What is awards management software

What is Awards Management Software?

Awards management software centralises everything involved in running competitions, grants, awards, and residencies. Instead of juggling email threads, shared drives, and multiple spreadsheets, you get one platform where applicants submit, judges score, and administrators manage the entire lifecycle.

The best platforms handle submissions collection, automated communications, judging workflows, payment processing, and data analysis. They eliminate manual tasks that consume days of your time.

But does the software actually reduce your workload, or does it just digitise your existing chaos? Some platforms can add complexity, often disguised as sophistication. Defining your programme’s purpose before shopping for software helps you avoid paying for features you’ll never use.

Core features that matter

Intuitive submission forms

Applicants abandon complicated forms. If your submission process requires three browser tabs and a user manual, you’re losing quality entries before they start.

Modern platforms should let you build custom forms. No coding, no waiting for technical support to make changes. Upload any file type (images, videos, PDFs, 3D models), embed cloud storage links, and preview exactly what applicants see.

Platforms should also allow candidates to access to complete their entry later, auto-save and give admin the choice to allow candidates access to editing entries after submissions close.

Flexible judging tools

Your judges are busy professionals, often doing you a favour.

Give them clunky scoring interfaces, and they’ll procrastinate. Make it delightfully easy, and they’ll finish quickly, and work with you again in the future.

Look for scoring systems that allow for criteria scoring and customisable score judging. Judges should access everything from any device without downloading files or learning new software. Anonymous judging prevents bias. Bulk assignment saves you from manually distributing 300 entries across 12 judges.

The platform should automatically chase judges with friendly reminders (so you don’t have to). Real-time dashboards show completion rates at a glance. When judges complete scoring on time, you know the interface works.

Automated communications

Writing personalised emails to hundreds of applicants manually is heavy work. Confirmation emails, deadline reminders, status updates, rejection letters, winner announcements – automate as much as you can of it (some personal communications is good too, especially when you publish results – it shows you as human).

Some platforms let you customise email templates with your branding and tone. Trigger messages based on actions (submission received, moved to shortlist, selected as winner).

Marketing your competition becomes easier when applicants receive professional, timely updates without your intervention. This builds trust and keeps stronger candidates engaged through multi-stage processes.

Payment processing

If you’re charging entry fees, payment should integrate seamlessly in the application process. Applicants shouldn’t leave your platform to complete transactions on third-party sites – that’s where you lose submissions.

Stripe integration is standard, but check the commission structure. Transparent platforms publish their transaction fees upfront – typically a small percentage per entry to cover payment processing and platform costs. What you want to avoid are hidden fees, variable rates that change without notice, or platforms holding your money before releasing it later. Fair pricing means knowing exactly what you’ll pay before launch, not discovering surprise charges afterwards.

Real-time analytics

Spreadsheets lie dormant until you update them. Dashboards show live submission counts, judge progress, completion rates, and dropout points.

Understanding where applicants abandon your form helps you fix friction immediately. If 40% drop off at your project description page, something’s wrong there. Some platforms even track the application journey to show which steps lose candidates—that insight alone can double your submission rate.

Time to Setup

Time to launch matters enormously when deadlines approach. Some platforms require weeks of onboarding calls and mandatory training before you can publish anything. Others let you launch in under an hour.

Mandatory onboarding delays often serve the platform’s operational needs, not yours. You shouldn’t pay extra for someone to build your opportunity when intuitive design lets you do it yourself. That said, optional support during setup provides valuable reassurance for first-timers without creating bottlenecks.

Stay clear of anyone who requires you to pay to make any changes to your setup – you need to be agile to improve your process. If each time you need to make an edit you need to request someone to do it for you – you’ll get frustrated very quickly.

Launch flexibility becomes critical when your internal approval process runs late. The ability to draft, review, and publish independently means external factors don’t sabotage your timeline.

Pricing models: Monthly versus mandatory annual lock-ins

Not every programme runs continuously. You might host one competition annually, or several shorter programmes throughout the year. Flexible pricing adapts to reality.

Monthly subscriptions let you pay only when actively running programmes. Annual contracts force you to commit (and pay) before proving your programme works. If your first competition dates move to next year, you’re still locked in for eleven more months. Also watch out for “price per programme”, or “price per judge” – these grow very quickly.

Transparent platforms publish pricing openly. If you need to “contact sales” for quotes, expect negotiations, hidden fees, and pressure tactics – that’s a massive waste of your time and might signify their pricing is opaque and may change at any time.

Fair platforms show exactly what you’ll pay with no surprises.

Some platforms start at around £39/month (US platforms around $48/month) provide excellent value without annual commitments. Prices scaling beyond £6,000 annually signal enterprise targeting that may not suit smaller organisations.

User experience matters

Beautiful design matters less than functional simplicity. Can your 75-year-old judge navigate the platform without calling you for help? Can applicants submit from mobile devices without frustration?

Test this yourself before committing (if a platform requires a payment before you can test it, run for the hills!). Many platforms offer free trials or demo environments. Create a test submission as if you’re an applicant. Score entries as a judge. Manage workflows as an administrator. The experience should feel intuitive at every level.

