Entrance Rules and Criteria for Entering the Challenge Competition:
Complete the brief registration form – which is designed to disclose your identify, your contact information and your reason/motivation for entering the contest.
Acknowledge
your acceptance of the task – the written presentation (with video
component if you wish) on the targeted topic:
1) How can the political gridlock in Washington be minimized to a threshold where the constructive political process may be continued? Or
2) Or
3)
Acknowledge
your acceptance of the deadline for submissions and the finality of
the judges’ preferences in selecting the winner.
Be responsible in presenting the ideas of others that have been expressed in published material, e.g., books, articles, blogs, speeches or other modes – by giving proper credit to the original creator of the idea. Inevitably, complex solutions to complex problems will borrow from the previous work of others. Some of these work-products may have long ago become matters of public domain. The practical goal of this stipulation is not to create a research burden on contestants, but to simply avoid the cavalier pirating of someone else’s intellectual property.
Entries should include the following elements:
The core solution-concept or idea,
A rationale that this solution-concept is viable and prospectively effective,
An implementation plan, i.e., how does the solution-concept get applied? What stakeholders or gatekeepers must buy into the proposed solution and what action must they take (or cause to be taken by others) in order for the targeted problem to be solved?
The primary or most troubling obstacles that may inhibit success of the implementation.
Selection criteria are referenced on the registration form.
To underscore the importance of our facilitating viable solutions to the gridlock problem, we want to work with the winners of the contest by recommending cosmetic and content edits, as required. Our panel of judges will be asked to make editorial comments as part of their assessment of the entries; this diversity of critiques, we believe, will result in more effective solutions that are also respectable work-products and eminently presentable to the various stakeholders and gatekeepers we wish to influence and incite to action.
We understand that “pride of authorship” sometimes inhibits a willingness to accept constructive criticism and the imposition of edit requirements. Importantly, however, our intent is to optimize the likelihood that our winning solutions will be influential. For that reason, contestants must be willing to accept the editorial changes we recommend.
Mail us at human.capital@critical-decisions.com with your questions and/or comments.
