Evidence practice
Portfolio practice tasks
Three portfolio tasks per chapter — Basic, Strong and Transfer evidence.
Chapter 1 — Business Functions and Value Creation
Basic evidence
Function map of a small shop
Skill: Functions~20 minPortfolio
Choose one small business you know (a shop, repair workshop or food stall). Draw a function map showing its main functions (e.g. buying, making, selling, money). Label each box with one line on what it does.
Expected artefact: A one-page hand-drawn or typed function map with at least four labelled function boxes and a title naming the business.
Show quality checklist & guidance
- The business is named and its type is clear.
- At least four distinct functions are shown, not just departments by name.
- Each box has a short note on what that function actually does.
- The map is readable and tidy enough for someone else to follow.
Evidence level: Basic — shows you can identify functions in a real organisation.
Common weakness: Listing only "sales" and "owner" and missing support functions such as buying or record-keeping.
Improvement suggestion: Walk through one normal day and add any task that does not yet fit an existing box.
Self-check: Could a stranger tell what each function does from my labels alone?
Strong evidence
Inputs, outputs and a hand-off risk
Skill: Value chain~35 minPortfolio
Extend your function map. For the same business, add its main inputs and outputs, mark which functions are support functions, and circle one hand-off between two functions where a mistake could cause a problem. Write two sentences explaining that risk.
Expected artefact: The upgraded map plus a short written note (two to three sentences) describing one named hand-off risk.
Show quality checklist & guidance
- Inputs and outputs are both shown and match the business.
- At least one support function is correctly marked as such.
- One specific hand-off (function A to function B) is circled, not a whole department.
- The written risk names what could go wrong and the likely effect.
Evidence level: Strong — connects functions into a flow and reasons about a weak point.
Common weakness: Describing a general worry ("things go wrong") instead of a concrete hand-off between two named functions.
Improvement suggestion: Name the document or item that passes between the two functions (e.g. an order slip) and say what happens if it is wrong or late.
Self-check: Have I named a real hand-off and a real consequence, not a vague fear?
Transfer evidence
Compare hand-off risks in two businesses
Skill: Analysis~50 minPortfolio
Make brief function maps for two different businesses (e.g. a restaurant and a transport service). In each, identify one hand-off risk. Then write a short comparison arguing which risk is more serious and why, considering how often it happens and how much damage it causes.
Expected artefact: Two function maps plus a half-page reasoned comparison ending with a clear judgement.
Show quality checklist & guidance
- Both businesses are mapped clearly and are genuinely different in type.
- Each has one specific, well-described hand-off risk.
- The comparison weighs both likelihood and impact, not just one.
- A clear judgement is stated and justified, not left open.
Evidence level: Transfer — combines mapping, risk reasoning and a justified recommendation across cases.
Common weakness: Picking the "scarier sounding" risk without weighing how often it actually occurs.
Improvement suggestion: Add a one-line rough estimate of frequency and cost in Credits for each risk to make the comparison concrete. Either business may be judged riskier if the reasoning is sound.
Self-check: Did I justify my choice using both how likely and how costly each risk is?
Chapter 2 — Markets, Customers and Marketing
Basic evidence
Customer profile card
Skill: Customers~20 minPortfolio
For one product or service, write a one-page customer profile: who buys it, what need it meets, and where they hear about it. Use plain bullet points.
Expected artefact: A one-page customer profile card with a named product and at least five facts about the typical customer.
Show quality checklist & guidance
- A specific product or service is named.
- The customer is described, not just "everyone".
- A clear need or problem the customer has is stated.
- At least one channel where the customer learns about the product is given.
Evidence level: Basic — shows you can describe a target customer.
Common weakness: Saying the customer is "everybody", which gives no useful focus.
Improvement suggestion: Narrow to one realistic person and describe their situation and budget.
Self-check: Could I picture one real person from my profile?
Strong evidence
Mini marketing mix with figures
Skill: Marketing mix~35 minCalculation
For your product, set out the four elements of the marketing mix (product, price, place, promotion). Give a price in Credits, one promotion idea with a rough cost in Credits, and explain how the four parts fit together.
