Contests

April 26, 2011

I often have this gut instinct not to like ‘contests’ or lists of “Best or Top (fill in the number)”.  I know this is not a popular view.  I also know that yes, we all like accolades, it makes us feel good about ourselves and our work, and a little competition can be a good thing.  But is the time and effort put into these contests the best use of our limited time and resources as we work to make a better world?  A major focus of my work is about sharing information that can help practitioners develop and implement practical programs to change people’s quality of life for the better.  Thus I want to get as much good information out there, in accessible ways, as possible.

A list by Devex  that came out last week of “40 Top Development Innovators” brought this reaction once again, and has helped to clarify for me what I don’t like about these type of lists. First let me say I highly respect the work of all of the organizations on this list and they are all doing some good and in most cases ‘innovative’ work.  But what was the goal of this list?  If it is to say ‘you’re doing a good job’ and your peers respect you, then the goal was probably accomplished.  But wouldn’t a project like this become so much more valuable to the sector if the goal was also to provide useful information in an accessible way that other organizations and practitioners could learn from?

There is a lot of information one has to sift through to get to the hidden (and usable) gems in these organizational descriptions.  Buried in most of the organizational descriptions under the question “Can you provide a specific example of something your organization has done that is particularly innovative?” are the beginnings of some very practical information that could be of use to other organizations.  What of instead of just a listing (or in addition to), the innovations could be pulled out and organized in a way that they could be searched by others?  Even better what if Devex (or any other organization that has similar contests and “Best” or “Top” lists) then included this information on their website so that it would be searchable into the future? What a contribution that could be to modeling effective ‘knowledge management’ in the digital age.

I know we won’t easily eliminate all of these ‘contests’ and “Best of…lists’ but if you are with an organization that is sponsoring one of them, please think twice as to what your goals are.  You could be really innovative by trying something different that could make a real and long lasting contribution, rather than becoming  just another quick news story.

Categories: Uncategorized
Tags:

  • http://www.desireeadaway.com Desiree Adaway

    Bonnie,
    I think you bring up some great points. I do not like “contest” at all. While I know they have a purpose I just do not know of any that has had a great ROI when all is said and done.

    The list issue is really something worth digging a little deeper with….good work should be acknowledged but then what? If I am told you are the best in an area that is fine and well but what tools, tricks,systems or proccesses can you teach me and my org so I can increase my effectiveness? I like your thoughts on how to make these designantion work for many as opposed to a select few.

    • http://www.goinginternational.com Bonnie Koenig

      Thanks, Desiree. Part of my intent here as you’ve noted is to challenge the accepted system a bit. Yes, some kinds of accolades and incentives are good but when was the last time the sector re-thought the contest and ‘best of lists’ model?

  • http://www.ceffect.com Gayle L. Gifford, ACFRE

    Bonnie,
    What I look at in these “contests” is who is being served. Most of them are designed to promote the contest maker by getting lots of people or organizations involved in “voting” who see the site and boost its traffic and public profile.

    But at the end of the day, what does the contest tell us? Not much about development, or innovation, or social change. And as we both know, an organization that is on top one day can easily be on the bottom tomorrow when someone discovers and promotes the part of the organization that isn’t working quite so well.

    One organization that has done what you’ve suggested with their prize is The Lodestar Foundation with its Collaboration Prize. http://www.lodestarfoundation.org/collaboration.html The database for all entries is online and searchable by type, region. Summary information and the write-ups for each entry are available for all to see, hosted by the Foundation Center http://foundationcenter.org/gainknowledge/collaboration/ This is a wonderful service and way to spread knowledge throughout the sector.

    • http://www.goinginternational.com Bonnie Koenig

      Gayle – This is a great model. Hopefully it will get more publicity so others can consider doing this as well. I agree that many/most contests and ‘best of’ lists are designed to promote the contest maker, but a win-win scenario such as Lodestar has started would be a good next step…

      • http://www.communityorganizer20.com Debra Askanase

        Gayle, thanks for introducing me to the Lodestar Foundation contest mode. What an innovative way to cross-promote everyone and offer a great resource. Plus, collaboration is always a great benefit!

  • http://aviewfromthecave.com Tom

    I have run my own contest, but naming the ABBAs I think indicates about how serious I think they should be taken. For me, it is good to recognize excellent work. My point for holding them was to bring about more notice and discussion around aid blogging. I think it is an important endeavor. Contests and lists allow people to engage more easily and casually.

    However, they to generally become naval-gazing and popularity contests. To that extent it is problematic. Being on the other side, I was nominated for the BOBs. I wrote a post about it, made a header for a short period and tweeted it once. The recognition is nice, I cannot deny that, but I did not want to campaign in order to garner votes. That is not why I do what I do. Things like this are great because it helps to know that I am doing something right, but the day that I actively spend more of my time trying to win a contest or make a list is when I have significantly veered away from my intended purpose.

    Finally, I think we tend to think critically in life. I know I do it more than often. It is harder to make an effort to praise good consistent work. Contests and lists are a way to do that. Alone that is not a good reason, but I am OK with them for serving that purpose and bringing in people who might not have otherwise been aware of what was listed.

    To give an example. I like reading lists at the end of the year for music and movies. One list I read had the film Winter’s Bone as the best film of 2010. It was later nominated for an Academy Award in the Best Film category, but I never would have been exposed to the film if it were not for the list. A step further is that I have watched the entire list of the AFI top 100 from start to finish. Some movies were bad and some are now my all-time favorites. It has now exposed me to actors and styles which I never actively looked for until seeing such films. As it turns out I am a sucker for 1940′s era romantic comedies (Philadelphia Story, Bringing Up Baby, It Happened One Night and so on). To that extent a list has achieved its goal.

