Judging Categories
The Innovation Competition judging categories draw on the "Heilmeir Questions." George Heilmeir (LCD pioneer) posited that anyone proposing a research project or product development should answer the 9 questions below.
Category | Description | Guiding Questions |
---|---|---|
Goals |
The presentation should clearly and concisely describe the goals of the project and provide the audience with a foundation from which to understand the remaining presentation content. |
What are you trying to do? Articulate objectives using absolutely no jargon. |
Innovation |
Teams should demonstrate that they have a broad understanding of existing challenges/approaches and have made efforts to integrate new perspectives into a novel solution or approach. |
How is it done today, and what are the limits of current practice? What is new in your approach and why do you think it will be successful? |
Impact |
Teams should demonstrate that they understand the context of the project in the real world and the needs of stakeholders who would benefit from the new approach. |
Who cares? If you are successful, what difference will it make? |
Viability |
Teams should demonstrate that they have considered factors necessary to transform the idea into an implementable solution and have identified reasonable markers for progress. |
What are the risks? How much will it cost? How long will it take? What are the mid-term and final criteria for success? |
Presentation Effectiveness |
The team's presentation should be organized, clear, and enthusiastic. It should provide useful visuals and keep the audience engaged. |
Judging Rubric
Category | Inadequate | Fair | Good | Exceeds Expectations |
---|---|---|---|---|
Goals |
Does not describe the need that the project addresses or the project’s specific goals |
Superficial explanation; key points are unclear |
Provides explanation of goals but some details are unclear |
Provides clear explanation of the problem being addressed and the goals of the project |
Innovation |
No time spent on explaining existing solutions, novel approaches |
Vague discussion of existing solutions and new approach |
Discussion of problem/current solutions from a limited perspective Suggests how this approach could be an improvement |
Clearly addresses problem and existing solutions from multiple perspectives Makes a compelling case that this approach is a significant improvement |
Impact |
No discussion of stakeholders (e.g., potential users/ customers/ beneficiaries), no explanation of broader impact |
Mentions potential stakeholders with no obvious connection to project outcomes |
Some discussion of how stakeholders could potentially benefit from project outcomes |
Motivational, value-added discussion of how multiple stakeholders would benefit from the project’s success |
Viability |
Did not address risks, cost, timeframe, or measures of success No demonstration of progress |
Superficial or limited consideration of risks, cost, timeframe, measures of success Limited discussion of progress |
Good understanding of risks, cost, timeframe Some attempt to incorporate measures of success Demonstration of progress |
Outstanding understanding of risks, cost, timeframe valid, well-structured measures of success Demonstration of progress |
Presentation Effectiveness |
Did not effectively use visuals; unenthusiastic and unclear presentation; lacked organization |
Used some visuals, but lacked organization; some points unclear |
Good use of visuals; clear presentation; fairly well organized |
Excellent visuals Engaging and clear presentation Outstanding organization |