Expected artefact: A one-page marketing-mix sheet with a price and a promotion cost in Credits and a short note on how the parts support each other.
Show quality checklist & guidance
- All four mix elements are present and relevant to the product.
- A specific price in Credits and a promotion cost in Credits are given.
- The elements are consistent (e.g. a low price matched to a low-cost channel).
- The note explains the link, not just lists the four parts.
Evidence level: Strong — applies a framework with realistic figures.
Common weakness: A premium price paired with a cheap, mismatched promotion channel, with no comment on the clash.
Improvement suggestion: Check each element against the customer profile and adjust any that do not fit.
Self-check: Do my four elements point at the same customer?
Transfer evidence
Respond to a new competitor
Skill: Strategy~50 minPortfolio
A new competitor opens nearby selling a similar product 15% cheaper. Write a short plan recommending how your business should respond across the marketing mix, with at least one figure in Credits, and explain the trade-offs of your choice.
Expected artefact: A half-page to one-page response plan with a clear recommendation and at least one Credits figure.
Show quality checklist & guidance
- The plan addresses more than just price (e.g. service, place or promotion).
- At least one realistic figure in Credits supports the argument.
- Trade-offs are named (e.g. cutting price protects volume but reduces margin).
- A clear, defensible recommendation is reached.
Evidence level: Transfer — multi-element reasoning under competitive pressure.
Common weakness: Reflexively matching the competitor's price with no thought to margin or differentiation.
Improvement suggestion: Show a quick margin check at the old and proposed prices. Several responses (hold price and improve service, or cut price selectively) can be valid if the trade-off is reasoned.
Self-check: Have I weighed at least one cost against one benefit of my choice?
Chapter 3 — Costs, Pricing and Profit
Basic evidence
Fixed and variable cost list
Skill: Costs~20 minPortfolio
For a small business, list at least six costs and sort each into "fixed" or "variable". Add a one-line note explaining what makes each type.
Expected artefact: A two-column cost list (fixed vs variable) with at least six items and a short definition line for each type.
Show quality checklist & guidance
- At least six realistic costs are listed for the chosen business.
- Each cost is placed in the correct column.
- The definitions distinguish costs that change with output from those that do not.
- The business type is stated so the costs make sense.
Evidence level: Basic — shows you can classify costs.
Common weakness: Putting rent under variable because the amount feels uncertain, rather than because it changes with output.
Improvement suggestion: For each cost ask "if I made one more unit, would this change?" — if no, it is fixed.
Self-check: Did I sort by behaviour with output, not by size?
Strong evidence
Break-even calculation
Skill: Break-even~35 minCalculation
Using your cost list, set a selling price and a variable cost per unit in Credits and a total monthly fixed cost in Credits. Calculate the break-even quantity, show your working, and state what it means for the business.
Expected artefact: A worked break-even calculation showing the formula, the figures in Credits and a one-sentence interpretation.
Show quality checklist & guidance
- Price, variable cost per unit and fixed costs are all in Credits and realistic.
- The contribution per unit is calculated correctly (price minus variable cost).
- Break-even = fixed costs divided by contribution per unit, with working shown.
- The result is interpreted in plain words (units per month to avoid a loss).
Evidence level: Strong — applies the break-even method to your own figures.
Common weakness: Dividing fixed costs by the price instead of by the contribution per unit, which gives too low a break-even.
Improvement suggestion: Always subtract variable cost from price first, then divide; label each number with "Credits" or "units".
Self-check: Did I divide by contribution, not by price?
Transfer evidence
Price-change decision under rising costs
Skill: Pricing~50 minCalculation
A supplier raises your main material cost by 20%. Using your figures, recalculate the break-even, propose whether and how much to raise your price in Credits, and explain the effect on customers and profit. Recommend a final decision.
Expected artefact: A worked recalculation plus a half-page recommendation with figures and reasoning.
