Sales competition rules template and worked example

Write the rules before the contest opens and publish them in one place, unchanged, for the duration. Nine clauses cover it: name, dates, eligibility, metric and scoring, tie-break, guardrails, prize structure, payout timing and disputes. The blank template and a completed example are both below, along with the arithmetic for sizing the prize from incremental margin rather than from whatever was left in the budget. Every clause here exists because a real contest has been damaged by its absence — most often the tie-break, which nobody writes until two reps finish level and one of them stops trusting the programme. If you are still choosing a format, the contest ideas library covers brackets, sprints, ladders and team battles.

What each clause is protecting against

Blank template

COMPETITION RULES

1. NAME
   [Contest name]

2. DATES
   Opens:  [date], [time], [time zone]
   Closes: [date], [time], [time zone]
   Scoring cut-off: activity must be recorded in [CRM] by [time] on [date].
   Standings freeze at cut-off; late records do not score.

3. ELIGIBILITY
   Included: [roles / teams / named reps]
   Excluded: [roles, e.g. managers, SDR leads]
   Joiners: reps starting after [date] compete on [pro-rated target / the
     improvement board / not at all].
   Leave: reps absent [n] or more working days have their target reduced
     pro rata by [rule].
   Leavers: reps who exit before close forfeit placement; the position is
     not reallocated.

4. METRIC AND SCORING
   Scored events:
     [Activity 1] — [n] points
     [Activity 2] — [n] points
     [Activity 3] — [n] points
   Source of truth: [CRM object / field]. Nothing scores from spreadsheets,
     screenshots or self-report.
   Ranking formula: [absolute points / % to individual target / improvement
     vs own trailing baseline].

5. TIE-BREAK
   Applied in this order:
     1. [First tie-breaker, e.g. higher count of the constraint metric]
     2. [Second tie-breaker, e.g. earlier timestamp of the qualifying event]
     3. [Third, e.g. prize split equally between tied reps]

6. GUARDRAILS
     [Metric 1]: [rule]. Breach consequence: [points voided / removal].
     [Metric 2]: [rule]. Breach consequence: [...]
   Records edited after the fact to increase a score are voided in full.
   Deliberate manipulation removes the rep from the contest.

7. PRIZE STRUCTURE
     1st: [prize]
     2nd: [prize]
     3rd: [prize]
     [Non-absolute award, e.g. most improved vs own baseline]: [prize]
   Prize budget derived from [incremental margin calculation].

8. PAYOUT TIMING
   Activity-based prizes: paid by [date], within [n] working days of close.
   Revenue-based prizes: paid after the [n]-day validation window closes on
     [date]. Deals cancelled or refunded inside that window are deducted.
   Method: [payroll / voucher / non-cash].

9. DISPUTES
   Raise with [named person] within [n] hours of standings being published.
   Evidence standard: the [CRM] record at cut-off. Screenshots do not
     override the record.
   Decisions are final and published to the whole team with the reasoning.
   Standings are not amended after [date].

Completed example

A three-week demo sprint for a ten-rep outbound team.

COMPETITION RULES

1. NAME
   The Fifteen — three-week demo sprint

2. DATES
   Opens:  Monday 3 August 2026, 09:00 BST
   Closes: Friday 21 August 2026, 17:00 BST
   Scoring cut-off: activity must be recorded in HubSpot by 17:00 BST on
   Friday 21 August. Standings freeze at cut-off; late records do not score.

3. ELIGIBILITY
   Included: all ten AEs on the SMB team.
   Excluded: the sales manager and the two SDRs.
   Joiners: one AE starts 10 August and competes on a two-week pro-rated
     target (two thirds of the standard target).
   Leave: any rep absent 3 or more working days has their target reduced by
     one fifteenth per day absent.
   Leavers: forfeit placement; the position is not reallocated.

4. METRIC AND SCORING
   Scored events:
     Meeting booked        — 10 points
     Meeting held          — 23 points
     Closed won            — 125 points
   Source of truth: HubSpot Meetings and Deals objects. Nothing scores from
     spreadsheets, screenshots or self-report.
   Ranking formula: percentage to individual three-week target.

5. TIE-BREAK
     1. Higher count of meetings held (the constraint metric).
     2. Earlier timestamp of the rep's final qualifying meeting.
     3. Prize split equally between tied reps.

6. GUARDRAILS
     Meeting booked: scores only when the invite has an external attendee
       and a scheduled duration of 20 minutes or more. Booking and holding
       the same meeting scores both lines once, never twice.
     Meeting held: no-shows score zero. A reschedule scores once, on the
       date it is held. Internal-only attendees void the record.
     Closed won: deals under £1,500 score at half weight.
   Records edited after the fact to increase a score are voided in full.
   Deliberate manipulation removes the rep from the contest.

