Answer (A): Firing the manager is a severe disciplinary action. It shows that you are not willing to compromise on the integrity of your employees, but at the same time, it might be too drastic. John was warned that he might be fired, so it seems reasonable to give him another opportunity before termination, especially since he is valued. In addition, it might be somewhat exaggerated to define the manager’s actions as “stealing.” For these reasons, answer B seems better than A.
Answer (C): This response is the equivalent of doing nothing, which is rarely the correct answer in SJT questions. It is always recommended to choose answers that involve your active decision unless all active actions are causing more harm than good (which is rarely the case). By selecting this response, you indicate that you do not see the severity of the manager’s actions and do not believe that integrity is a critical component in a workplace. Furthermore, it shows little ownership of what is happening around you in the company. P&G is looking for people who accept accountability and treat the company’s assets as their own.
Answer (D): Making John pay for the refreshments will not ensure that he will refrain from his actions in the future. By giving this punishment, you acknowledge that there has been a violation of trust, and you offer John a way to take accountability for his actions. However, it may imply that these actions are forgiven as long as you pay, so it does not address the central issue of violating the confidence that was given to you.
Answer (E): By talking to John and explaining why he should stop acting the way he does, you respect the company's values and want to do the right thing. It is positive to use your communication skills to try and persuade the manager to change his ways. Still, it might not work as he is well aware that his behavior is problematic and is against company policy. For this reason, it is not the best option even though it has positive aspects.