Evaluation

Your proposal will be reviewed by the Editorial Team and external reviewers with past speaking experience.

Here is what they are looking for in a sessions:

• Starts from real, lived challenges or questions
• Makes the process visible, not just the polished final chart
• Offers concrete, reusable insights or tools
• Create sroom for reflection, conversation, or play

We value authenticity and practical takeaways over polish. Show us your journey, not just your destination.

Selection Criteria

We aim to have a rough consensus amongst the multiple evaluators for each proposal. The evaluation rubric below is how each of them will be looking at the proposal.

Criteria	Accept ✔️	Maybe ?	Reject ❌
Proposal Outline	The abstract is crisp and precise. The proposer has outlined the flow of their talk well. The proposer has made the effort to explain the key takeaways and the audience for their talk.	The problem statement explained in the abstract is interesting (OR) the proposer has touched upon a new and upcoming area of innovation/work, but the flow of the talk needs work.	The description is thin. The proposer has been lazy to not include too many details.
Idea Quality	The core idea is original, engaging, and captures the conference themes/spirit.	The idea has merit but lacks novelty or doesn't fully align with conference themes.	The idea is derivative, unfocused, or misaligned with conference themes.
Value of Takeaways	The takeaways are clear and relevant to the topic at hand. They are practical and innovative - something that the conference audience will benefit from.	The takeaways for the audience are not very clear, but may have potential. Some refinement is needed.	The takeaways are fairly generic or common knowledge (OR) takeaways are unclear.
Audience Alignment	The speaker is able to define the target audience along with their interests, skill levels, and needs.	The audience is broadly defined but lacks specific targeting or understanding of needs	The proposer has not identified a clear audience or has misunderstood the attendee profile.
Expertise	The speaker is knowledgeable about the content they are presenting. They demonstrate significant depth in critical areas.	The speaker is knowledgeable but lacks depth in critical areas of presentation	The speaker demonstrates authority on the topic.knowledge but lacks depth in insufficient expertise or critical areas of the presentation.