Show quality checklist & guidance
- The new variable cost and resulting break-even are calculated correctly.
- A specific proposed price in Credits is given, not just "raise it".
- Effects on both customers (demand) and profit (margin) are discussed.
- A clear final decision is recommended and justified.
Evidence level: Transfer — combines costing, pricing and judgement on a realistic shock.
Common weakness: Passing the full cost rise straight to customers without checking whether they will keep buying.
Improvement suggestion: Compare profit at two or three candidate prices. Holding price and absorbing some cost can be valid if you show the margin is still acceptable.
Self-check: Did I weigh lost sales against higher margin before deciding?
Chapter 4 — Procurement and Inventory
Basic evidence
Purchase order draft
Skill: Procurement~20 minPortfolio
Draft a simple purchase order for three items a business needs. Include item, quantity, unit price in Credits, line totals and a grand total in Credits.
Expected artefact: A completed purchase order with three line items and a correct grand total in Credits.
Show quality checklist & guidance
- Each line shows item, quantity and unit price in Credits.
- Line totals equal quantity times unit price.
- The grand total adds the line totals correctly.
- The order names a supplier and a date.
Evidence level: Basic — shows you can complete a standard procurement document.
Common weakness: Arithmetic slips in line totals or grand total.
Improvement suggestion: Re-add the column from bottom to top to catch any error.
Self-check: Do my line totals and grand total all reconcile?
Strong evidence
Compare two supplier quotes
Skill: Sourcing~35 minCalculation
Two suppliers offer the same item: Supplier A at 50 Credits each with free delivery; Supplier B at 45 Credits each plus 300 Credits delivery for an order of 40 units. Calculate the total cost from each and recommend one, noting any non-price factors.
Expected artefact: A short comparison showing both totals in Credits and a recommendation with at least one non-price factor.
Show quality checklist & guidance
- Both totals are calculated: A = 40 × 50 = 2,000 Credits; B = 40 × 45 + 300 = 2,100 Credits.
- The cheaper option (A here) is identified from the totals.
- At least one non-price factor (reliability, quality, lead time) is raised.
- A clear recommendation is given.
Evidence level: Strong — compares offers on a full-cost basis, not headline price.
Common weakness: Choosing Supplier B on the lower 45 Credits unit price and ignoring the 300 Credits delivery.
Improvement suggestion: Always compare delivered totals, then layer non-price factors on top. Choosing B can be valid if a named factor (faster delivery) justifies the extra 100 Credits.
Self-check: Did I compare delivered totals, not just unit prices?
Transfer evidence
Fix a recurring stock problem
Skill: Inventory~50 minPortfolio
A workshop keeps either running out of a key part or over-ordering and tying up cash. Recommend a simple reorder rule (reorder level and order quantity), justify it with figures in Credits, and explain how it balances stock-out risk against cash tied up.
Expected artefact: A written reorder rule with figures plus a half-page justification of the trade-off.
Show quality checklist & guidance
- A specific reorder level and order quantity are proposed.
- Figures in Credits and an estimate of usage and lead time support the rule.
- Both risks are addressed: stock-outs and cash tied up in excess stock.
- The recommendation is coherent and defensible.
Evidence level: Transfer — designs a control rule balancing competing goals.
Common weakness: Setting a very high stock level to "be safe" without noting the cash it locks up.
Improvement suggestion: State the daily usage and lead time you assumed, then size the buffer to that. A range of safe rules is acceptable if the trade-off is shown.
Self-check: Does my rule protect supply without locking up too much cash?
Chapter 5 — Recording Transactions and Bookkeeping
Basic evidence
Cash book entries
Skill: Bookkeeping~20 minPortfolio
Record five transactions (some receipts, some payments) in a simple cash book with date, description, money in, money out, and a running balance in Credits.
Expected artefact: A cash book with five dated entries and a correct running balance in Credits.
Show quality checklist & guidance
- Each entry has a date, description and an amount in the correct column.
- Receipts go to money in; payments go to money out.