    • http://www.goinginternational.com Bonnie Koenig

      Thanks, Tom. Very thoughtful comments and an extension of the comments you and I often exchange re: ‘contests” :-) There may be an important distinction here between contests that are done to provide guidance or recognition and take little or no effort on the part of those who are nominated (such as your ABBAs and movie lists) and those that require effort on the part of those nominated. This is one of my greatest concerns with contests/lists such as the Devex one. There was time and effort put into these ‘applications’ by NGOs who have limited time as it is. If ‘we’ as a sector are asking for their time, are there more effective ways to use that time?

  • http://aviewfromthecave.com Tom

    “There was time and effort put into these ‘applications’ by NGOs who have limited time as it is. If ‘we’ as a sector are asking for their time, are there more effective ways to use that time?”

    Agreed. They should be run independently and not require time and resources from NGOs.

    Thanks Bonnie.

  • http://talesfromethehood.wordpress.com J.

    Good points in your post, Bonnie, and some insightful discussion in the comments above mine.

    I could go on about “innovation” (it’s a pet peeve – in my world 95% of what passes for “innovation” actually isn’t) or the naval gazing and agency-specific ooh-rah that gets automatically built into contexts like the DevEx one.

    More than anything else, though, I guess where I come down on the issue of contests is that at the end of the day the winners are not being picked by those whose opinions ought to matter the most: “the poor”, “our” beneficiaries, aid recipients… Contests just seem like one more distraction, one more way in which this industry – oddly – seems bent on making itself NOT about helping those who it claims it is about helping.

  • http://www.architecturefordevelopment.com David Week

    Hi Bonnie. I agree with your point, and all of the commenters bring out additional and valid points. You might write a new post: “six reasons not host or enter contests”, to sum it all up. That would be useful.

    To these I can add this from my experience in architecture.

    1 – You have to ask: who is doing the judging? I agree in the long term that the beneficiaries might be the judge. But that’s not practical. The next best might be knowledgeable people taking a long time to decide. For instance, on the site for “Poor Economics”, the authors list organisations that they believe, through their 15 years of research, are making a difference link here. Right or wrong, this list has some substance.

    On the other hand, consider this story, about the award of one of Australia’s top art prizes, which was determined on a coin toss.

    Most awards are decided in a very short time, by not very trustworthy processes. They often deliver an untrustworthy result which has more to do with Andy Warhol’s 15 minutes, than lasting educational value.

    2 – What does the “incentive” reward? Development is a long term project, which rarely delivers short-term buzz. On the other hand, the human organism likes a short term buzz. Why do you think we have poker machines?

    Even if your forebrain understands the long term buzz, the risk of going for the short-term buzz of accolades and awards is that part of you will always be thinking about that in the background, as you work.

    For that reason, the leading management advisor for architects and engineers, Frank Stasiowski, recommends that offices ban the practice of entering projects into competitions, because even the possibility of the award shifts the workers’ minds away from the interest of the clients, and towards what wins awards.

    Already, I see several new NGOs who seem to be more intent on reporting that their CEO got invited to a meeting of the Clinton Initiative, than hard data of out impact of the field. I advise donors to stay away from such organisations in droves. Robert Townshend, former head of Avis, and author of “Up the Organisation”, said that as you progress up the corporate ladder, you will get an invitation to Hollywood to hobnob with the stars. His advice: respectfully decline.

    Good post. Please do follow up with a summary of “six reasons why not to”.

  • http://www.goinginternational.com Bonnie Koenig

    J., very important point about who is picking the winners and including the voice of beneficiaries. Thanks for raising that.

    David, thanks for sharing your examples and experiences. Okay, I’ll consider that follow-up post :-)

  • http://trackerblog.trackernews.net J.A. Ginsburg

    What I find so exhausting about the endless array of “Best of” lists (please, somebody, a “Best of Best of” list…) is, as you note, the tendency to celebrate pecking orders over substance. Rarely is there one best solution to multi-dimensional issues, so why would there be a “best” anything? Lots of “really goods,” yes. But “best”?

    No doubt, we have all been at conferences where someone gets up and tells us that the x-hundred best and brightest are in the room today. Really? Seven billion people on the planet and we’re the creme de la creme?

    A bit more humility and focus on work rather than rankings, please…

  • http://www.idealist.org Ami Dar

    Thanks Bonnie for starting this conversation. I don’t have much to add to what you and others here have said, but it’s sort of fascinating to see the power of brands over time. They said they asked “thousands of people,” and purely from a “big brand” point of view the results were entirely predictable. How and whether this correlates with “innovation” is up for debate, I think. (I would guess it correlates pretty randomly on this list.) Thanks again! – Ami

  • http://www.goinginternational.com Bonnie Koenig

    Thanks Janet and Ami. Would love to find ways to keep this conversation going and perhaps influence some of those contemplating new lists and contests…

  • http://www.communityorganizer20.com Debra Askanase

    One thing about “best of” lists is that they exclude, often unintentionally. Those who are in a sector and are not mentioned in the list are snubbed unintentionally. How does that make them feel? What does that accomplish? I love the Lodestar example that @Gayle offered earlier for just that reason.

    Another way to create lists that don’t exclude is to celebrate *real* innovation that moves the sector forward. Things such as “5 organizations that created mobile apps to solve the water crisis worldwide,” etc.

    About contests, I am jaded but do think that the purpose tends to be awareness, which isn’t all that bad for a nonprofit. The problem is that the organization isn’t usually ready to move into “contests, stage two” which is how to involve the newly interested members of the community and welcome them with opportunities.

    Bonnie – thanks for providing the opportunity for this wonderful conversation.
    @askdebra

  • Pingback: The Grand Challenge: Saving Lives through Collaboration « Engaging Internationally