.
How the test works
- Read (or watch) the workplace scenario.
- Review four possible actions.
- Choose the action you would be most likely to take.
- Choose the action you would be least likely to take.
- Move through all 15 scenarios. Example questions appear at the start.
Do not treat the options as a personality quiz about how “nice” you sound. Look for proportionate line management: psychological safety, fairness, evidence, clear expectations and follow-through.
This Management Judgement Test differs from the Civil Service Judgement Test (broader behaviour judgement, preference plus scenarios) and from the Civil Service Work Strengths Test (strengths fit and multi-part effectiveness ratings). Use the guide for the exact test named in your invitation.
How to prepare
- Read Preparing for the Civil Service Management Judgement Test on GOV.UK end to end.
- Complete the official Management Judgement practice test first, especially if you use assistive technology.
- Review public Success Profiles: Civil Service behaviours at the grade named in the advert, with a management lens.
- Practise most/least choices that develop others, decide with evidence, stay calm and set clear expectations without aggression or avoidance.
- Allow at least an hour on the day. Raise access queries at least two working days before the deadline where possible.
- Use independent third-party materials only as optional extra familiarisation after official practice.
Management judgement approach (educational)
When you compare four actions, ask:
- Does this protect people, fairness and service quality?
- Does it use evidence rather than assumption or favouritism?
- Does it develop the person rather than only punishing or rescuing them?
- Does it set clear expectations and owned next steps?
- Does it escalate proportionately rather than under- or over-reacting?
Strong educational patterns usually combine private honesty, supportive challenge, documented agreements and timely escalation when risk remains. Weak patterns usually include public humiliation, ignoring problems, inventing policy exceptions, or dumping responsibility without support.
Scoring, feedback and banked scores
Official guidance states that:
- your pattern of responses produces a score compared with a representative applicant group;
- the score is presented as a percentile (for example, 44 means better than 44% of that group);
- feedback is available from your Civil Service Jobs application centre;
- specific question answers are not released, for security;
- if you meet the minimum required standard for the job level you will be informed;
- after the deadline, recruiters may raise the pass mark after considering protected-group impact and capacity for the next stage;
- meeting the minimum standard is no guarantee of progression;
- if you do not meet the minimum standard for a job level, you can retake during future applications.
Importantly, the current Management Judgement preparation page on GOV.UK does not include a banked scores section. An October 2020 update explicitly removed banked scores text because they did not apply to this test. Do not assume Work Strengths or Styles banking rules transfer here. Confirm anything your invitation says if reuse is mentioned locally.
Practice exercises: 24 original management scenarios
These 24 original exercises use a most/least format similar in feeling to the live test. They are not official items. For each scenario, educational commentary marks a Most defensible and Least defensible action for study. In the live test you choose most and least likely from your own professional judgement under the instructions given.
Scenario 1 (Collaborative / developing others)
A new team member keeps making the same process error. The task looks simple to experienced staff.
A. Ask them to explain the process back to you so you can see where understanding breaks, then coach that gap. B. Ask your manager to overturn the hire because a simple task is already hard. C. Quietly remove the task from their workload forever without discussing development. D. Continue demonstrating at speed without checking understanding, then blame them later.
Most defensible: A Least defensible: B Rationale: Collaborative managers diagnose learning gaps and develop capability. Immediate exit chatter after early struggle lacks patience and fairness.
Scenario 2 (Decisive / evidence)
Two of your staff give conflicting accounts of why a deadline was missed. Stakeholders want a blame statement today.
A. Pick the account from the person you like more. B. Gather available records, listen to both people privately, decide on facts and communicate a fair next step. C. Publish a joint apology that invents causes neither person reported. D. Refuse to manage the issue because conflict is uncomfortable.
Most defensible: B Least defensible: A Rationale: Decisive judgement uses evidence and fairness, not favouritism or avoidance.
Scenario 3 (Empathetic / resilience)
A high performer becomes abrupt after a bereavement. Delivery quality is dipping and teammates are unsettled.
A. Mock the behaviour in the team huddle to reset norms. B. Have a private, calm conversation acknowledging the change, check what support they need and agree temporary adjustments with clear review points. C. Ignore the behaviour indefinitely to “give space” while service risk grows unmanaged. D. Start formal action immediately with no private conversation.
Most defensible: B Least defensible: A Rationale: Empathy plus clear expectations beats humiliation or unmanaged drift.
