What is a police promotion in-basket exercise?

An in-basket exercise simulates the day-to-day paperwork a police supervisor deals with, including memorandums, written and oral complaints, investigative reports, internal documents, letters, and telephone calls. Candidates are given a set of items to respond to in writing within a time limit, and are evaluated by trained assessors on 15 skills and abilities including analytical ability, decisiveness, delegation, supervisory skills, leadership, integrity, and written communication.

Why do police candidates fail the in-basket exercise?

An estimated quarter of candidates fail the in-basket their first time because they did not prepare. Common mistakes include overlooking critical items, failing to prioritize effectively, making decisions without adequate justification, ignoring delegation opportunities, and using vague language. The exercise is also difficult because of cognitive load — the brain naturally tries to start with easier items, which can leave the most important and highest-scoring items unaddressed.

What 15 skills are scored in a police in-basket assessment?

The 15 skills and abilities scored in a police in-basket assessment are: Analytical Ability, Decisiveness, Ability to Coordinate and Delegate, Supervisory Skills, Leadership Ability, Integrity, Command Presence, Ability to Function Under Pressure, Initiative and Enthusiasm, Interpersonal Skills, Customer Service Orientation, Flexibility, Written Communication Ability, Oral Communication Ability, and Ability to Manage Resources.

What is the quality-and-quantity principle in in-basket scoring?

Assessors only give credit for behaviors — what you say, do, or write. A high-quality response is correct and appropriate. A high-quantity response goes into great detail. Vague or general responses result in low to moderate scores. Writing 'I would take appropriate action' earns no credit; writing exactly what action you would take, who you would involve, and what follow-up you would conduct earns full credit.

Should you write in complete sentences on a police in-basket?

For most in-basket items, writing in bullet points and incomplete sentences is actively preferred — it is faster and allows you to cover more ground. Only items specifically designated as formal written response items require complete sentences and correct grammar. Spending time polishing prose on non-writing items wastes time and earns no additional points.

Police Promotion Information and Resources

Everything You Need to Know to Plan For and Achieve Promotion Up the Ranks in Law Enforcement!

How Should You Prepare for a Police Promotion In-Basket Assessment?

By Lt. Paul Patti (ret) - Director
Police Career and Promotion Services, LLC.

What you need to know about all aspects of preparing for and achieving your promotion in law enforcement can be found in these pages.

About us: I spent 27 years in law enforcement, and since 1985 I have directed an organization that has worked with individuals and agencies in finding and promoting the right people into the higher ranks of police and sheriff's departments. We include a Ph.D. in Personnel Management, as well as a staff attorney focusing on criminal law applications in law enforcement. We specialize not only in writing promotion textbook exams for police agencies, but also written exam preparation for individuals, along with in-basket, oral board and assessment center preparation for both agencies and individual training. Our individual client base has a 99%+ pass rate on their written exams!

More information about me, my organization and affiliates can be found at these links; PoliceCareer.com, About Us, PoliceCareer.net, PolicePromotion.com, Finests.com, In-Basket.net and PoliceAssessmentCenter.com.

Master List of Articles. Questions? Contact me - Paul@PolicePromotion.com

Photo of newly promoted police captain with his wife

The In-Basket Assessment Center Exercise — Not as Easy as You Think!
By Lt. Paul Patti (ret.), Director, Police Career and Promotion Services, LLC — 40+ years of law enforcement promotion expertise.

Where the In-Basket Came From — the History and Science Behind It

In-basket exercises are the result of decades of research. They became a popular assessment tool for selection and managerial training in the 1950s–1970s.

Since 1957, many internationally well-known companies have carried out research and application of the in-basket test. In the United States, the test has been adopted by more than 1,000 well-known enterprises, such as AT&T, Ford Motor, and General Electric. The in-basket test has been taken as an important method of selecting and evaluating enterprise managers.

The academic validity evidence is solid: a meta-analysis of 32 studies involving 3,986 participants found that in-basket tests demonstrate moderate to strong criterion-related validity for predicting job performance, with a corrected correlation of 0.36 against supervisory ratings and similar criteria. This validity range — typically observed correlations of 0.20–0.40 after accounting for measurement error — supports their use in personnel selection.

The key benefits of using in-basket simulations include measuring insights rather than information recall, using higher-order thinking skills, and high realism and richness in context versus conventional tools.

The In-Basket simulates the day-to-day paperwork that a police supervisor must deal with, including memorandums, written and oral complaints, investigative reports, internal documents, letters, and telephone calls.

