Reference
Award terms glossary
Plain definitions for the language award programmes use. Free to reuse.
- Attribution
- Which party a claimed outcome belongs to: your firm, a joint venture partner, the client, or the project as a whole. Getting this wrong is one of the fastest ways to lose credibility with a judge who knows the sector.
- Category
- The specific class of entry within a programme. Most programmes have between six and twenty. Choosing the right one matters more than most firms assume, because it decides who you are compared against.
- Criteria
- The published questions and considerations an entry is scored against, usually with weightings. Almost always available before entries open.
- Early bird deadline
- A discounted closing date, typically several weeks before the standard one. The discount is real but the more useful effect is that it forces the work earlier.
- Eligibility window
- The period during which the project must have been delivered or completed to qualify. Frequently misread, and a common cause of rejected entries.
- Entrant
- The organisation submitting. Distinct from the project team, which may include several organisations.
- Evidence ladder
- Our term for how strongly a claim is supported, from proposed, through reported and evidenced, to independently verified and completed.
- Extended deadline
- A later closing date at a higher fee, often announced only once the standard deadline passes. Do not plan around one.
- Finalist
- An entry shortlisted for judging or for announcement at the ceremony. In many programmes finalists are published, which makes them a useful record of who takes the programme seriously.
- Hard rule
- In our engine, a check that stops a claim outright rather than flagging it. Overclaiming completion, attribution drift, absolute guarantees and unsourced quantities are all hard rules.
- Judging panel
- Usually senior practitioners judging unpaid and in their own time. Worth remembering when deciding how long an answer should be.
- Overclaim
- A statement that goes further than the underlying evidence supports. Distinct from a lie, and far more common.
- Programme
- A complete award scheme, usually annual, containing multiple categories. Some run state rounds that feed a national round.
- Provenance
- The record of which source document supports a given statement. The thing that makes a claim checkable rather than merely plausible.
- Scored criterion
- A criterion carrying explicit marks. An entry silent on one scored criterion rarely wins regardless of how strong it is elsewhere.
- Shortlist
- See finalist. Some programmes shortlist privately and announce only winners.
- State round
- A state-level programme whose winners may advance to a national round. Entering the state round is usually the only route to the national one.
- Submission
- The complete entry: the answers, the attachments and the supporting material, as lodged.
- Supporting evidence
- Documents attached to substantiate claims. Usually optional, frequently decisive.
- Word limit
- The maximum length of an answer, enforced by the portal. Answers written in Word and pasted in are the usual source of truncation.
Start with two answers.
Send an award you are actually entering and whatever project material you already have. You get two complete answers, the case we would make, the questions we would send your team and the claims that one more fact would unlock.
$250
Credited in full if you go ahead. If you read it and walk away, you owe nothing further.