A sales situational judgement test presents realistic selling situations and asks you to judge which responses are most and least appropriate. This guide explains how the format works with a generic worked example, summarises what research says about predicting sales performance, and offers practical advice for candidates and hiring managers.

What a sales situational judgement test measures

Selling is full of judgement calls. A customer pushes for a discount; a promising lead goes quiet; a colleague is chasing the same account; a target is in reach if you overstate what the product can do. How someone handles these moments shapes both their results and their employer's reputation.

A sales situational judgement test (SJT) samples those moments in a standard form, so that every candidate faces the same situations and is judged against the same scoring key. The Viewpoint Sales SJT presents 12 situations. For each one you choose the most appropriate and the least appropriate of the responses offered. It is untimed, which lets candidates focus on judgement rather than speed.

An SJT does not test product knowledge or selling scripts. It shows how a candidate weighs competing priorities: the customer's needs, honesty, the long-term relationship, team working and commercial outcomes.

A worked most-and-least example

The following is a generic illustration written for this article, not an item from the Viewpoint test.

Imagine you sell office equipment. A long-standing customer rings to say a competitor has quoted a lower price, and they will switch unless you match it today. Four possible responses are described below.

• Match the price immediately to keep the account.

• Ask what the competitor's quote includes, remind the customer of the service they currently receive, and explore whether a different package could meet their budget.

• Tell the customer the competitor is unreliable and they will regret it.

• Say you will need to check with your manager and call back within the hour.

A thoughtful candidate would probably see the second option as most appropriate: it finds out more, reinforces value and looks for a solution that works for both sides. The third is the clearest candidate for least appropriate, since disparaging a competitor without evidence damages trust. The first and fourth sit in between; matching on the spot may give away margin unnecessarily, while checking with a manager can be sensible but delays engagement with the customer's real concern.

The point is not that there is one magic answer, but that a well-built SJT's scoring key reflects how experienced, effective people in the role judge these options.

What research says about predicting sales performance

Research on sales selection gives a nuanced picture. Vinchur and colleagues' meta-analysis found that the achievement component of conscientiousness predicted objective sales figures (corrected correlation .41) as well as supervisor ratings (.25), and that potency, an aspect of extraversion, predicted both. General cognitive ability related well to supervisor ratings (.40) but hardly at all to objective sales (.04) [1]. In other words, what you predict depends on how you define success, and no single measure covers everything.

SJTs bring a different angle. McDaniel and colleagues' meta-analysis showed that SJTs predict job performance, and that the instructions matter: asking what you should do links scores more closely to cognitive ability, while asking what you would do can link them more to personality [2]. Pollard and Cooper-Thomas, reviewing best practice, recommend framing responses in terms of what a person thinks they should do rather than what they would do [3].

Using a sales SJT well

For employers, a sales SJT works best when its situations reflect the role you are hiring for, whether that is field sales, account management or telephone selling. Read scores in bands from Very Low to Very High rather than against a single pass mark, and combine them with a structured interview and, ideally, a role-play. A candidate whose result sits in a lower band might be asked in interview to describe how they handled a customer threatening to leave, which often reveals more than the score alone.

For candidates, preparation is simple. Read each situation fully. Read every option before deciding. Think about what an honest, customer-focused professional would do, rather than what might win the sale fastest. Remember that choosing the least appropriate response counts as much as choosing the best.

You can find out more on the Sales SJT page, compare our other situational judgement tests, or see our pricing.

Frequently asked questions

How long does the Viewpoint Sales SJT take?

It is untimed. There are 12 situations, and for each one you choose the most and least appropriate responses.

Can you prepare for a sales situational judgement test?

You cannot learn the answers, but you can prepare by understanding the role, reading carefully and thinking about what effective, ethical salespeople do in practice.

Is a sales SJT a personality test?

No. It measures judgement in work situations. Research shows SJT scores relate to both personality and cognitive ability, depending partly on how the questions are worded.

Should a sales SJT be used on its own?

No. It is most useful alongside interviews and other evidence, interpreted in score bands rather than as a pass or fail.

References

1. Vinchur, A. J., Schippmann, J. S., Switzer, F. S. & Roth, P. L. (1998). A meta-analytic review of predictors of job performance for salespeople. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(4), 586–597.
2. McDaniel, M. A., Hartman, N. S., Whetzel, D. L. & Grubb, W. L. (2007). Situational judgment tests, response instructions, and validity: a meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 60(1), 63–91.
3. Pollard, S. & Cooper-Thomas, H. D. (2015). Best practice recommendations for situational judgment tests. Australasian Journal of Organisational Psychology, 8, e7.