System
Type
System
Format
Two gates + flexible weighted standards
From
Recruitment + quarterly submission review (2 uses)
01 · Context
“Market-Ready” used to live in curators’ heads — which meant review couldn’t scale, feedback was inconsistent, and contributors got silence instead of direction. The rubric converts that judgment into a standard without pretending judgment can be automated away. It was deliberately less rigid than a traditional scoring sheet: a piece that isn’t the most visually dynamic can still earn representation when the process and narrative behind it are outstanding. So the architecture is two absolute gates plus a flexible grouping of weighted standards. Two things were never negotiable: mission alignment with consent to public storytelling, and salability — with reproductions the heaviest filter. Everything else flexes.
02 · The artifact
GATE 1 · MISSION & STORY
Representation requires consent to public storytelling — the contributor’s connection to the mission is part of the offering. No consent, no representation. Non-negotiable.
GATE 2 · SALABILITY
Commercially viable in at least one channel — placement, reproduction/product, licensing, or commission fit — reproduction weighted heaviest. Non-negotiable.
Use 1 · Recruitment review
Work looked at early. Not market-aligned → actionable, specific feedback, not silence, and a lengthened interval before reapplying. Promising → runs the full market-ready read.
Use 2 · Rolling submissions
Weights shift with collection and client need cycle to cycle, but the foundations — execution, reproducibility, product fit, story — are always measured. A “not yet” always ships with a “here’s what.”
PASS: both gates cleared, then Market-Ready on the criteria weighted highest that cycle.
FAIL: targeted feedback on the lowest-scoring criterion, resubmit next cycle.
↳ recreated & sanitized · weights are set at quarterly planning, not per piece · level language generalized
03 · Outcome
one standard governing recruitment evaluation and quarterly submission review
average acceptance-to-sale — the data the rubric was calibrated against
collection review rule — unsold work gets re-evaluated, not hoarded