What did the judging process look like to arrive at the shortlist?

31 - Oct - 2017

There were 4 key aspects to the judging process:

First, we re-thought the application form for the Enable Makeathon 2 (EM2) and it is markedly different from EM1. The core difference being that applicants were required to produce a short video explaining their ideas as well as share a short ‘pitch deck’. Applications were detailed and thoughtful and hence the quality of the pool is wonderful making our decisions much harder.

Second, the jury evaluation criteria was created after several rounds of discussions with social impact investors, philanthropic foundations and entrepreneurs and captured the best of all the knowledge gained through the Enable Makeathon ecosystem. The criteria was reflective of the stages in the competition as well as the outcomes that all stakeholders are expecting from EM2. A ‘Market Scan Report’ highlighting existing products operating in the same space, size of market/opportunity as well as the need was created and shared with the Jury to support their decision making process.

Next, and most importantly, we ensured that the initial shortlist of ideas was discussed and vetted by persons with disabilities (PwDs) who are at the bottom of the pyramid. A group of 30 PwDs looked at all the solutions and shared their feedback on the need, utility, cost and other aspects of the applicant ideas. The insights from this process were captured and fed into the next round of evaluation.

Finally, the jury came together and assessed the 30 highest scoring applicants now with the context of the insights shared by the PwDs assessing each application individually, sharing their thoughts keeping in mind partner, mentor and manufacturing ecosystems in both Bengaluru and London.

This process helped achieve a dual goal – ensuring that only the best applications moved forward, as well as to ensure that we were able to provide the best experience to each of the entrants.

Think201