Candidates are seated together in a room at desks or conference tables and given a manila envelope containing the "in-basket" relevant to a typical supervisor's work at any department. Candidates are instructed to answer the questions in writing, without any assistance from anyone, including access to the internet. The goal of these assessments is to identify and evaluate a candidate's critical success factors and traits that are necessary for success in a supervisory or leadership role.

Why New Candidates Fail the In-Basket

The In-Basket Assessment Exercise is considered the most common and often most intimidating component. It tests organization skills, delegation skills, and most importantly judgment under time pressure.

Despite the straightforward appearance, in-basket exercises can trip candidates up in several ways. Common mistakes include:

Overlooking a critical memo or incident in the scenario stack

Failing to prioritize tasks effectively, leading to missed urgent items

Making decisions without adequate justification or documentation

Ignoring opportunities to delegate routine or minor tasks

Using ambiguous language instead of clear, actionable communication.

To stand out, candidates should demonstrate prioritization, clear communication, and sound judgment.

For example, addressing urgent issues first and explaining their reasoning shows situational awareness.

Additionally, considering team welfare and proposing constructive solutions highlights strong leadership potential.

One frequent error is focusing solely on task completion rather than decision-making processes. Furthermore, overlooking how well a candidate delegates or communicates can result in an incomplete assessment.

Avoid perfectionism. It's more important to address every item reasonably well than to spend ten minutes perfecting a single response. Assessors value decisiveness and big-picture thinking. The more candidates practice, the more instinctive their prioritization becomes — a trait every successful supervisor must possess.

An estimated quarter of candidates fail the in-basket their first time for one reason: thinking it would be easy, so they didn't fully prepare.

The in-basket is difficult not because the individual tasks are hard, but because of what behavioral scientists call cognitive load — the total burden placed on working memory when processing multiple competing demands simultaneously.

Cognitive biases may impair individuals' task prioritization strategies. One antecedent that could encourage people to start with smaller tasks might be an attempt to avoid cognitive load. People treat cognitive effort as aversive and costly, and hence may endeavor to avoid or procrastinate what they perceive as effortful processing.

In plain English: one of the most common in-basket errors — starting with the easy items and working toward harder ones — is driven by a well-documented cognitive bias, not laziness or poor judgment. Candidates do it automatically because the brain tries to avoid difficult cognitive work. Knowing this allows candidates to recognize and override the impulse.

Decision fatigue compounds the problem: when cognitive resources are depleted, individuals may be more prone to taking expedient shortcuts, overlooking ethical implications, or engaging in behaviors that prioritize immediate self-interest over organizational values or societal good. This is why rushing through the final items of a long in-basket often produces the weakest responses.

Delegation, Judgment, and Organization: The Core Skills of the In-Basket

Candidates are usually evaluated using the 1 to 5 -point behaviorally-based rating scale:

5 — Exceptional
4 — Effective
3 — Minimally Effective
2 — Ineffective
1 — Unacceptable.

Each assessor in the panel will make an individual rating for each skill and ability measured in the exercise. Then, the assessors will have a discussion to reach a final score for each skill and ability.

For the majority of in-basket items, you are actively better served writing in bullet points and incomplete sentences, because it is faster, cleaner, and allows you to cover more ground. Spending time polishing prose on non-writing items wastes time and earns no additional points.

The complete list of skills and abilities measured includes:

Analytical Ability — gathering and evaluating information for relevance and trends; defining problems and their probable causes; evaluating and prioritizing between conflicting alternatives; anticipating potential problems proactively.

Decisiveness — choosing the most appropriate course of action; recognizing implications of actions; choosing among several conflicting priorities; making sense of information that initially appears disorganized; using judgment when there is incomplete information.

Ability to Coordinate, Delegate, and Plan Work — defining tasks to be completed; developing procedures for oneself or others; scheduling work activities; delegating work and following up to ensure timely completion.

Supervisory Skills — assessing subordinate performance; counseling, coaching, and mentoring; addressing and managing conflict and performance problems; providing feedback; developing subordinates' careers.

Leadership Ability — persuading others; selecting appropriate leadership styles; maintaining morale; setting a positive tone; making difficult and ethical decisions; creating and developing a team.

Integrity — acting without personal bias; acting impartially after gathering all relevant facts; demonstrating just and proper actions based on law, policy, or Department protocol.

Command Presence — carrying oneself with authority and confidence; taking and remaining in command of emergency and non-emergency situations.

Ability to Function Under Pressure — retaining composure in difficult or stressful situations; making sound decisions under emergency conditions; demonstrating emotional detachment (objectivity).

