Continuous Innovation Award Rubric
This rubric has changed compared to last year
| Criteria | Weight | Score (1-100) | |||
| Bad (1–25) | Good (26–50) | Great (51-75) | Excellence (76-100) | ||
| Output | 25% | Used in internal unit | Used in more than 1 unit | Used in all Binus Group
(Internal) |
National / International
(External) |
| Implementation | 30% | Slightly implemented | Partially implemented | Mostly implemented | Fully implemented |
| User Feedback
(stakeholder/user satisfactory result) |
20% | Unsuitable measurement method(s) | There is already a way to measure the outcome, but the measurement has not yet been implemented, description without evidence | There are outcomes reported but the way they are measured is unclear. | The team report data of measured outcomes of the innovation |
| Commercial Viability/ Replicability | 15% | Has barely commercial potential, does not tackle practical aspects of production | Has little commercial potential, barely tackily practical aspects of production | Has commercial potential, addresses aspects of effective design and production, not of fast execution | Has a commercial potential, addresses aspects of effective design and production, applicable for fast execution and market penetration |
| Lesson Learned | 10% | Unclear explanation of lesson learned | Vague explanation lesson learned | Clear explanation of lesson learned | Clear explanation of lesson learned with mitigate strategies |