Brief template
Fill this in with the organisation. Keep it to one page: if it doesn't fit, the brief is too big.
Fit checklist
Check every brief before anyone starts. The three conditions come from the BRIDGE framework: real-world work helps people learn when the task fits them, the workload is realistic and the organisation supports them.
- Clear task. One problem, one thing to hand back, and skills that match the people taking it on.
- Realistic size. The hours match the size chosen, and the deadline leaves room for questions.
- Real support. At least a briefing and answers to questions, plus feedback at the end.
- Fair work. It isn't a job the organisation would otherwise pay someone to do.
- Shared rights agreed. The organisation can use the work; solvers can show it, except confidential parts.
- No risky data. Solvers won't handle customers' personal details or anything unsafe.
Ground rules
Share these with the organisation and get a reply by email saying they agree. An email is enough for small briefs.
- Fair work. This brief does not replace work we would otherwise pay for.
- Support. We will give a short briefing, answer reasonable questions, and give feedback on the work at the end.
- Use of the work. We may use what solvers produce. Solvers may show their work in a portfolio, except anything we mark as confidential.
- Credit. If we publish or use the work publicly, we will credit the solvers if they wish.
- No guarantees. Solvers are learning and volunteering. We will treat their work as ideas to consider, not professional advice.
- Respect and safety. Communication stays polite and professional, and no solver is asked to handle personal data or do anything unsafe.
Feedback rubric
The organisation rates each solver or team on the skills the brief used. Rate what you saw, not effort or friendliness.
| Skill | 1 Emerging | 2 Developing | 3 Proficient | 4 Professional standard |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Understanding the problem | Misread what we needed | Got the gist, missed key points | Clearly understood our situation | Saw things we hadn't |
| Quality of ideas | Generic or unworkable | Some usable ideas | Practical ideas we could use | Ideas we'd act on straight away |
| Communication | Hard to follow | Clear in parts | Clear and well organised | Persuasive and ready to share |
| Professionalism | Missed deadlines or contact | Mostly reliable | Reliable and responsive | Like working with a good colleague |
Feedback record
Completed by the organisation and given to the solver. It's their evidence of real work, so keep it honest and specific.
| Solver or team | |
|---|---|
| Brief and size | |
| Organisation | |
| Dates | |
| Ratings (1–4) from the rubric | |
| Did you use the work? | Yes · Partly · Not yet |
| One thing they did well | |
| Happy to give a reference? | Yes · No |
| Name, role and date |
Challenge-day plan
Three and a half hours, two to four organisations, teams of three to five. Works in a classroom, a community hall or online.
| Time | What happens |
|---|---|
| 0:00–0:20 | Welcome. Each organisation gives a 5-minute briefing. Teams choose or are given a brief. |
| 0:20–0:40 | Question time: teams ask the organisation what they need to know. |
| 0:40–2:10 | Teams work. Organisations drop in twice for quick check-ins. |
| 2:10–2:30 | Break. Teams prepare a 3-minute pitch and one-page summary. |
| 2:30–3:15 | Pitches, with 2 minutes of questions from the organisation. |
| 3:15–3:30 | Organisations share what they'll use. Feedback records follow within a week. |
The fit checklist applies the BRIDGE framework: Wu, Y., Beaumont, K. and O'Riordan, R. (2026) 'Industry-Integrated Curriculum Design for Employability in Marketing Education: The BRIDGE Process Framework', The European Conference on Education 2026: Official Conference Proceedings, pp. 613–636. doi.org/10.22492/issn.2188-1162.2026.48