How to Write an Award Entry That Wins – A Step by Step Guide

Every year, outstanding work goes unrecognised.

Not because it was not good enough. Not because the judges were unfair. But because the organisations behind it did not know how to translate what they had achieved into an entry that communicated its value clearly, honestly, and compellingly.

Writing an award entry is a specific skill. It is not the same as writing a case study, a proposal, or a marketing document — though it borrows from all three. It requires a particular kind of clarity about what you did, why it mattered, and what changed as a result. And it requires the confidence to tell that story directly, without underselling the work or overreaching in the claims you make about it.

This guide is for organisations entering the International Brilliance Awards for the first time. It covers every stage of the process — from choosing the right category to submitting a finished entry — and gives you the specific, practical guidance that separates entries that win from entries that do not.

Before You Write Anything — Choose the Right Category

The most common mistake first-time entrants make is not in the writing. It is in the category selection.

Entering the wrong category is the single fastest way to undermine an otherwise strong piece of work. An entry that would have won in one category may not even be shortlisted in another — not because the work is weaker, but because it is being assessed against the wrong criteria by judges looking for something different.

Before you write a single word, read the category descriptions carefully. All of them — not just the ones that seem obviously relevant. Look for the category whose description most closely matches the specific nature of your work, the specific outcomes you achieved, and the specific audience your work was designed to serve.

Ask yourself: if a judge read this category description and then read my entry, would they feel the entry belonged here? If the answer is yes, you are in the right place. If there is any doubt, keep looking.

If you are genuinely uncertain between two categories, it is worth contacting the awards team before you submit. We would rather help you find the right home for your work than see a strong entry assessed in the wrong context.

Step 1 — Understand What Judges Are Looking For

Before you write your entry, you need to understand who is reading it and what they are trying to assess.

Our judges are senior industry professionals. They have real experience in the fields they are judging. They have seen genuinely outstanding work — and they have seen work that has been dressed up to look better than it is. They know the difference.

What they are looking for, across every category, comes down to three things:

Clarity of purpose — Did you know what you were trying to achieve, and can you explain it simply and directly? Judges are not looking for ambitious-sounding objectives. They are looking for specific, honest descriptions of what the work was designed to do.

Quality of execution — Did you deliver what you set out to deliver? How did you navigate the challenges and constraints you faced? What decisions did you make and why? The judges want to understand the thinking behind the work, not just the outcome.

Evidence of impact — What actually changed as a result of what you did? Not what you hoped would change. Not what you expected would change. What actually, measurably, verifiably changed — for the organisation, for the people inside it, or for the audience it was designed to serve.

Keep these three things in mind throughout the writing process. Every section of your entry should be building the case on one or more of them.

Step 2 — Gather Your Evidence Before You Start Writing

The most common reason strong entries underperform is not poor writing. It is insufficient evidence.

Before you open the entry form, gather everything that supports what you are claiming. Quantitative data — engagement scores, retention rates, revenue figures, customer satisfaction scores, campaign reach, conversion rates. Qualitative evidence — testimonials, employee feedback, leadership quotes, media coverage. Before and after comparisons that show clearly what changed. Timelines that demonstrate the scale and complexity of what was delivered.

The more specific your evidence, the stronger your entry. “Employee engagement improved significantly” is weak. “Employee engagement increased by 24 points over 12 months, reducing attrition by 18% in a market where the industry average was rising” is strong. The difference is not just persuasive — it is the difference between an entry that feels credible and one that feels vague.

Gather more evidence than you think you need. You will not use all of it — but having it available means you can choose the most compelling data points rather than relying on whatever you can remember when you are writing under pressure.

Step 3 — Structure Your Entry Around the Story, Not the Questions

Most award entry forms are structured around a series of questions. It is tempting to answer each question in isolation — to treat the form as a questionnaire and work through it mechanically from top to bottom.

Resist that temptation.

The strongest entries read as a coherent story — one that takes the judge on a journey from the challenge or opportunity you identified, through the thinking and decisions that shaped your response, to the outcomes you achieved and the lessons you drew from them. The questions in the form are prompts, not constraints. Your job is to answer them in a way that builds that story rather than interrupting it.

Think of your entry in three acts:

Act One — The Context What was the situation before you started? What challenge were you facing, what opportunity did you identify, or what need did you set out to address? Why did it matter — to the organisation, to the people inside it, or to the audience you were serving? This section should be concise but specific. Judges need enough context to understand why the work was necessary — not a history of the organisation.

Act Two — The Work What did you actually do? What thinking shaped your approach? What decisions did you make and why? What obstacles did you face and how did you navigate them? This is the heart of your entry — the section where the quality of your thinking and execution becomes visible. Be specific. Be honest about what was difficult. Do not smooth over the complexity of what you delivered — judges respect organisations that show they understood the challenges they were working with.

