There is so much that goes into creating a compelling award submission packet. And so much I want to say about that (I'll get there eventually.) But I figured it might be best to first share my process in a nutshell and then dig a little deeper into some of the methods I employ to create a a compelling submission packet.
What do I do when I realize I have to write an award submission?
First, I review the website for submission guidelines early and often.
Then, I learn/summarize just enough about the project to determine:
- The size and complexity of the project itself,
- The impact of the project on the business, &
- Who owns the project and who are the subject matter experts.
This helps me to estimate
- The likelihood of it winning an award, &
- The approach I need to take...
... to get the information I need to write a compelling submission.
That's the process in a nutshell. Note nary a mention of any writing. Yet.
Why don't I just start writing?
Remember that old adage, measure twice & cut once? Well it's not just for wood working; it also applies to word working. Depending on the situation, these submissions can take a lot of time. In my experience, changing my approach to a submission part way through has a deleterious effect on the quality of the final product. So, I instead delay putting digit to keyboard until I have all of the high-level (and some of the small) details of the project. Because this helps me to determine my approach to writing the submission. And I don't approach these the same way every time.
If I don't start writing, then what do I do first?
I ask the single most important question.
Who owns this project? Is it me? Or does it belong to someone else? Not sure? Then I ask myself this question: Who do folks come to when they need to know something about the project? If it's just me, then it's mine. If it's not, then it belongs to someone others (as well as myself sometimes.) This might sound rather obvious, but it serves as a self-check. In the past, I might have made some assumptions about how much I knew about a project, only to learn that I really needed information held by someone else. Making the wrong call about this can throw a wrench into my timeline or, worse, force me to leave out an important feature of the product.
It also determines my approach to writing the submission. Because if I own the project, I need only reflect upon the experience, outcomes, and how I want to present a summary of all that wonderful stuff. But if it belongs to someone else, I need to do research about the project and then reflect on what was done. And by research I mean interview or survey some/all the people who were responsible for important aspects of the project, including the end users/recipients. More than 75% of my submissions have been about projects that belong to someone else.
This may seem complicated, but it need not be. And for me, it's a crucial first step. I do not feel comfortable turning in a submission about a project I only know a little bit about. It doesn't matter to me if the submission is 500 words, or two pages. This kind of writing is a lot like the process of distillation -- in order to create a condensation of your project with clarity and universal solvency like distilled water, you need to start with a vast soup of information. The bigger the soup of information, the better your condensation, er, I mean, submission. But this takes time and energy, so it's important for me to plan my approach according to the size and complexity of the project. In my experience, it is more difficult (and artful) to write a little about a lot than it is to write a lot about a lot. (Or alot.)
So I know just enough about the project. Now what?
I assess it for its award-worthiness. And I don't mean the worthiness of the project. I mean the likelihood that a panel of expert judges will come to the conclusion that your project is an example of industry best practice. I think it makes sense to be realistic about whether this before I start writing. I do not spend time on submissions for projects that I do not think will win.
So how exactly do I determine this? I rate the project using my award-worthy quiz. Feel free to use it. It is a series of ten questions (plus one bonus question) that I ask myself and others about the project before I begin writing. Each question addresses an element of the project that I feel plays an important role in creating a compelling story of industry best practice. Then I rate each question on a scale of 1 to 10.
For example, one of the elements I rate has to do the project's return on investment (ROI.) This is its "bang for the buck." How much time/resources were saved or benefits gleaned from taking on this project and did the amount of time and resources spent on its creation make it worth our while? All of these elements are important, but I (and the judges I have spoken with) put a lot of weight on this one element in particular. I will talk more about my quiz in another blog post.
I know I have a winner here. What now?
This is when the bulk of the research and writing begins. I start to tackle this in Part 3.