7. PRIZE STRUCTURE
     1st: £900
     2nd: £550
     3rd: £300
     Most improved vs own trailing 3-month baseline: £250
   Total budget £2,000, derived below.

8. PAYOUT TIMING
   Activity-based prizes (1st to 3rd, most improved): paid with August
     payroll, within 5 working days of close.
   Revenue-based component: none in this contest.
   Method: payroll, taxable as normal.

9. DISPUTES
   Raise with the sales manager within 72 hours of standings being
     published on Friday 21 August.
   Evidence standard: the HubSpot record as at 17:00 BST on 21 August.
     Screenshots do not override the record.
   Decisions are final and published to the whole team with the reasoning.
   Standings are not amended after Wednesday 26 August.

Sizing the prize from incremental margin

Prize budgets set by feel are either too small to change behaviour or large enough to make the programme indefensible. Derive the number instead.

The example team runs a baseline of 45 meetings held per week across ten reps. The contest targets a 20% lift for three weeks:

• Incremental meetings: 45 × 0.20 × 3 weeks = 27 meetings
• Average deal £6,000 at 70% gross margin = £4,200 margin per win
• Meeting-held to win conversion of 10% makes one meeting worth £4,200 × 0.10 = £420
• Incremental gross margin: 27 × £420 = £11,340
• Prize budget at 15–20% of incremental margin: £1,700 to £2,270 — round to £2,000

Fifteen to twenty per cent is a rule of thumb, not a law, but it holds up in two directions: it is large enough that the contest visibly costs something, and small enough that the programme still returns roughly five times its prize spend if the lift lands. Sales Gamification sizes the prize split this way automatically during Blueprint's first-competition pass, using the margin figures read from your own pipeline.

On the split itself: never winner-takes-all. Three absolute positions plus one non-absolute award is the minimum that keeps a ten-rep team engaged, because by day four the reps who cannot reach the podium need something still live. The most-improved award does that work at 12.5% of the budget. For larger teams, add positions rather than increasing the top prize — the marginal engagement per pound is far higher at fourth place than at first.

Publishing the rules

Post the full document once, pin it, and link every subsequent message back to it. Do not summarise it in the kickoff post and leave the detail elsewhere; the summary becomes the version people argue from. The announcement copy template covers the kickoff, mid-point and results messages that sit on top of this document.

Two operational notes. Freeze the rules at open — a mid-contest change, even one that corrects a genuine mistake, costs more credibility than the mistake did, so correct it in the next contest and say why. And run the standings publicly throughout via live competition boards rather than a weekly email, so the rules are being demonstrated continuously instead of asserted at the end. Setting up the whole thing, including CRM mapping and guardrails, takes about four minutes — start a 14-day trial with no card required, and see the flat per-team pricing.

FAQ

What should a sales contest tie-break rule be?

Rank at least two tie-breakers before a third fallback. The strongest first tie-breaker is a higher count of the contest's constraint metric — the stage the contest was designed to move — because it resolves the tie on the thing that mattered. A timestamp of the final qualifying event works well as a second. Splitting the prize equally is a reasonable third, but should not be the first rule.

How large should a sales contest prize be?

Between 15% and 20% of the incremental gross margin the contest is designed to produce. Calculate the expected lift in the target activity, multiply by that activity's margin value, and take a fifth. For a contest targeting 27 extra meetings each worth £420 of margin, that is £11,340 of incremental margin and a prize budget of roughly £2,000, split across at least four positions.

Can competition rules be changed mid-contest?

No. A mid-contest change costs more trust than the error it corrects, because reps who have already adjusted their behaviour to the published rules experience the change as the goalposts moving. Log the problem, run the contest to its stated close, and fix the rule in the next one with a stated reason. The only exception is a scoring outage, which pauses the contest rather than amending it.

Who should be eligible for a sales competition?

Everyone whose activity the scored metrics actually measure, and nobody else. Managers and enablement staff are normally excluded because they can influence routing. Reps who join mid-contest should compete on a pro-rated target rather than being excluded — exclusion in week one is how a new starter learns the programme is not for them. State the pro-rating rule in the document, not case by case.

When should contest prizes be paid?

Activity-based prizes within five working days of close, which is fast enough that the payout is still connected to the effort. Prizes based on closed revenue should wait for the validation window — commonly 30 to 60 days — so that a cancelled or refunded deal does not leave the wrong person paid. State both dates in the rules so nobody has to chase.