Innovation Cup

This template sets up a department-vs-department contest where the score is based on verified idea.submitted events. It uses a highest_score goal type with per-capita fairness, so the ranking reflects participation rate rather than raw headcount. The prize type is points, and the default run length is 14 days. It is designed for engagement programs where you want a clean, time-boxed burst of improvement ideas.

An HR, internal communications, operations, or continuous-improvement owner can run it, depending on who manages idea intake. The organizer should be able to define the departments, confirm submissions, and publish standings during the contest. If you want the contest to feel credible, assign one person or a small review group to validate that each idea is real and on-topic. The template works best when the organizer can respond quickly to submissions and keep the rules simple.

This template is built for an episodic contest, not an always-on leaderboard. A 2-week duration is a natural cadence because it is long enough for people to notice the challenge and submit ideas, but short enough to keep momentum. Many teams use it as a quarterly or campaign-style event rather than a permanent program. If you run it too often, participation can flatten and the ideas can get repetitive.

Yes, if you want smaller departments to have a fair chance against larger ones. Raw totals usually favor the biggest group, which can discourage participation from lean teams. Per-capita scoring makes the contest about participation density, not just size. That said, if you want a pure volume race, you would remove the per-capita framing and use a different contest design.

The template scores only verified idea.submitted events, so the organizer can reject duplicates, jokes, or off-topic entries before they count. A simple submission rule set helps: one idea per entry, clear problem statement, and a short description of the proposed improvement. If you want stronger quality control, add a review step or require each submission to answer a few prompts. The main pitfall is letting quantity become the only goal without any screening.

Yes, but the team scope should stay clear so entrants know who they are competing for. You can swap departments for stores, plants, branches, shifts, or regions if that matches your organization. The important part is keeping the team unit stable for the full 14 days and preserving per-capita fairness. If the groups are too fluid, the standings become hard to trust.

This template relies on the platform tracking idea.submitted events, so submissions should come through your idea intake flow or another verified source. You can pair it with forms, internal portals, or workflow tools that create the event when an idea is logged. If your process includes review, make sure only accepted submissions count toward standings. Avoid manual scoring for this template unless the ideas are truly external to the platform.

The biggest mistake is using raw counts instead of per-capita scoring, which makes the contest feel unfair to smaller departments. Another common issue is vague submission rules, which leads to duplicate or low-effort ideas. Teams also stumble when the contest has no clear end date or no visible standings updates. A short launch message, simple rules, and a fixed close date usually solve most of those problems.

An ad-hoc idea challenge usually collects suggestions without a clear scoring model, end date, or winner. Innovation Cup turns that into a structured contest with a defined duration, department standings, and a transparent way to rank participation. That structure makes it easier to launch, easier to explain, and easier for employees to understand what success looks like. It also gives you a reusable format for future campaigns instead of starting from scratch each time.