- The running balance updates correctly after each line.
- All amounts are in Credits.
Evidence level: Basic — shows you can keep a basic cash record.
Common weakness: Putting a payment in the money-in column, which inflates the balance.
Improvement suggestion: Before each line, ask "did cash come in or go out?" and pick the column accordingly.
Self-check: Does my closing balance follow logically from each entry?
Strong evidence
Reconcile cash book to a statement
Skill: Reconciliation~35 minCalculation
Your cash book shows a balance of 4,200 Credits but the bank-style statement shows 3,950 Credits. List plausible reasons for the difference, then show a short reconciliation that brings the two figures into agreement.
Expected artefact: A reconciliation note listing reconciling items and showing both figures meeting at one agreed balance in Credits.
Show quality checklist & guidance
- At least two plausible reasons for the 250 Credits gap are given (e.g. an uncleared payment, a recording error).
- The reconciliation adjusts the right side for each item.
- The two figures are brought to a single agreed balance.
- All figures are labelled in Credits.
Evidence level: Strong — applies reconciliation logic to a real discrepancy.
Common weakness: Simply changing the cash book to match the statement without explaining each item.
Improvement suggestion: Identify whether each item belongs to the cash book side or the statement side before adjusting. Several valid sets of reconciling items exist.
Self-check: Does every adjustment have a stated reason?
Transfer evidence
Design a simple record-keeping routine
Skill: Controls~50 minPortfolio
A small shop loses receipts and forgets to record sales. Design a weekly record-keeping routine (who does what, when, with which documents) that would prevent this, and explain how each step reduces errors or fraud. Note that local rules on record retention should be confirmed.
Expected artefact: A written routine (steps with responsibilities and timing) plus a short rationale for each control.
Show quality checklist & guidance
- The routine names who does each step and how often.
- Specific documents (receipts, cash book, summary) are referenced.
- Each step is linked to a risk it reduces (lost receipts, unrecorded sales).
- The answer notes that local retention rules must be confirmed.
Evidence level: Transfer — builds a practical control system and justifies it.
Common weakness: Listing rules with no owner or timing, so nothing is actually accountable.
Improvement suggestion: Add a simple weekly check where a second person verifies the totals. Different routines are acceptable if responsibilities and timing are clear.
Self-check: Could someone follow my routine without asking me questions?
Chapter 6 — Financial Statements and Performance
Basic evidence
Label a simple profit statement
Skill: Statements~20 minPortfolio
Given revenue, cost of goods and expenses in Credits, build a simple profit statement and label gross profit and net profit. Use any reasonable figures.
Expected artefact: A short profit statement in Credits with gross profit and net profit clearly labelled.
Show quality checklist & guidance
- Revenue, cost of goods and expenses are shown in Credits.
- Gross profit = revenue minus cost of goods, correctly placed.
- Net profit = gross profit minus expenses, correctly placed.
- The two profit lines are clearly labelled.
Evidence level: Basic — shows you can structure a basic profit statement.
Common weakness: Subtracting all expenses at once and losing the gross profit line.
Improvement suggestion: Keep cost of goods separate from other expenses so gross profit stays visible.
Self-check: Can I point to both gross and net profit on my statement?
Strong evidence
Calculate and explain two ratios
Skill: Ratios~35 minCalculation
From your profit statement, calculate the gross profit margin and the net profit margin as percentages. Show the working and explain in one sentence each what the two ratios tell the owner.
Expected artefact: Two ratio calculations with working and a one-line interpretation of each.
Show quality checklist & guidance
- Gross profit margin = gross profit ÷ revenue × 100, with working shown.
- Net profit margin = net profit ÷ revenue × 100, with working shown.
- Both results are given as percentages.
- Each interpretation links the ratio to a real meaning for the owner.
Evidence level: Strong — computes and interprets performance measures.
Common weakness: Dividing by cost of goods instead of by revenue, giving a wrong percentage.
Improvement suggestion: Always divide profit by revenue for a margin; double-check the base figure before multiplying by 100.