Overly complex platforms require extensive training, leading to longer setup times and higher abandonment rates. If judges need detailed instructions to score entries, your completion rates suffer.

Human support versus help centres

Things go wrong at 11pm the night before your deadline. Your applicant can’t upload files. Your judge forgot their password. Your admin needs to extend the deadline urgently.

Live chat with real humans during business hours (ideally your time zone) provides peace of mind. Comprehensive help documentation and video tutorials serve the “I’ll figure it out myself” crowd at strange times (no one wants to be awake at 2am on a Saturday fielding questions).

Smaller platforms often provide more personalised support than massive companies serving thousands of clients. You become a name, not a ticket number. Account managers who understand your programme can offer strategic advice beyond technical support.

When spreadsheets make sense

Awards management software isn’t always necessary. Under 20 submissions with straightforward judging? A shared Google Sheet probably suffices. Simple competitions with single-round judging and no fees? Basic forms can work fine.

Software becomes essential around 50+ submissions, multi-stage processes, multiple judges, entry fees, or when you value your time at more than minimum wage. The platform’s cost becomes irrelevant when it saves you 40 hours of manual work.

Data ownership and export freedom

Your submission data belongs to you and your candidates, not the platform. Candidates should be able to drop out at anytime and remove their information from your programme at any time.

Platforms should let you download complete datasets (submissions, scores, comments, applicant information) in standard formats. CSV exports, PDF submissions, everything. When your programme ends or you switch platforms, you should walk away with all your data.

Platforms that make exporting difficult or charge fees for data access are holding your information hostage. That’s a red flag signaling they know retention depends on friction, not value.

Growing without needing to switch platform

Your first programme might attract 200 submissions. Your fifth could hit 5,000. The right platform scales seamlessly without any down time.

Look for unlimited uploads, no entry caps at lower pricing tiers, and the ability to upgrade mid-programme if you exceed expectations. Success shouldn’t punish you with platform limitations.

Some platforms charge per submission. Ranges are ok, but if it’s £5 per entry your costs will explode as you grow.

Fixed subscription fees (with reasonable tier jumps) provide budget certainty.

Multi-programme management

Many organisations run several programmes annually – grants, awards, residencies, commissions. Switching between platforms or maintaining multiple subscriptions wastes time and money.

A single platform handling diverse programme types (with different submission requirements, judging processes, and workflows) simplifies operations.

One login, one invoice, one support contact.

Accessibility and inclusion considerations

Awards should celebrate diverse talent, but complicated processes create barriers. Fostering creativity requires removing unnecessary obstacles.

Mobile-friendly forms let people submit from phones without desktop access. Optional entry fees or tiered pricing allows those with limited budgets to participate.

Visual design affects engagement dramatically. Stark interfaces (like white text on black backgrounds) tire eyes during long judging sessions. Clean, accessible design helps everyone participate comfortably.

Integration capabilities

Your awards programme doesn’t exist in isolation. It needs to play nicely with your existing tools.

Cloud storage integration (Dropbox, Google Drive, Vimeo, YouTube) lets applicants share large files without upload hassles. Email service integration automates communications through your existing systems. CRM connections help track long-term relationships with applicants.

Integrations can save you further time plugging into your other services through Zapier or webhooks.

Unexpected hidden Costs

Platform subscription fees are obvious. Transaction fees appear on pricing pages. But what about the hidden costs?

• Training time for your team, judges, and applicants.
• Setup complexity that requires hiring consultants.
• Poor documentation forcing repeated support calls.
• Painful interfaces that increase processing time.
• Inflexible systems requiring manual workarounds.

These costs often exceed subscription fees. A slightly more expensive platform that genuinely reduces workload delivers better ROI than a “cheap” option that creates new problems.

Red flags overview

Certain signals indicate platforms that prioritise their needs over yours:

• Mandatory long onboarding periods before you can launch
• Opaque pricing requiring sales calls
• Complicated cancellation processes
• Hidden fees or variable rates that change without notice
• “Fair usage” policies with vague limits
• Significant feature differences between subscription tiers
• Customer reviews mentioning hidden fees or support issues
• Excessive transaction fees that significantly eat into revenue
• Limited or expensive data export options

What success looks like

Good awards management software becomes invisible. Applicants submit without friction. Judges score quickly. Administrators monitor progress effortlessly. Communications happen automatically. Results compile in minutes, not days.

You stop being a process manager and become a programme strategist. Instead of updating spreadsheets at midnight, you’re planning next year’s expansion or engaging with winning work.

Saved time translates to measurable impact. Six working days per 1,000 submissions adds up quickly. Better judge experiences increase panel participation. Smoother applicant journeys boost submission quality and quantity.

Finally

Awards management software should empower you to run better programmes with less stress. The right platform saves time, reduces errors, and creates delightful experiences for everyone involved.

Start by understanding what you actually need to manage. Not what vendors want to sell you, but what your programme requires. Map your workflow, identify pain points, then evaluate platforms against those specific needs.

Look for transparent pricing, flexible contracts, intuitive design, and genuine support. Test thoroughly before committing. And remember—the best software is the one that disappears into the background while you focus on celebrating remarkable work.

Frequently Asked Questions