Scenario 4 (Confident / expectations)
A stakeholder repeatedly emails your team late at night and expects same-hour replies outside agreed service hours.
A. Tell the team to answer instantly every time. B. Set a clear expectation with the stakeholder about response windows, protect the team and escalate pattern issues if they continue. C. Ghost the stakeholder permanently. D. Encourage the team to complain about the stakeholder on social media.
Most defensible: B Least defensible: D Rationale: Confident management sets boundaries and owns escalation without abandoning service or professionalism.
Scenario 5 (Agile / change)
A process change lands with two weeks’ notice. Your team is mid-sprint on legacy tasks.
A. Pretend the change does not apply until someone forces you. B. Re-sequence work with the team, agree what stops or slips and tell affected stakeholders early. C. Promise every legacy and new deliverable unchanged. D. Blame the programme team publicly to reduce local pressure.
Most defensible: B Least defensible: A or C Rationale: Agile management adapts the plan transparently rather than denying change or over-promising.
Scenario 6 (Collaborative / knowledge sharing)
One specialist holds critical process knowledge alone and is about to take leave.
A. Hope nothing breaks while they are away. B. Arrange structured knowledge capture and buddy cover before leave starts. C. Ban leave until documentation is complete, announced abruptly with no discussion. D. Ask a junior to invent the process from memory on the day.
Most defensible: B Least defensible: A Rationale: Sharing knowledge and planning cover are core collaborative management duties.
Scenario 7 (Decisive / allocation)
You must assign an unpopular evening rota. Everyone prefers weekdays.
A. Assign it only to the quietest staff member to avoid pushback. B. Explain the business need, use a transparent rota method and check for reasonable adjustments before finalising. C. Cancel a statutory service obligation without authority. D. Tell people privately different stories about who “deserves” exemption.
Most defensible: B Least defensible: A Rationale: Fair decisions are explained and consistent, not convenience-based or secretive.
Scenario 8 (Empathetic / conflict)
Two team members escalate a personal disagreement into a group chat.
A. Join the chat with sarcastic comments. B. Stop the public thread, speak to each person privately, reset behavioural expectations and agree how work communication will continue. C. Delete the chat history and claim nothing happened. D. Ask the wider office to vote on who is right.
Most defensible: B Least defensible: A or D Rationale: Calm, private resolution protects dignity and team climate.
Scenario 9 (Confident / performance)
A team member’s quality is repeatedly below the agreed standard after coaching.
A. Avoid the conversation because they may become upset. B. Hold a structured performance discussion, document expectations and support, and follow the organisation’s fair process. C. Humiliate them in front of peers to “motivate” improvement. D. Reassign all their risky work permanently with no feedback.
Most defensible: B Least defensible: C Rationale: Confidence includes owning difficult conversations through proper channels.
Scenario 10 (Agile / self-awareness)
You realise your initial prioritisation was wrong after new risk data arrives.
A. Stick with the old plan to look consistent. B. Acknowledge the update, change the priority and tell the team and stakeholders what changed and why. C. Hide the new data so your earlier call looks right. D. Blame the team for not guessing the new risk earlier.
Most defensible: B Least defensible: C Rationale: Agile, self-aware managers correct course when evidence changes.
Scenario 11 (Collaborative / empowerment)
A capable officer wants to lead a small internal improvement but seeks approval for every minor detail.
A. Refuse any autonomy because you prefer control. B. Agree outcomes, constraints and check-in points, then give them space to lead within that frame. C. Let them run with no outcomes or review. D. Take the idea and present it as yours at the next board meeting.
Most defensible: B Least defensible: D Rationale: Empowerment needs clear boundaries plus credit where it is due.
Scenario 12 (Decisive / risk)
Your team reports a near miss that could affect public users. A partner asks you to keep it informal.
A. Keep it informal forever to protect relationships. B. Log and escalate through the correct risk route, support those who raised it and keep communications factual. C. Blame the nearest junior in writing immediately. D. Delay all action until after a busy campaign week regardless of risk.
Most defensible: B Least defensible: A Rationale: Decisive fairness protects people and integrity over informal convenience.
Scenario 13 (Empathetic / workload)
Several staff show signs of overload during a peak intake period.
A. Tell them stress is part of public service and move on. B. Triage workload with them, protect core priorities, seek temporary resource or sequencing help and monitor wellbeing. C. Approve unlimited overtime without a plan and ignore health risks. D. Remove all stretch work from high performers only, creating unfairness elsewhere.