Self-check: Did I divide each profit by revenue, not by costs?
Transfer evidence
Diagnose a falling margin
Skill: Analysis~50 minPortfolio
Revenue rose this year but net profit margin fell. Using two years of simple figures in Credits, work out what changed, list the most likely causes, and recommend one action the owner should take first. Justify your priority.
Expected artefact: A two-year comparison with figures plus a half-page diagnosis and a prioritised recommendation.
Show quality checklist & guidance
- Two years of figures are compared and the margin change is quantified.
- Plausible causes are identified (rising costs, discounting, higher expenses).
- The recommended first action targets the largest or most controllable cause.
- The priority is justified, not arbitrary.
Evidence level: Transfer — links statement analysis to a reasoned management action.
Common weakness: Concluding "sell more" when the real issue is that costs rose faster than sales.
Improvement suggestion: Compare each cost line as a percentage of revenue across the two years to find what slipped. Different first actions are valid if the cause is correctly identified.
Self-check: Does my recommended action match the cause I found in the figures?
Chapter 7 — Cash Flow and Working Capital
Basic evidence
One-month cash flow sketch
Skill: Cash flow~20 minPortfolio
Build a simple one-month cash flow showing opening balance, cash in, cash out and closing balance in Credits. Use any reasonable figures for a small business.
Expected artefact: A one-month cash flow in Credits with opening and closing balances.
Show quality checklist & guidance
- Opening balance, total cash in and total cash out are all shown in Credits.
- Closing balance = opening + cash in − cash out, calculated correctly.
- Items are realistic for the chosen business.
- The layout is clear and labelled.
Evidence level: Basic — shows you can build a simple cash flow.
Common weakness: Confusing profit with cash and recording a sale as cash in before it is actually received.
Improvement suggestion: Only count cash when it truly moves in or out, regardless of when the sale was made.
Self-check: Did I record only real cash movements?
Strong evidence
Three-month forecast with a shortfall
Skill: Forecasting~35 minCalculation
Extend the cash flow to three months. Build it so that one month shows a negative closing balance in Credits. Identify which month runs short and suggest one realistic way to cover the gap.
Expected artefact: A three-month forecast in Credits showing the shortfall month and a short note proposing a fix.
Show quality checklist & guidance
- Each month carries its closing balance forward as the next opening balance.
- One month clearly shows a negative closing balance in Credits.
- The shortfall month is correctly identified.
- A realistic fix (delay a payment, arrange short-term funds, chase receivables) is proposed.
Evidence level: Strong — projects cash forward and spots a problem early.
Common weakness: Restarting each month from the original opening balance instead of carrying the previous closing forward.
Improvement suggestion: Link each month so the closing balance becomes the next opening; the shortfall then appears naturally.
Self-check: Did each month's opening balance equal the previous closing?
Transfer evidence
Profitable but out of cash
Skill: Working capital~50 minPortfolio
A business is profitable on paper but keeps running short of cash because customers pay late and stock is high. Using simple figures in Credits, explain why profit and cash differ here, and recommend two changes to working capital. Justify which you would do first.
Expected artefact: A short explanation with figures plus two recommended working-capital changes and a justified priority.
Show quality checklist & guidance
- The gap between profit and cash is explained using receivables and stock.
- Figures in Credits illustrate the cash tied up.
- Two specific working-capital changes are proposed (faster collection, lower stock).
- A first priority is chosen and justified by impact or ease.
Evidence level: Transfer — connects profit, cash and working capital in a realistic squeeze.
Common weakness: Treating profit and cash as the same thing and missing the role of late payment and stock.
Improvement suggestion: Estimate the Credits freed by each change before ranking them. Either change may rank first if the reasoning holds.
Self-check: Did I explain clearly why profit does not equal cash here?
Chapter 8 — Organisational Structure and Process
Basic evidence
Draw an organisation chart
Skill: Structure~20 minPortfolio
Draw a simple organisation chart for a small business with at least five roles. Show who reports to whom and label one main duty per role.
