Project Kick-Off (Situational Judgement)
6-8 questions · Untimed (suggest 15 minutes)
What it tests. Succeeding Together and Taking Responsibility: professional judgement, collaboration and project ownership without over-escalating.
Worked example. Two senior members disagree on data methodology and stall the project; the best action drafts a structured hybrid compromise for both to review, while immediately escalating to the Director is the worst.
Common traps. Selecting the most self-assertive, individualistic options, assuming the bank prefers aggressive alpha traits.
How to handle it. Approach every scenario as a prudent risk manager who values team input: gather more data, communicate openly, support peers and maintain compliance.
Global Engagement (Situational Judgement)
6-8 questions · Untimed (suggest 15 minutes)
What it tests. Valuing Difference and a global mindset: accounting for cultural differences and coordinating across geographies.
Worked example. A Hong Kong team submits data in a local convention; the best action schedules a mutually convenient call to understand the context and build an automated transformation script, not a blunt email demanding a fix.
Common traps. Transactional efficiency: fixing the immediate problem quickly while damaging cross-regional relationships.
How to handle it. Choose options that build communicative pathways: active listening, collaborative check-ins and standardised shared resources.
Data Monitoring (Numerical & Inductive)
8 questions · Untimed (suggest 25-30 minutes)
What it tests. Advanced numerical reasoning and data synthesis, filtering out irrelevant background under high cognitive load.
Worked example. Identify the top three assets by debt, apply a 10% EBITDA reduction to two of them per the adjustments tab, compute each adjusted leverage ratio and the average, then compare to a 4.2x threshold to classify the portfolio.
Common traps. The base-population switch (global versus regional figures), ignoring footnotes on units, and forcing a calculation when the answer is genuinely 'data insufficient'.
How to handle it. Spend the first 20 seconds mapping which tabs hold relevant variables, and keep a structured scratchpad or Excel sheet to log intermediate numbers.
Navigating Competing Commitments (Verbal & Inductive)
8 questions · Untimed (suggest 25-30 minutes)
What it tests. Verbal reasoning and identifying logical inconsistencies across complex corporate communications.
Worked example. A sustainability policy bars financing arctic-drilling logistics unless the entity earns over 60% of revenue from renewables; with the client at 70% renewable revenue, the financing complies.
Common traps. Importing outside knowledge, and missing modifiers like 'unless', 'provided that' or 'exclusively' that invert a rule.
How to handle it. Read the question first, scan the matching tab for key terms and read those sentences slowly to map the explicit logic chain; if unverified by the text, treat as unproven.
Pause and Reflect (Personality & Values Sliders)
6-8 questions · Untimed (suggest 15 minutes)
What it tests. Long-term cultural fit and consistency under Getting It Done and Taking Responsibility.
Worked example. Between finalising plans thoroughly before acting and remaining flexible as new information emerges, the slider should reflect an authentic but balanced, risk-conscious position.
Common traps. Gaming an artificial extreme persona (flagged by inverted-phrasing consistency checks), or sitting dead-centre on every item.
How to handle it. Be authentic but anchored to a collaborative, risk-conscious professional; avoid extremes unless the statement is a clear ethical baseline.