Most defensible: B Least defensible: A Rationale: Empathy is practical: rebalancing work and seeking help, not slogans or denial.
Scenario 14 (Confident / upward challenge)
Your senior manager asks for a progress narrative that overstates certainty.
A. Overstate certainty as requested. B. Provide an evidence-based update, distinguish knowns from unknowns and explain why overstatement creates risk. C. Refuse to update at all. D. Leak your disagreement to the press.
Most defensible: B Least defensible: A or D Rationale: Confidence with integrity means owning accurate advice through proper channels.
Scenario 15 (Agile / reorganisation)
A restructure announcement creates anxiety. Rumours are spreading faster than facts.
A. Add speculative detail to sound informed. B. Share only confirmed information, invite questions you can answer, admit what is unknown and signpost official briefings. C. Avoid the team for a week hoping calm returns. D. Promise no one will be affected when you do not know that.
Most defensible: B Least defensible: A or D Rationale: Agile managers reduce harm by being truthful about certainty boundaries.
Scenario 16 (Collaborative / inclusive meetings)
Quieter staff are interrupted repeatedly by a senior peer from another team in joint sessions you chair.
A. Laugh along so the meeting keeps moving. B. Reset speaking norms, invite unfinished points from interrupted colleagues and follow up privately with the interrupter if needed. C. Cancel collaboration forever. D. Send a public email naming and shaming the interrupter.
Most defensible: B Least defensible: A Rationale: Collaboration requires protected voice, not entertaining dominance.
Scenario 17 (Decisive / customer impact)
A process failure affects a batch of applications. Fix options differ in speed and accuracy.
A. Choose the fastest option without checking accuracy risk. B. Compare options on user impact, fairness and control measures, then decide and communicate clearly. C. Wait for perfect information for weeks while users are stuck. D. Ask each team member to invent their own workaround.
Most defensible: B Least defensible: D Rationale: Evidence-based decisions balance pace with fairness and control.
Scenario 18 (Empathetic / feedback style)
You need to give critical feedback on stakeholder handling that embarrassed a partner organisation.
A. Soften the issue so much that no behaviour change is requested. B. Give specific examples privately, describe impact, agree expected behaviour and offer support to practise. C. Copy the whole directorate into a critical email. D. Joke about it in front of their peers.
Most defensible: B Least defensible: C or D Rationale: Empathetic challenge is private, specific and forward-looking.
Scenario 19 (Confident / underperformance of a popular colleague)
A likeable colleague misses quality checks that others follow. Team members ask why standards differ.
A. Excuse them because popularity maintains morale. B. Apply the same standard, explain expectations privately and address team fairness without gossip. C. Raise standards on everyone else to compensate. D. Discuss their shortcomings for entertainment at lunch.
Most defensible: B Least defensible: A or D Rationale: Setting expectations even-handedly builds trust.
Scenario 20 (Agile / tool change)
A new case system is imperfect. Your team wants to revert to old workarounds that create audit risk.
A. Authorise unofficial workarounds to reduce complaints. B. Capture defects, use approved interim controls, escalate blockers and coach the team through the change. C. Insist the system is flawless and punish anyone who raises issues. D. Stop using any system until a perfect replacement arrives.
Most defensible: B Least defensible: A Rationale: Adaptation includes safe escalation of defects, not silent rule-breaking.
Scenario 21 (Collaborative / cross-team dependency)
Another team repeatedly misses inputs your team needs. Relationships are strained.
A. Complain about them on an all-staff channel. B. Raise the dependency with evidence, agree a working agreement and escalate jointly if needed. C. Quietly duplicate their whole function without authority. D. Tell your team to stop chasing inputs and accept failure.
Most defensible: B Least defensible: A Rationale: Collaboration under pressure stays factual and joint, not theatrical.
Scenario 22 (Decisive / inconsistent advice)
Two staff gave a member of the public conflicting advice. The person is now confused and angry.
A. Defend whichever advice your team gave first, regardless of policy. B. Apologise for the inconsistency, confirm the correct published position, correct the record and coach both staff. C. Ask the public user to choose which advice they prefer. D. Blame the public user for asking twice.
Most defensible: B Least defensible: C or D Rationale: Fair decisions repair harm, apply correct policy and develop staff.
Scenario 23 (Empathetic / return to work)
A team member returning from long-term leave is anxious about stepping back into a changed team.
A. Drop them into full load on day one to “get back to normal”. B. Agree a phased plan, buddy support and clear review points while keeping expectations realistic. C. Keep them away from meaningful work indefinitely “to be kind”. D. Discuss their medical details with the whole team.