Expected artefact: A one-page organisation chart with at least five roles and clear reporting lines.
Show quality checklist & guidance
- At least five roles are shown.
- Reporting lines connect roles clearly.
- Each role has one main duty noted.
- The chart is tidy and readable.
Evidence level: Basic — shows you can represent a reporting structure.
Common weakness: Drawing roles as a list with no lines, so reporting relationships are unclear.
Improvement suggestion: Connect each role to its manager with a line so the hierarchy is visible.
Self-check: Can I trace who reports to whom from the lines?
Strong evidence
Map a process and find a bottleneck
Skill: Process~35 minPortfolio
Map a everyday process (e.g. taking and fulfilling an order) as a sequence of steps. Mark the step where work most often piles up, and estimate the delay it causes in time or Credits.
Expected artefact: A step-by-step process map with one bottleneck marked and an estimate of its cost or delay.
Show quality checklist & guidance
- The process is shown as ordered steps from start to finish.
- One realistic bottleneck step is marked.
- The delay or cost is estimated in time or Credits.
- The map matches a real, recognisable process.
Evidence level: Strong — analyses a process and locates a constraint.
Common weakness: Marking the busiest step rather than the one that actually slows everything else.
Improvement suggestion: Find the step where items wait the longest before being handled — that is usually the true bottleneck.
Self-check: Is my marked step the one that holds up the rest?
Transfer evidence
Recommend a structure change as a business grows
Skill: Organisation design~50 minPortfolio
A growing training center now has 20 staff but still has everyone reporting to one person, causing delays. Recommend a revised structure, show it as a chart, and explain the trade-offs (clearer lines vs added layers and cost in Credits). Justify your design.
Expected artefact: A revised organisation chart plus a half-page justification weighing the trade-offs.
Show quality checklist & guidance
- The new chart reduces the span of control on the single manager.
- Trade-offs are discussed: clearer lines and faster decisions vs more layers and cost.
- Any added supervisory cost is acknowledged in Credits.
- The design is justified against the growth problem described.
Evidence level: Transfer — redesigns structure and reasons about the trade-offs.
Common weakness: Adding many management layers and ignoring the extra cost and slower communication they bring.
Improvement suggestion: Add only the layers the size justifies; state the cost of each new supervisory role. Several structures can be valid if the trade-off is reasoned.
Self-check: Did I weigh clearer reporting against added layers and cost?
Chapter 9 — Risk, Compliance and Quality
Basic evidence
Simple risk register
Skill: Risk~20 minPortfolio
List four risks a small business faces. For each, note how likely it is (low/medium/high) and how serious the impact would be (low/medium/high) in a simple table.
Expected artefact: A four-row risk register with likelihood and impact rated for each risk.
Show quality checklist & guidance
- Four realistic risks for the chosen business are listed.
- Each has a likelihood rating and an impact rating.
- The two are kept separate, not merged into one score.
- The table is clear and labelled.
Evidence level: Basic — shows you can identify and rate risks.
Common weakness: Rating likelihood and impact as a single "risk level" instead of two dimensions.
Improvement suggestion: Always rate how often it might happen and how bad it would be as two separate columns.
Self-check: Did I rate likelihood and impact separately?
Strong evidence
Prioritise risks and add controls
Skill: Mitigation~35 minPortfolio
From your register, rank the four risks by combining likelihood and impact. For the top two, propose one control each and estimate its cost in Credits. State whether each control is worth the cost.
Expected artefact: A ranked risk list with two controls, their costs in Credits and a worth-it judgement for each.
Show quality checklist & guidance
- Risks are ranked using both likelihood and impact.
- The top two risks each have a specific control.
- Each control has a cost in Credits and a judgement on value.
- The judgement compares the control cost to the risk it reduces.
Evidence level: Strong — moves from rating risks to choosing proportionate controls.
Common weakness: Recommending an expensive control for a low-impact risk without checking it is worth it.
