L7. Co-Create What Matters toolkit
Toolkit
Co-creation is about moving beyond consultation to genuine shared ownership. It gives staff and students the opportunity to shape initiatives rather than simply being handed pre-made decisions. When people see their fingerprints on the final plan, they feel invested in its success. This canvas helps leaders frame co-creation clearly, ensure ideas are captured meaningfully, and structure the process to be productive and time-efficient.
| Issue or Opportunity |
| What is the project, challenge, or area of improvement that requires shared ownership? Be clear about why it matters and why input is needed now. Framing the issue well ensures the process feels purposeful rather than tokenistic. |
| Constraints |
| What are the non-negotiables or limits that must be respected? This might include budget, deadlines, safeguarding requirements, or alignment with statutory policies. Naming the boundaries openly helps keep co-creation realistic while still allowing genuine input. |
| Ideas from Staff or Students |
| What suggestions, approaches, or solutions emerge from the group? Encourage a wide range of contributions and ensure all voices are heard. Use structured facilitation to balance energy and focus, surfacing trade-offs where necessary. |
| Decision Criteria |
| How will decisions be made and on what basis? Agreeing transparent criteria avoids frustration and shows participants that their input will be judged fairly against clear standards such as impact, feasibility, or alignment with school values. |
| Owners |
| Who will take responsibility for ensuring each action happens? Assigning ownership makes the process credible and prevents co-creation from becoming a talking exercise without follow-through. |
| Review |
| When and how will the outcomes of this co-created project be reviewed? Agree a timeline for checking progress and reflecting on what has been achieved. This signals that the process has accountability and that contributions continue to matter. |
| Reflection Prompts |
| Did people see their fingerprints on the final plan? Was the balance right between creativity and clear direction? Did the process respect constraints while still allowing for meaningful ownership? How will the learning from this co-creation exercise shape the next one? |
L7. Co-Create What Matters: example toolkit
Role: Assistant Principal
| Issue or Opportunity |
| We are redesigning our staff CPD programme for next year. Engagement has dipped, and feedback suggests that staff want more choice and relevance in their professional learning. This is the perfect opportunity to co-create a model that reflects staff expertise and interests, rather than a top-down plan that risks missing what matters most to them. |
| Constraints |
| Our budget and timetable are fixed, which limits how many sessions can run simultaneously. Safeguarding training and statutory updates must remain compulsory. These boundaries were shared from the outset to ensure the process stayed practical and focused, while still allowing for creativity within the non-negotiables. |
| Ideas from Staff or Students |
| During three co-design sessions, staff suggested peer-led sessions, rotation-based masterclasses, and optional pathways linked to career goals. Support staff requested joint sessions with teachers to build shared understanding. The most powerful ideas came when groups combined, leading to a structure that balances autonomy with coherence. |
| Decision Criteria |
| Together, we agreed that any proposed session must meet three criteria: it improves teaching and learning, it can be sustained within existing resources, and it connects directly to school priorities. Sharing these criteria early helped manage expectations and kept discussions focused on impact rather than preference. |
| Owners |
| Each faculty nominated a CPD lead to take responsibility for designing and delivering one session per term. I am overseeing the framework but have stepped back from control, allowing faculties to own their themes and delivery methods. This has already increased enthusiasm and accountability. |
| Review |
| We have planned a mid-year feedback round to review which sessions staff found most useful and what adjustments might be needed. Staff have suggested using a short digital form after each session, which we will pilot next term. This ensures that co-creation remains a continuous process rather than a one-off event. |
| Reflection Prompts |
| This process reminded me that shared ownership does not mean lack of direction; it means clarity with openness. Staff engagement has grown because they feel part of shaping something real. My next step is to use this approach more widely, ensuring that co-creation becomes our default way of working rather than an occasional exercise. |