Most defensible: B Least defensible: D Rationale: Empathy includes privacy, paced return and purposeful work.
Scenario 24 (Confident / refusing unsafe pressure)
A delivery board presses you to sign off incomplete assurance before go-live.
A. Sign anyway to look commercially helpful. B. State the open risks, refuse unsafe sign-off, propose what must be completed and escalate formally if pressure continues. C. Disappear from the discussion. D. Sign then immediately email a private disclaimer to yourself only.
Most defensible: B Least defensible: A Rationale: Courage in convictions means owning public-interest risk, not cosmetic assurance.
Educational answer summary
| Scenario | Most defensible | Least defensible (primary) |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | A | B |
| 2 | B | A |
| 3 | B | A |
| 4 | B | D |
| 5 | B | A |
| 6 | B | A |
| 7 | B | A |
| 8 | B | A |
| 9 | B | C |
| 10 | B | C |
| 11 | B | D |
| 12 | B | A |
| 13 | B | A |
| 14 | B | A |
| 15 | B | A |
| 16 | B | A |
| 17 | B | D |
| 18 | B | C |
| 19 | B | A |
| 20 | B | A |
| 21 | B | A |
| 22 | B | C |
| 23 | B | D |
| 24 | B | A |
Use the table for study navigation only. Live scoring models are not public and may differ.
Devices, access and reasonable adjustments
Official guidance recommends:
- a quiet place and stable internet;
- a larger screen when possible;
- resuming from the application centre if a session drops;
- contacting the recruiter if a workplace blocks access;
- requesting reasonable adjustments through the application if needed.
See the reasonable adjustments candidate guide for online tests.
Official resources
- GOV.UK: Preparing for the Civil Service Management Judgement Test
- GOV.UK: Civil Service online tests
- Official Management Judgement practice test
- Civil Service Management Judgement Test information video
- Success Profiles: Civil Service behaviours
- Reasonable adjustments for online tests
Related guides
- UK Assessment Tests
- Civil Service Judgement Test
- Civil Service Work Strengths Test
- Civil Service Styles Assessment
- Civil Service Numerical Test
- Civil Service Verbal Test
- Civil Service Customer Service Skills Test
- Civil Service Casework Skills Test
- Civil Service Fast Stream
FAQ
What is the Management Judgement Test?
It is an online situational judgement test of day-to-day management judgement and decision-making for line management success in selected Civil Service roles.
How many scenarios are there?
Official preparation guidance states there are 15 scenarios, each with four actions. You choose most likely and least likely for each.
Is it timed?
No. Official guidance says the test is not timed. Many people take about two to four minutes per scenario. Allow at least an hour.
Which grades use it?
Current GOV.UK preparation guidance says it is used to identify management judgement skills for applicants to roles between EO and SEO levels. Confirm against your vacancy, as use depends on whether that capability is required.
What behaviours does it cover?
Collaborative, Decisive, Empathetic, Confident and Agile, as summarised on the official preparation page.
Is there a “right personality”?
There is no public answer key. Educational practice should prioritise fair, evidence-based, people-aware management actions. Do not try to invent a theatrical leadership persona.
Are banked scores available for this test?
Can I retake if I do not meet the standard?
Official guidance says that if you do not pass at the minimum required standard for a job level, you can retake during future applications. Meeting a minimum standard still does not guarantee progression in the campaign.
Can hiring managers re-check later?
Yes. Official guidance notes that hiring managers may require candidates invited to interview to retake under supervised conditions.
Where is feedback?
In your Civil Service Jobs application centre. Specific question answers are not released.
Should I practise the CSJT instead?
Only if your invitation names the Judgement Test. Management Judgement is a separate test focused on managing others. Related practice can help familiarity with SJT thinking, but start with the official Management Judgement practice test named for this assessment.
Should paid prep replace official practice?
No. Start with GOV.UK guidance and the official practice test. Independent pages such as JobTestPrep’s Management Judgement materials are optional extras only. They are not official and cannot redefine Civil Service scoring.
Next steps
- Complete the official Management Judgement practice test.
- Watch the Management Judgement information video.
- Practise most/least management choices that develop people, decide with evidence and set clear expectations, then take the live test in a quiet hour.
If you also want broader independent Civil Service management-judgement familiarisation after official practice, see the .
Return to the UK Assessment Tests hub for more British public-service guides.