Testimonials and References

No affiliate links on this site, and no competition is named here as good or bad.

A testimonial is third-party evidence, which is the strongest kind available — and most are written in a way that supplies none. For teams that want a concrete workplace example, additional reading.

What makes one usable

A named outcome. What changed for them, specifically.

A figure where they have one. A customer's own number is worth more than yours, because it is not yours. For broader context on evaluation and professional practice, see GRAMMY.

A named person and organisation, with permission — an anonymous testimonial is close to worthless to a judge who cannot weigh the source.

And brevity. Three sentences that say something beat a page that does not.

The four that score nothing

"A pleasure to work with." True, generic, unattributable to any criterion.

"Highly professional and always responsive." Every entry has this.

Anything praising character rather than outcome. A judge is scoring what happened, not who you are.

And anything you wrote for them to approve, which reads exactly as what it is — the vocabulary is yours and a judge who reads forty of these recognises the pattern.

How to ask

Early, specifically, and making it easy.

Three weeks before you need it, not two days. References are the attachment nobody has time to chase, and a rushed request produces the generic version above.

Ask a question rather than for a testimonial. "We are entering an award and the criterion asks about measurable impact. Would you be willing to say what changed at your end after we did X — even a figure or an example?"

A question is answerable. "Would you write us a testimonial" is a task, and it gets postponed and then done hurriedly.

And offer to work from their answer, which is different from writing it for them: they supply the substance, you tidy the sentence, they approve it.

Permission

Ask explicitly for the entry.

A testimonial given for a website is not automatically available for an award submission, particularly where the entry will be read by competitors on a panel.

And where a customer's data supports a claim, ask before including it — some organisations have policies about being named and all of them prefer to be asked.

Keep the permission in writing with the entry.

What to do when nobody will

It happens, for reasons that are usually about their policy rather than your work.

Public sector and large corporate customers frequently cannot supply testimonials without a process nobody has time for.

Use what is public instead: a published case study, a procurement outcome, a figure they have themselves reported.

Or describe the outcome without naming them — "a public sector client in the region" — which is weaker and is honest, and is better than nothing where the alternative is silence.

Where the programme contacts them directly

Some ask for referees rather than testimonials, and the difference matters.

A referee will be approached by the programme and asked questions you will not see.

Which means the choice is different: somebody who knows the specific work in detail, rather than the most senior person available.

Tell them it is happening, what the entry claimed, and roughly when to expect contact — a referee ambushed by an unexpected call gives a vague answer that helps nobody.

And ask permission before naming anybody as a referee, which is basic and is skipped surprisingly often.

Using them across entries

A good testimonial is reusable and dates.

One from four years ago describing work you no longer do supports nothing current, however warm it is.

Refresh them. A short note to a current customer once a year, asking the same question about what changed, keeps the file usable — and it belongs in the same folder as the figures.

Note the date on each, since a judge will want to know when it was said.

The internal version

Staff testimonials, for employer categories.

Handle carefully. Anything solicited by an employer carries an obvious pressure, and judges know it.

Anonymous survey data is stronger — a figure from a staff survey with the response rate stated is evidence in a way that three quotes chosen by management are not.

And where quotes are used, say how they were obtained, which is the difference between evidence and selection.

Where to put them

In the answer, not in an appendix.

A quote sitting alongside the claim it supports is read; one in a bundle of supporting material at the end may not be, since supporting material is frequently optional reading.

Two sentences inside the relevant section beat a page attached separately.

And where the form provides a separate testimonials field, use it for the rest and still put the strongest one where it evidences a criterion.

The one worth chasing hardest

From a customer whose own reporting carries a figure.

"Our downtime fell by 40% in the twelve months after" — stated by them, about their own operation — is the strongest single sentence available to any entry.

It requires asking somebody to look something up, which is why it is rare and why it is worth three weeks of notice rather than three days.

Ask one customer properly rather than five casually.

In one line

Ask a question about what changed, three weeks out, and the answer is the testimonial.

The short version

• A testimonial is third-party evidence, which is the strongest kind, and most are written in a way that supplies none
• Usable ones name an outcome, carry the customer's own figure, identify the person and organisation, and are short
• Four score nothing: a pleasure to work with, highly professional, anything praising character, and anything you drafted for approval
• Ask three weeks ahead, and ask a question about what changed rather than asking for a testimonial
• Get permission explicitly for the entry, since one given for a website is not automatically available for a submission
• Where nobody can supply one, use public material or describe the outcome without naming them