The Unsolicited Nomination

No affiliate links on this site, and no programme is named here as good or bad. For teams that want a concrete workplace example, accountability and responsibility in the workplace.

You cannot win something you did not enter.

That sentence resolves most of this page, and the reason it needs a page is that the approach is designed to make you not think it.

The sequence

Consistent enough to describe. A broader reference point is Gartner.

A congratulatory email. You have been nominated, or selected, or named in a list. The tone is warm and specific-sounding without being specific.

A category that flatters and is broad enough to fit almost anybody — excellence, innovation, best in a region.

Then the payment. A fee to confirm, to receive the trophy, to appear in the feature, to access the logo pack — and this is the point of the whole exercise.

And frequently an upsell. A larger package, press coverage the organiser produces, a listing.

The Better Business Bureau describes exactly this pattern, noting that such approaches typically begin with an unsolicited email and involve a fee of a couple of hundred dollars. (BBB — consumer protection organisation.)

Why it works on competent people

Because recognition is genuinely wanted and rarely offered.

Somebody running a small business, working hard and largely unnoticed, receives a message saying their work has been seen. The first response is not credulity. It is a moment of pleasure, and the scrutiny arrives afterwards, by which point the frame is already set.

It also arrives with no risk attached at first. The nomination is free; only the acceptance costs. Which means the decision to engage feels costless and the payment request comes when you are already invested in the idea.

Nobody should feel foolish for the initial reaction. The mechanism is built around it.

The questions that end it

"Who nominated me?" A legitimate programme can say. This single question resolves most cases, because the answer is either a name or an evasion.

"What did you assess, and against what criteria?"

"When was the shortlist published, and where?"

"Is any payment required at any stage?"

Ask in writing. A real programme answers all four in one reply; the other kind replies with urgency, a discount, or a new deadline.

The variants

The magazine feature. You have been selected for inclusion; the inclusion costs. Same structure, different product.

The directory listing. A "top ten" or "best of" page you can join for a fee, carrying a link.

The book. An anthology of leaders, in which your chapter is available at a price.

And the ranking, where a proprietary method has placed you and the placement can be enhanced.

All are recognition sold as though it were awarded, and the test is the same: did anybody assess anything before contacting you?

What to do

Nothing, in most cases.

Do not reply. Engagement produces more approaches, and there is nothing to gain from explaining that you have seen through it.

Do not click the links, which is standard advice about unsolicited email and applies here for the usual reasons. (BBB.)

Where you want to report it, consumer protection bodies accept reports and the value is in the record rather than any recovery.

And where you are genuinely unsure, the ten-minute check settles it without needing to reply at all.

The one that is genuine

Occasionally a real programme does approach people, and it looks different.

A trade body inviting entries to a scheme with published criteria, naming no winner and asking for no money — an invitation to apply rather than a congratulation.

A customer or a peer nominating you, where the programme then contacts you to ask whether you wish to submit an entry. Real, and it involves you writing something.

The distinguishing feature is that nothing has been decided. A genuine approach asks you to do work; the other kind asks you to pay.

Telling colleagues

Worth doing, because these approaches arrive at whoever is listed publicly.

Somebody in an organisation who does not know the pattern may accept and pay, believing they have won something for the firm.

One message to whoever handles marketing or invoices — describing the shape rather than a specific sender — prevents it, and it costs nothing.

The same applies to anybody newly self-employed, who receives these in volume and has no basis for comparison.

Why the volume increased

Because the approach is cheap to run at scale.

Business names and contact details are scraped from public directories, personalised automatically, and sent in bulk. The cost per approach is near zero and one acceptance covers thousands of failures.

Which means volume is not evidence of a wider industry — it is evidence that the mechanism is inexpensive, and it explains why the same shape appears from many apparently unrelated organisers.

A survey published in 2026 by an awards entry consultancy reported that 36% of respondents were put off entering awards at all by the proliferation of such schemes. (Boost Awards — 100 respondents with an existing interest in awards, and a company that sells entry services, which is an interest to note. The direction is consistent with other reporting.)

Which is the real damage: the approaches cost some people money and cost the legitimate programmes their audience.

The short version

• You cannot win something you did not enter, and the approach is designed to stop you thinking it
• The sequence: a warm congratulatory email, a flattering broad category, a payment to accept, then an upsell
• The BBB describes this pattern, typically beginning with unsolicited email and a fee of a couple of hundred dollars
• It works because recognition is genuinely wanted, the nomination appears costless, and the payment request arrives after you are invested
• Four questions end it: who nominated me, what was assessed, when was the shortlist published, and is any payment required
• Variants sell the same thing as a feature, a listing, a book chapter or a ranking — the test is whether anybody assessed anything first