Act Three — The Impact What changed as a result of what you did? Be as specific and quantitative as possible. Connect the outcomes directly to the work — show the judges the line between what you did and what happened. Include both quantitative and qualitative evidence. And if the impact extended beyond the immediate metrics — if the work changed how the organisation thinks about something, or opened up possibilities that did not exist before — say so, specifically and honestly.

Step 4 — Write Clearly and Honestly

This sounds obvious. It is not.

Award entries are frequently written in a style that obscures rather than communicates — dense with jargon, padded with superlatives, and structured in ways that make the actual work harder to see rather than easier. Judges notice this. And they respond to it by marking down.

Write as if you are explaining the work to a senior professional in your field who has no prior knowledge of your organisation. Use plain language. Avoid acronyms unless you define them. Cut every sentence that does not add information — every “world-class,” “innovative,” and “cutting-edge” that is not supported by specific evidence.

Be honest about what did not work as well as what did. Judges are professionals. They know that every project faces challenges, makes compromises, and produces results that are mixed alongside the wins. An entry that acknowledges difficulty and explains how it was navigated is significantly more credible than one that presents a journey of uninterrupted success.

And do not undersell. This is as common a mistake as overselling — and in some ways more damaging. If your work delivered outstanding results, say so clearly and directly. Do not bury your strongest evidence in the middle of a paragraph. Do not hedge claims that are fully supported by data. The judges cannot recognise work they cannot see clearly.

Step 5 — Pay Attention to the Word Count

Every category has a word count. Treat it as a discipline, not a constraint.

Entries that significantly exceed the word count signal to judges that the entrant has not done the work of editing — that they have prioritised completeness over clarity. Entries that significantly underuse the word count signal that the entrant either does not have enough to say or has not taken the process seriously enough to develop their thinking fully.

Aim to use between 90% and 100% of the available word count. If you are significantly under, it is a sign that your entry needs more specific evidence, more detailed explanation of your thinking, or a more thorough account of your outcomes. If you are significantly over, edit ruthlessly — cut the weakest evidence, tighten the language, and focus on the points that most directly support your case.

Step 6 — Use Supporting Materials Strategically

Most categories allow you to submit supporting materials alongside your written entry — data, research, campaign creative, photography, video, or other evidence of the work.

Use this opportunity carefully. Supporting materials should add evidence that the written entry cannot convey on its own — not repeat what you have already said in a different format. A campaign video that shows the work in action. A data table that presents your outcomes more clearly than prose can. Photography from an event that communicates the scale and energy of what you delivered.

Do not submit materials for the sake of it. A well-chosen single piece of supporting evidence is more effective than a large volume of loosely relevant documents. Judges have limited time. Make it easy for them to find and understand the evidence that supports your case.

Step 7 — Review Before You Submit

Before you submit your entry, review it against these questions:

• Does the entry tell a clear, coherent story from challenge to outcome?
• Is every claim supported by specific evidence?
• Have I been honest about the challenges and how I navigated them?
• Is the language clear and jargon-free?
• Have I used the word count effectively?
• Does the entry answer the category criteria directly?
• Would a senior professional in my field read this and understand immediately why the work was outstanding?

If the answer to any of these questions is no — go back and fix it before you submit. A strong entry that is submitted late is better than a weak entry submitted on time.

What Happens After You Submit

Once your entry is submitted, it enters our independent blind judging process. All identifying details — your organisation name, logo, and location — are removed before any judge reads your submission. Your entry is then assessed against the published judging criteria by a panel of senior industry professionals who have no knowledge of which organisation submitted it.

This process takes time — and it is supposed to. Rigorous judging cannot be rushed. Finalists for the 2027 International Brilliance Awards will be announced on 23 November 2026.

If you are shortlisted as a finalist, you will be invited to the Awards Ceremony on 28 January 2027 in London — a black-tie gala evening where winners are announced and recognised in front of their peers.

A Final Note

The organisations that win the International Brilliance Awards are not always the largest, the best-resourced, or the most recognisable. They are the ones that did outstanding work and took the time to explain it clearly, honestly, and specifically.

If you have done work in the past two years that you are genuinely proud of, the entry process is worth the investment. Not just because of what winning might do for your organisation — but because the process of writing the entry itself forces a clarity about what you achieved and why it mattered that has value regardless of the outcome.

The 2027 entry deadline is 5 October 2026.

→ Request your free Entry Kit: brillawards.com/request-entry-kit → View the judging criteria: brillawards.com/judging-criteria → Browse award categories: brillawards.com/awards → View entry fees: brillawards.com/fees → Enter now: brillianceawards.awardstage.com → Contact the team: info@brillawards.com

Frequently Asked Questions