Page 10

v.

Comparative Distributions Attachment 3 presents the statistical results of the Submissions and Awardees. Evident here is a disappointing under-representation in Categories that one would expect high interest in, for example Agro-industrial Processing, Environment, Tourism, and Food and Beverage. On the other hand, the Panel also noted what it deems an over-representation by ICT related ideas. The 16% of Submissions that are recorded in Attachment 3 as ICT is actually understated as the Creative, and Services Categories have several submissions that could equally well have been classified as ICT. In seeking to understand the peculiarity, the Panel takes cognizance of the current popularity of the IT sector (inclusive of App development). The Panel, however, wonders whether some aspect of marketing or communication of the Competition may have inadvertently contributed to a bias towards particular potential interest groups or away from others, or alternatively a notion that innovation can only be considered in the context of ICT.

vi.

Robustness of Results Attachment 3 also provides evidence in the similarity between the two distributions in that the outcome (i.e. the list of Awardees) mirrors very well the distribution of the Submissions. This is noteworthy as each Submission was considered on its own merit, with no attempt to achieve a particular result in any Category. The results are therefore deemed to be robust. A further aspect of the robustness of the result is in the fact that each Awardee would have had the application reviewed four (4) times – the initial screening for completeness, the pre-screening, the Evaluation Panel initial evaluation, the Evaluation Panel award granting evaluation.

vii.

Multiple Awards Though multiple submissions to the Competition are allowed, multiple Awards in one year to the same individual or Company is not. A confirmatory check on this was done by the Administrative Staff at the end of the Awards phase. Where there was an instance of more than one Award to the same person or group, the Evaluation Panel was advised and deliberated on which was the submission more likely to achieve the Proof of Concept stage in order to make a decision.

10

Profile for idea2innovation

Evaluation Panel 2013 report  

The report generated by the independent Evaluation Panel for the idea2innovation 2013 competition hosted by the Council for Competitiveness...

Evaluation Panel 2013 report  

The report generated by the independent Evaluation Panel for the idea2innovation 2013 competition hosted by the Council for Competitiveness...

Advertisement