Initiative and Enthusiasm — maintaining a self-starting approach; anticipating work to be accomplished; seeking and recommending alternative methods for enhancing performance.

Interpersonal Skills — interacting in a considerate, respectful manner; functioning within a team; establishing and maintaining working relationships at all levels.

Customer Service Orientation — understanding the needs and constraints of the public; responding to citizen inquiries and requests in a timely and complete manner; considering the needs of the public when making decisions.

Flexibility — adjusting to changing circumstances; adapting or changing priorities as the situation requires.

Written Communication Ability — writing in a clear, concise, and organized manner; writing legibly with correct spelling and proper grammar; editing others' writing.

Oral Communication Ability — speaking clearly, concisely, and in an organized manner; using proper pace, volume, and grammar; listening effectively and modifying communications to the audience.

Ability to Manage Resources — determining the need for and requesting necessary equipment, personnel, and resources; knowledge of the chain of command and notification procedures

The first step in performing well is understanding that assessors will only give credit for behaviors. Behaviors are what you say, do, or write. For example, in order to receive credit for disciplining a subordinate in the In-Basket you must clearly write that you would discipline the subordinate. Writing that you would "take appropriate action against the subordinate" may not be specific enough to receive credit for administering discipline.

You must give responses that are high-quality and high-quantity. A high-quality response is one that is correct and appropriate for the given situation. A high-quantity response is one that goes into a great level of detail. The more detail you provide, the better you demonstrate exceptional levels of the skills and abilities that are critical to the Sergeant's job.

Assessors are trained not to read into or try to interpret what you say or write; more detail is best. Vague or general responses will result in low to moderate scores. High scores are given for responses that are thoroughly described and justified.

If there is one page on this site you return to before your assessment center, make it this one. The in-basket rewards preparation, and preparation alone, more than any other exercise in the process.

Some very detailed sources and articles to further understand the In-Basket Skills Assessment;

Prince George's County PD — 2020 Sergeant Skills Assessment Manual
ResearchGate — Validity of In-Basket as Managerial Measure
Global Council for Behavioral Science — Decision Fatigue
Global Council for Behavioral Science — Cognitive Load
Wiley/Personnel Psychology — In-Basket Performance Measures
Police1/Jetmore — Assessment Centers Part 2 (In-Basket)
Police1/Jetmore — How Assessment Centers Work (Part 1)
OJP — How to Be Successful on Oral Assessment Exercise
OJP — How to Be Successful on Written Assessment Exercises
OJP — Police Assessment Testing Handbook (4th Ed.)
OJP — Assessment Center Exercises for Sergeant - Assessor's Manual
NIH/PubMed — In-Basket Reliability and Validity Research
Grokipedia — In-Basket Test (Meta-Analysis Data)
Pixonality — In-Basket Benefits and Drawbacks
Taggd — In-Basket Technique (History and HR Overview)
Aspiring Fire Officers — In-Basket Success Tips
Aspiring Fire Officers — Completing In-Basket Tasks
Aspiring Fire Officers — In-Basket Test Prep Strategies
Aspiring Fire Officers — In-Basket Response Samples
Aspiring Fire Officers — Leadership in In-Basket Tests
Dirigo Safety — Law Enforcement Assessment Centers
Police1 — 3 Most Common Questions About Promotional Exams

Master list of articles and resources: from PolicePromotion.net
Your Police Promotion Timeline — When Should Preparation Begin?
Field Training — Your First Defining Chapter
Building Your Promotional Reputation Over Time
Recordkeeping — Your Evaluations, and Training Documentation
The Two Tracks — Supervision vs. Specialization
The Role of College Education in Law Enforcement
The FTO As an Early Promotion Credential
The Written Promotional Exam — What It Covers and How to Prepare
The Oral Board — the Promotion First-Timer's Biggest Challenge
The In-Basket Exercise — NOT as Easy as You Think!
Assessment Center Exercises — Don't Fear — Prepare!
Making it To The Top — Or — How High is High Enough?
When it's Time to Leave it All Behind — And What to do Next.

Do You REALLY Want the Promotion? — Links to help you prepare for:
Police Corporal
Police Detective
Police Sergeant
Police Lieutenant
Police Captain
Police Administration and Upper Management
Understanding Police Leadership Concepts
Understanding Police Ethical Considerations
Understanding Police Patrol and Field Operations
Understanding Community and Problem-Oriented Policing
Understanding Intelligence-Led Policing
Police Case Law Application with Case Law Pro