Problem / need / context
At a Further Education and Training centre in County Cork, trainers delivering a QQI Level 5 Retail and Business Studies programme noticed that many learners, despite performing well in assessed tasks, consistently waited to be told what to do next. When faced with open-ended activities or group tasks without clear instructions, learners became hesitant and looked to the trainer for direction. Employers providing work placements in local retail businesses raised the same concern: learners needed prompting for tasks that a more experienced colleague would identify and act on independently.
This pointed to a gap in the transversal skill of Leadership and Initiative, defined as the ability to take responsibility for improvement and change, including identifying what needs to be done, acting on it without being asked, and supporting others in the process. In a retail and business context, this skill underpins career progression: supervisory and team leader roles depend on it, and employers in the region consistently highlighted it as a quality that set stronger candidates apart. Trainers recognised that the programme needed to create structured opportunities for learners to practise exercising initiative before they entered the workplace.
Intervention
The programme co-ordinator, working with two module trainers and a mentor from a Cork city retail employer, introduced a six-week project called “Run the Floor.” Each learner was assigned a real improvement challenge based on scenarios drawn from the employer partner, such as designing a new staff induction checklist, proposing a revised store layout for a seasonal promotion, or creating a training guide for a routine task that newer colleagues often found confusing.
Crucially, the brief for each challenge was deliberately left open. Learners were not given a step-by-step guide or a set of criteria beyond the overall goal. Trainers withheld their usual level of direction, instead offering a weekly ten-minute check-in where learners reported on what they had done so far and what they planned to do next. The employer mentor attended two sessions during the project, asking questions about learners’ choices and framing the initiative as something a real team leader in their business would be expected to handle independently. At the end of the six weeks, each learner presented their completed work to the group and the employer mentor, explaining the decisions they had made and what they would do differently if they repeated the task.
Outcomes
The project produced a visible change in how learners approached their work. By the third week, most had stopped waiting for trainer input between check-ins and were making decisions independently, seeking feedback from peers or using the employer mentor’s earlier questions as a guide for their thinking. Several learners who had been quiet and reactive in classroom settings took on a noticeably more active role, reporting in their presentations that having ownership of a real task had changed how they thought about their own capability.
Placement supervisors reported that learners from this cohort were more proactive than in previous years, identifying tasks without being asked and occasionally suggesting small improvements to routines in their placement stores. The employer mentor took on one learner for a part-time role following the programme, citing their initiative during the project as a key factor in the decision. Trainers noted that the reduced level of direction required during the project also freed up session time for richer discussion, and the “Run the Floor” model has since been incorporated as a standard component of the programme each year.