Improvement suggestion: Spend most on the high-likelihood, high-impact risks; for minor risks a cheap control or acceptance may be wiser.
Self-check: Is each control matched to a risk big enough to justify it?
Transfer evidence
Respond to a quality failure
Skill: Quality~50 minPortfolio
A food-processing workshop has had several customer complaints about inconsistent product quality. Investigate likely causes, recommend a quality-control routine, and estimate its cost in Credits against the cost of lost customers. Note that local food-safety rules must be confirmed. Justify your plan.
Expected artefact: A short investigation, a proposed quality routine and a cost-versus-benefit comparison in Credits.
Show quality checklist & guidance
- Plausible causes of inconsistency are identified (process, inputs, training).
- A concrete quality-control routine with checkpoints is proposed.
- The routine's cost in Credits is weighed against the cost of lost customers.
- The answer notes that local food-safety rules must be confirmed.
Evidence level: Transfer — combines investigation, control design and cost reasoning.
Common weakness: Blaming one worker rather than examining the process that allows variation.
Improvement suggestion: Add a simple check at the point where variation enters; compare its cost to even one lost regular customer in Credits. Various routines are valid if justified.
Self-check: Did I compare the control cost to the cost of doing nothing?
Chapter 10 — Management, Leadership and Human Resources
Basic evidence
Role description for one job
Skill: HR basics~20 minPortfolio
Write a short role description for one job in a small business: job title, three main duties, and the main skills needed.
Expected artefact: A one-page role description with a title, three duties and required skills.
Show quality checklist & guidance
- A clear job title is given.
- Three concrete duties are listed, not vague phrases.
- The skills match the duties described.
- The description fits a real small-business role.
Evidence level: Basic — shows you can describe a role clearly.
Common weakness: Writing duties so vaguely ("help out") that the role is unclear.
Improvement suggestion: Start each duty with an action verb and name what is produced or handled.
Self-check: Could someone tell from my description what this person does all day?
Strong evidence
Plan a fair shift rota
Skill: People management~35 minCalculation
A shop needs cover across a six-day week with four staff. Build a rota that meets opening hours, shares weekend work fairly, and stays within a weekly wage budget of 4,000 Credits. Show the wage total and note any trade-off you made.
Expected artefact: A weekly rota table with a wage total in Credits and a short note on the main trade-off.
Show quality checklist & guidance
- The rota covers all required opening hours across six days.
- Weekend work is shared rather than dumped on one person.
- The wage total is calculated and stays within 4,000 Credits.
- One trade-off (e.g. fewer staff on a quiet day) is noted.
Evidence level: Strong — balances coverage, fairness and a budget.
Common weakness: Meeting the budget by leaving a busy period understaffed without flagging the risk.
Improvement suggestion: Check the busiest hours first, then trim quieter slots to fit the budget; many fair rotas are possible.
Self-check: Is the rota fair, covered, and within 4,000 Credits?
Transfer evidence
Handle a performance and motivation problem
Skill: Leadership~50 minPortfolio
A normally good worker has become slow and withdrawn, and the team's output is dropping. Plan how you would investigate, hold a fair conversation, and agree next steps. Estimate the cost in Credits of doing nothing (lost output) versus acting. Note that local employment rules must be confirmed. Justify your approach.
Expected artefact: A written plan covering investigation, conversation and follow-up, plus a rough cost comparison in Credits.
Show quality checklist & guidance
- The plan separates finding out the cause from jumping to conclusions.
- A fair, respectful conversation approach is described.
- Agreed next steps with a follow-up point are included.
- The cost of inaction in Credits is weighed against acting, and local rules are flagged.
Evidence level: Transfer — combines investigation, communication and a cost-aware judgement on a sensitive situation.
Common weakness: Going straight to discipline without first understanding why performance dropped.
Improvement suggestion: Begin with a supportive, fact-finding conversation; estimate lost output in Credits to show why timely action matters. Several humane approaches are acceptable if fair and lawful, with local rules confirmed.
Self-check: Did I seek the cause before deciding on consequences?