Task Titans

Task Titans tracks verified task.completed events only, so the standings reflect real work that was checked off in the system. It is meant for a personal execution race where entrants compete on task volume over a fixed two-week window. Because the scoring is event-based, it avoids manual scorekeeping for work the platform already knows about. That makes it a good fit when you want a simple, auditable contest around completion, not subjective judging.

This template fits individual contributors, field teams, operations staff, and any group where task completion is a meaningful signal. It is especially useful when people can choose to opt in and compete without forcing the whole department into a ranking. Managers are excluded by default, which helps keep the contest fair and avoids mixing leaders with the people doing the work. If your audience is mixed-size or mixed-role, the opt-in structure keeps participation cleaner.

The template is set to 14 days because task-race formats work best as episodic contests with a clear finish line. Two weeks is long enough for entrants to build momentum and short enough to keep the standings active. If you run it too long, it starts to feel like a leaderboard instead of a contest. If you need a recurring cadence, rerun it in separate rounds rather than leaving it open-ended.

Scoring is based on the count of verified task.completed events, so every completed task adds to an entrant's score. The template uses highest_score, which means the person with the most completed tasks wins at the end of the contest. Suggested points by rank can be used for prize allocation, but the contest itself is still driven by verified completion counts. That keeps the format simple and resistant to gaming.

Yes, but the template is intentionally narrow: it counts task.completed events only. If you want to broaden the contest, you should do so by defining which tasks are eligible in your workflow, not by switching to manual scoring. This keeps the contest aligned with actual system activity and reduces the risk of Goodhart's-law problems. The best customization is usually in the task list, the prize, and the audience, not the scoring logic.

The biggest mistake is turning it into a public leaderboard that never ends, which changes the feel from a contest to constant ranking. Another common issue is including tasks that are too easy, too uneven, or not equally available across entrants. You should also avoid mixing in manual counts for work the platform already tracks, because that creates confusion and weakens trust. Finally, make sure the contest is opt-in so nobody is ranked without choosing to participate.

Task Titans is a metric contest, so it uses verified system events rather than organizer-entered numbers or photo/story submissions. Use a manual contest when the KPI is external to the platform, such as sales, steps, or fundraising. Use a submission contest when the goal is to judge entries like photos, stories, or ideas. Task Titans is the right choice when the work already exists as tracked task completions.

Yes, because it is opt-in, individual, and based on verified work events rather than subjective ranking. That said, you should still review whether the contest could affect workload, scheduling, or employee relations in your jurisdiction. If needed, keep the prize symbolic or points-based and avoid any format that publicly shames low performers. The safest use is a cooperative, voluntary contest with clear rules and a defined end date.

Connect it to the task system that already records task.completed events so the standings update automatically. You may also want to link it to onboarding, team announcements, or a weekly recap so entrants know where they stand. If you plan to repeat the contest, keep the rules and eligible tasks consistent from round to round. That makes the results easier to understand and compare.