Creative competitions and awards hold a distinct place in the creative industry, yet they come with a paradox. On one hand, they provide recognition and rewards, but on the other, they can emphasise a sense of rivalry. These formats—labeled as “competitions” or “awards”—can feel exclusionary for some creatives, creating an atmosphere that implies only certain types of creativity can be celebrated. Balancing these dynamics requires acknowledging the value competitions bring while exploring alternative frameworks that are more inclusive and collaborative.
The Problem with Traditional Creative Competitions
From their very title, competitions imply that creativity can be judged against a set of standards—that some art deserves more recognition than others. For many creatives, this focus on applying to competitions and hoping to win in order to gain more visibility or rewards often detracts from the purpose of why they create in the first place. The competitive atmosphere can also deter artists who feel they don’t meet criteria, or are simply uninterested in pitting their work against others. Traditional competitions can risk alienating underrepresented creatives and amplify self-doubt.
However, it is important to acknowledge that competitions have their place in the creative industry. They provide clear goals, prizes, and recognition, motivating individuals to push their boundaries. Defined winners can also inspire confidence and propel careers forward, particularly for those who thrive in competitive environments.
A New Framework for Creative Competitions
In any competition, there are three primary roles:
- The organisation
- The applicants (creatives)
- The judges
Shifting away from traditional models doesn’t mean abandoning the idea of creative recognition—it means reimagining it. We can work to create a space that feels collaborative rather than competitive. With this shift, applicants may feel more encouraged to submit their work, organisations may receive a broader variety of submissions, and judges take on roles that are constructive and impactful.
Open Calls over Competitions
Organisations can shift from traditional “awards” and “competitions” to open calls, which naturally feel more inclusive in their title. Open calls can widen access, inviting a range of creative entries instead of focusing solely on selecting the “best” work. However, even open calls often have a competitive element—usually, a final selection or winner.
To bridge this gap, organisations could focus on creating non-competitive open calls that encourage participation from creatives of all backgrounds and career stages, where there is no distinct “winner”. Some examples of organisations running open calls with this approach include:
Sussex Contemporary who are running their first ever democratic open call – an automatic hang-in exhibition with one entry per person to allow the maximum number of artists and makers to be involved.
New Contemporaries select an annual cohort of artists who have access to a range of opportunities including mentoring, talks, workshops and development programmes.
UKNA have created an initiative called New Artist Collective, which prioritises collaboration where artists work together through guided commissions to create new work, learn from each others’ practices, and explore what a temporary artist collective might achieve.
Arebyte are mentoring the next generation of early-career digital artists, through their programme Hotel Generation, equipping them with the skills to propose exhibitions, meet deadlines, and promote their work effectively. This program highlights the potential of open calls to empower participants and support their career trajectories.
While these types of open calls can feel more welcoming, it’s important to acknowledge that rejection might be harder to handle. It can leave applicants feeling more isolated from the community that was chosen.
Experimenting with Language and Communication
Imagine if competitions didn’t focus on “winning” but instead highlighted terms like “collaboration” and “inclusion.” Simple language changes in competition guidelines can create an environment where applicants feel included. Here, the organisation’s role becomes about setting a tone that invites and values every applicant.
For applicants, reading non-competitive terminology in competition guidelines could ease the stress of entry and encourage a focus on creativity first over external validation. In practical terms, this might look like open calls replacing the term “winner” with “selected artist” or highlighting several contributors works instead of focusing solely on a single top artist.
However, inclusive language can sometimes introduce ambiguity around selection criteria, making transparency even more vital. For applicants, clarity in guidelines combined with positive, non-competitive language can ease anxiety, allowing them to focus on creating rather than conforming.
Transparency In Judging
Judging remains one of the most complex aspects of creative competitions. When organisations emphasise transparency on who’s judging, they help applicants understand that the selection process is based on perspective, not absolute metrics, helping to demystify the process and reduce intimidation. Organisations might consider sharing insights into the judges’ backgrounds, experiences, and motivations. This approach not only humanises the process but also reassures applicants by offering clarity on the scoring criteria and decision-making framework.
But transparency around feedback from judges requires balance. Detailed feedback, while valuable, can sometimes unintentionally harm applicants if not delivered thoughtfully. Consent becomes crucial—ensuring all parties agree on how feedback will be shared and used.
Beyond the formalities of competition, judges have an opportunity—and perhaps a responsibility—to engage with applicants whose work resonates with them. Reaching out to these individuals, even if they aren’t selected as winners, can create meaningful connections. These interactions could open doors to alternate opportunities, extending the impact of the competition well beyond its original scope.
Building Community
Creative communities thrive in supportive and collaborative environments. A well-designed open call should aim to create connections among applicants, leading to a stronger sense of belonging. This not only enhances the experience for applicants, but also benefits organisations by cultivating a loyal network of creatives who are more likely to engage with future initiatives.
Group Segmentation: Organise applicants into groups based on shared interests to encourage networking and collaboration. This could include opt-in personalised introductory emails or virtual meet-and-greet sessions, allowing participants to connect in meaningful ways.
Community Platforms: Provide a shared platform, such as Slack or Discord, where applicants can exchange ideas, give and receive peer feedback, and collaborate in a non-competitive environment.
Help and Networking Sessions: Host application help sessions with built-in chat or breakout features, enabling applicants to seek guidance while forming connections with others in the community.
Redefining Success
In traditional competitions, applicants often measure their success solely by how far they progress, with winning as the ultimate goal. But success in creative competitions doesn’t have to be about winning. Organisations can shift the narrative to highlight personal growth, community building, and constructive feedback as valuable outcomes.
Feedback Loops: Incorporating feedback within the application process can provide every applicant—not just the winners—with insights to help them grow. This approach not only enhances their experience but also gives them a compelling reason to apply again in the future.
Thoughtful Rejections: Motivating, personalised responses to applicants who weren’t selected can leave a lasting positive impression. Instead of sending cold, generic rejection emails, organisations can acknowledge the effort put into applying, frame the application itself as an achievement, and share resources or links to other opportunities aligned with their interests.
Conclusion
Creative competitions and open calls each serve a purpose, but it’s clear that the industry benefits from a more balanced approach—one that values relationships over rivalry. Organisations have a responsibility to value inclusivity and transparency within their processes, shaping opportunities that build community and empower all participants. Creatives, in turn, can embrace these platforms as spaces for connection and exploration to find fulfilment beyond winning, and judges can act as bridges—by not only evaluating work, but also nurturing potential.
Together, this shift in perspective can redefine the creative landscape—making it not just about success, but about shared growth and collective celebration.
