A prototype can lead on originality and fall behind on usability. Another entry can solve the brief with modest technical novelty. If you record one overall score, you lose the distinction that explains those results.
Choose criteria that participants can act on. For a product challenge, you might assess usefulness and feasibility. For a design brief, you might assess originality and execution. Explain what reviewers should consider before opening submissions.
Publish the evaluation method with the brief
Participants need the criteria, the selection method and the evaluation dates before deciding whether to enter. State who scores the work and how public support affects the award. If you use weights, explain their effect instead of leaving participants to infer it from a leaderboard.
In Dexyd, review the criteria and advanced selection settings together. A criterion label alone does not establish a jury process or grant the public a vote. Those choices belong to the competition rules.
Use examples in the brief to reduce inconsistent scoring. Explain whether feasibility means a working demonstration, a documented test or a credible production plan. Require evidence that matches the level you expect.
Read strengths alongside the overall result
A criterion breakdown helps you explain why an entry placed where it did. It also helps you identify a creator whose strength fits a later project, even if that creator did not win the overall award.
Treat the score as evidence from one competition. Review the work, the scoring context and the creator profile before proposing a collaboration. A high originality score does not grant a verified professional qualification or establish availability for paid work.
Public support answers a different question from an expert evaluation. If you award both a Grand Prize and a Public Prize, state which method determines each. Avoid presenting the most-supported entry as the best technical solution unless your rules define that outcome.
Review the decisions behind tournament progression
Tournament results need an announced method for each duel and progression stage. Set the duel voting duration in minutes, hours or days, then check that the overall voting window can accommodate the planned rounds.
Review the scores and confirmed decisions that support qualification. Do not describe a score-based or confirmed progression as a random draw. Participants should be able to connect the announced method to the outcome they see.
If a result remains provisional, give participants the applicable dispute deadline and route. Keep an explanation of the evidence you used when resolving a disputed decision.
Carry the evaluation into the next collaboration
After the competition, use the relevant results and portfolio references to start a conversation about a defined project. Check the creator saved specialties, budget and availability instead of assuming those details from a result or badge.
You can find the setup and review steps in Dexyd Help. Read the selection FAQ before choosing the award method for your next competition.
