Situational Judgement and Decision Making
The Situational Judgement and Decision Making domain tests how you would act in realistic custodial situations: an inmate refusing a direction, a colleague cutting a corner, a visitor acting suspiciously. Questions may ask you to choose the best response or rank several responses from most to least appropriate. There is rarely a perfect option; you are scored on how closely your choices match the judgement expected of a NSW correctional officer.
The decision hierarchy
Work through every scenario in this order:
- Immediate safety - of inmates, staff and visitors - comes first. Is anyone at risk of harm right now?
- Security of the centre - containment, contraband, escapes, unauthorised movement.
- Lawful procedure - the Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999, the Regulation, and CSNSW policy.
- Communication and escalation - tell your supervisor, brief the relief, record it.
- Least restrictive option - resolve the matter with the minimum intervention that is genuinely effective.
A good response usually does three things: acts now, notifies the right person, and documents it. A poor response does nothing, acts alone, keeps a secret, or uses more force than necessary.
Worked example
An inmate tells you quietly that he has been thinking about self-harm and asks you not to tell anyone. Ranked options typically include: (A) promise confidentiality and keep watch; (B) reassure him, stay with him, call your supervisor and health staff, and record the disclosure; (C) tell him to put it in writing; (D) do nothing because he asked you not to.
Option B is best. Duty of care overrides a request for secrecy, and you should never promise confidentiality. You act immediately, escalate to the people trained to assess risk, and document. Option A fails because keeping the secret delays assessment; C delays; D is a serious dereliction.
Traps
- Choosing the 'kind' option over the safe one.
- Handling a serious matter informally to avoid paperwork.
- Ignoring a pattern of small breaches that together signal a bigger risk.
- Over-reacting with force where talking would resolve the issue.