Private leader guide · 1.1
Lead the Bridgeway workshop
Keep this guide private until the group has presented. Use the participant pack alongside it.
1. Run sheet
Use groups of 4–6. Print participant pages 1–3 per person and page 4 per group. Copy leader page 2 for observers. Bring pens and paper; agree access needs before starting.
-
Welcome and brief
5 min- Hand out pages 1–3 to everyone, plus one decision sheet per group.
- Read the task aloud and check the rules are clear.
- Explain this is practice, with feedback rather than a score.
-
Read and think
5 min- Allow five minutes of quiet reading.
- Ask each person to note a possible plan and one trade-off.
- Keep discussion for the next stage.
-
Group decision
20 min- Ask the group to agree three projects and complete its decision sheet.
- Observe how people listen, use facts and include others.
- Give a five-minute warning so they can prepare their recommendation.
-
Recommendation
5 min- Allow two minutes for the group to present.
- Use two minutes for observer questions about its choices.
- Use the final minute to capture feedback.
-
Debrief and next step
10 min- Ask what helped the group decide, and what made it harder.
- Invite observers to give one specific example and its effect.
- Ask each person to choose one behaviour to practise next time.
For remote sessions, share the participant pack and use breakout groups. Multiple groups present in parallel, or need extra time. Clarify only the printed rules; record missing facts as questions.
2. Observation
Use page 2 of this guide, one copy per person being observed. Record a time, an action and its effect. Mark “Observed”, “Not yet observed” or “No opportunity”. Missing evidence is not proof of a missing skill.
- Include and listen
- Invites ideas, lets people finish and checks what others mean.
- Use the facts
- Checks the figures and rules, and separates evidence from assumptions.
- Compare options
- Explains a trade-off and challenges an idea with reasons.
- Organise the work
- Agrees a process, watches time and helps the group finish.
- Explain and adapt
- Makes the recommendation clear and responds constructively to questions.
Do not rank people or total scores. Consider spoken, written and organising contributions. Avoid judging loudness, accent or eye contact; agree how observation sheets will be handled.
3. Example plans
Use after the group explains its own decision. These illustrate different trade-offs; none is a model answer.
B + C + F: Link advice, applications and employers
£5,400 and 36 staff hours
- Why this plan
- C offers evening advice, B helps with applications, and F brings employer contact.
- Trade-off
- Follow-through still needs daytime travel. The plan leaves £600 and four hours unused.
- Risk response
- Use the existing advice events to explain how to book the application lab.
- Question to check
- Can the application sessions run before the employer event?
- Progress measure
- The project lead records completed application drafts and voluntary follow-up reports at six weeks; note non-response.
C + D + E: Reduce barriers and offer repeat support
£5,600 and 34 staff hours
- Why this plan
- C offers evening access, E provides devices and D offers repeated guidance.
- Trade-off
- The group gives up the application lab and employer event. Mentor meetings still require travel.
- Risk response
- Use existing mentor check-ins to review a next step; do not assume mentors can deliver specialist application editing.
- Question to check
- Can residents attend the proposed mentor meeting times?
- Progress measure
- The mentor records agreed steps completed, with consent, alongside attendance and reasons people stopped attending.
A + B + F: Reach neighbourhoods, then offer a next step
£6,000 and 40 staff hours
- Why this plan
- A brings advice closer to residents; B and F provide application help and employer contact.
- Trade-off
- It uses all the budget and staff time, leaving no contingency. Follow-through still requires daytime travel.
- Risk response
- During existing advice visits, explain how to book the lab and employer event.
- Question to check
- Do the delivery dates allow people to prepare before meeting employers?
- Progress measure
- The project lead compares attendance with completed drafts and voluntary follow-up reports, without claiming employment impact.
Check all nine workable combinations
| Projects | Total cost | Staff hours |
|---|---|---|
| A + B + F | £6,000 | 40 |
| A + D + F | £5,600 | 38 |
| B + C + D | £4,800 | 38 |
| B + C + E | £6,000 | 36 |
| B + C + F | £5,400 | 36 |
| B + D + E | £5,800 | 36 |
| C + D + E | £5,600 | 34 |
| C + D + F | £5,000 | 34 |
| D + E + F | £6,000 | 32 |
A + B + D exceeds the staff limit (42 hours). A + D + E exceeds the budget (£6,200). A + C + D conflicts over equipment. B + D + F has no Access project.
4. Discussion and next step
- Reflect first (2 minutes). Each person names one helpful contribution and one thing they would change.
- Share observations (4 minutes). Observers describe an action and its effect, then offer one practical suggestion.
- Compare decisions (3 minutes). Check the rules and discuss a rejected option. Ask what the chosen plan gives up.
- Choose a next step (1 minute). Each person completes: “Next time I will…”
Ask what the rejected plan did better and who may still miss out. Attendance is not employment; forecasts cannot establish job outcomes. Finish with one practical behaviour each person will try.
Method and sources
All scenario facts and figures are fictional. All 20 three-project combinations were checked against the rules; nine work. This is practice, not a validated selection assessment. Neither university endorses it.
Version 1.1 · Sources checked 10 November 2026. Print and share unchanged for free educational and careers workshops, with attribution to Practice Aptitude Tests.