The Ideal Hackathon motivation

An Ideal motivation guide for hackathon managers, participants and judges.

There are lots of guides/articles (like this & this) that tell you everything related to hackathon. Usually, the motivation that drives these processes is fuzzy. I want to make that clear by telling you flaws those occur without clear motive. So, most of the hackathon stories turn out this way.

1. Organisers reach out companies/coworking spaces for venue. They promise some promotion benefits from the attendees and get a venue.
2. Organisers reach out some popular candidates from some of their connections and invite them as a Judges.
3. Participants see the reward of attractive cash prizes and participate to win the cash prize. If they don’t they get away saying — “I learnt something”
4. They call all the participants and work on for 24 to 48 hrs to build a project.
5. A Group of 5 judges will rate the projects on some parameters.
6. The average of the scores decides the best project that wins.

That is the story painted. Then, everyone disperse and never see each other again. There is nothing wrong with this painting that is being practiced because either ways all the parties are satisfied because something good is happening.

“To power the trajectory of a project is what hackathon is meant to fuel for. This is getting diluted. With enough people practicing the same story repeated;wrong precedence is set for people who look forward to host more hackathons.”

Photo by SpaceX on Unsplash

Journey

Identifying a problem is the starting point of trajectory. Trying to build a solution is the path innovator decides. Making this solution available for everyone in the world to use is the goal(which requires it turn into org).

Hackathon is the thruster powering that journey ↖

What’s flawed?

This thruster.

Photo by Meriç Dağlı on Unsplash

It is built on top of combined motive of Organiser, Participant & Judges.

• Motivation as a organiser to host the hackathon
• Motivation as a participant to build a solution
• Motivation as a Judge to give constructive feedback.

Hackathon manger’s Flaw

Hackathon managers are busy bugs. They have a lot things to take care of. It’s not because they are managers. It’s because they failed to build the right organising team and tools. So they don’t have bandwidth for focus on invisible yet most important aspects.

Hackathon is very broad term. This ideally allows all the possible industries(finance, cloud, blockchain, so on) to be invited.

• Each industry has different degrees of complexity in Business model, Technology substance, Marketing strategy.
• Usually, each of Judges can only be expert in one industry + any of two degrees of complexity. So they are not reliable on everything just because of their work title.
• This is why hackathons need themes. Having judges to specific themes paves the way for fair process of judging.
• But still blindly adding up scores across the projects is unfair. Have the debate process at the end where one Judge from each theme should back the best project. A constructive argument will give a fair winner.
• The Judging criteria comes from scope of Hackathon. For example, having “Is this project capable to having potential IPO” in a college level hackathon is very stupid without product going to the market with private investment. Take care when you build this Judging criteria.
• Number of teams participated is only indicator of good promotions not for the hackathon. Hackathon is just a thruster; it only gives teams a push and best amongst a voice of recognition.

Participant’s Flaw

Let me put this straight. You are a rocket heading to serve thousands with the solution that you’ve come up to solve a problem.

• Before cash prize or any reward, you primary goal should be improvement of project you built. So hear others thoughts even if they are stupid. They’ll say what people think about you. Find and fix what’s causing them to think that.
• Ask Judge the questions. Phrase your question to get as much feedback as possible. There’s only a thin line until it converts to argument. Once you argue, you lose the feedback. Doesn’t matter you win $10,000; if you don’t fix from what you hear.
• If you are winner of Hackathon, the organising team does over marketing of your success. In reality, you just won amongst couple of teams (20–50) participated. Real world is different.

Pitch

1. This is my team and background. This is how long We’ve been working on this.
2. This is the problem we are trying to solve.
3. This is how we build app/website/device using this particular technology.
4. Here is the data about these many people having this problem. Potentially, they may buy. Prove it with math.

Let Judges ask you questions about what is unique, why particular price, why particular market, what’s different in the algorithm, competitors, so on. You just be prepared with enough research to answer them.

Don’t make answer on spot. Be free to say it’s own assumption and you can work on it better.

Judging Flaw

You have an opportunity to do important activity of this thruster. To help rocket stay in trajectory.

• Incase you are given Judging criteria. Strictly abide by it. It is common bar for all the participants. Don’t be biased on basis of presentation or communication skills. Content they deliver is priority.
• Be candid. Ask them if they have any questions for you. Answer them if you could be of any help to them.
• Tell them you don’t know things you don’t know. Inturn ask them, you get to learn.
• Don’t try to rate every thing in the Judging criteria sheet if you understand you are not from relevant industry or expert in particular degree of complexity. Rate what you think + add comments. Feel free to discuss for help with other judges alongside you at stage of finalizing.

These are flaws to be fixed. It is important. Share it to Judges, Participants or Hackathon managers. I want you to set the right precedence for future.