Judging Criteria
- The very best entries will have a unique product that uses an innovative technology with a clear market demand, i.e. present two key criteria:
- a technology product/service answering a clear market need;
- a demonstrable route to market for that product/service.
- The technology can be, but does not need to be, brand new technology or necessarily ‘high tech’. The entry can utilise existing technology and/or modification of existing technology for a creative new product/service.
- By ‘route to market’, we are looking for the team’s understanding of their product’s place within a market and the identification of a clear and logical target customer with a real need that the product addresses. The team needs to have a clear picture of the development necessary for the technology and the proposed product.
- As a technology commercialisation rather than a business plan challenge, the competition does not address:
- expanded distribution and marketing strategies,
- detailed financial analyses,
- finalised team CVs and advisory panels etc.
A well-developed business plan will not place a team in a stronger position relative to a team that has no business plan.
- If a team’s entry is just at the idea stage the team needs to be able to assure the judges that the technology is feasible. The team does, however, need to have a product in mind, not just a technology. If this is an early stage idea, the team needs to be able to offer assurances that it is feasible to create the product/service.
- To be judged highly, you do not have to assume that the team can or will be the ones to take the idea to market.
- For a good entry, it should be reasonable to assume that the product could be built and sold at enough of a profit, to enough of the targeted customers, to sustain a business. The technologies do not necessarily need to be ‘Venture Capital-fundable’.
- The closer the team members are to the inception or invention of their technological innovation, the stronger their position will be in the judges’ eyes. In other words, a presentation made by the inventors will score more highly than one by those only peripherally involved in the birth of the technology.
