Important Metrics for Accelerators During Application Selection Process

The selection process in your accelerator or incubator is how you choose which new startups, businesses, or individuals to help grow. This process involves several steps, during which business experts, evaluators, and mentors assess each applicant to see if they are a good fit for your program.

Selecting the right startups is very important. If you choose well, it helps your accelerator or incubator program and the startups succeed. The startups can use the program's help to grow faster and do better in the market. But if the choices aren't optimal, both the startups and the program might not do as well as hoped.

In this blog, I will discuss important details, or key metrics, that help improve the selection process. Some of these metrics include:

1. Time spent in each round of selection

2. Percentage of rejected vs. qualified startups

3. Time spent by startups or applicants between each round of selection action.

4. Cohort-to-cohort comparison

5. Number of people involved in the selection of applicants

6. The average score of each candidate

7. Time spent by evaluators evaluating applicants

Each metric mentioned above offers unique insights that, when properly analyzed and applied, can significantly help accelerators make better choices, improve how you pick startups or applicants, and increase your chances of success.

We will explore how each of these points can make a big difference in finding the right startups for your accelerator program.

Time spent in each round of selection

Managing time efficiently during each round of the selection process is crucial. It accelerates the process and ensures that the right startups are chosen the right way. You can better understand and refine the selection process by tracking and reporting on various time-related statistics.

When examining the time spent by startups or applicants in each round, you should consider several key metrics:

1. Mean time spent: This is the average time taken by all startups in a particular round. It gives you a general idea of how long the round takes.

2. Median time spent: This is the middle value of the time spent by all startups, which helps you understand what a typical applicant experiences without the skew of outliers.

3. Mode time spent: This is the most frequently occurring time in the dataset. It can indicate the most common experience among all applicants.

4. Average time spent: Similar to the mean, this measure provides an overall sense of how long the round takes on average.

5. Maximum time spent: Knowing the longest time taken can help you identify if there are any significant delays or bottlenecks in the process.

By monitoring these metrics, you can pinpoint inefficiencies and make informed decisions to streamline the process. For example, if the maximum time spent is significantly longer than the average, it might indicate that some applicants encounter difficulties that slow them down.

If each selection step takes too long, it can slow down the whole process, making the startups think the accelerator isn't managed well or dynamic enough. However, rushing through the process can also be problematic because it might mean not evaluating each startup thoroughly. Finding the right balance between being fast and being thorough is key.

a. Quick vs. prolonged selection rounds

Quick rounds: Fast selection rounds can be good because they keep the process energetic and show that the accelerator is efficient. This can give startups an excellent first impression, making them excited and hopeful about joining your program.

Prolonged rounds: If the rounds are too long, they might slow down the startups' momentum and enthusiasm. This could also lead to missed opportunities, as the best startups might choose to go with other programs that seem more responsive.

b. Balancing speed and thoroughness

The best way to handle the selection process is to find a good balance. This means being quick enough to keep things moving and keep the startups interested but also taking enough time to make sure each startup is evaluated correctly. Here's how you can do this:

• Set clear timelines for each phase of the selection process and stick to them.
• Use tools and technology to help speed up the process without skipping fundamental checks.
• Get feedback from participants to see if the pace feels right and adjust if needed.

Managing the length of each round makes the whole selection process work better. It's all about creating a great first impression, keeping things moving, and making sure every startup gets a fair and thorough review. This way, the program finds the right startups that are likely to succeed and benefit the most from the accelerator's offerings.

Percentage of rejected vs. qualified startups

Another key metric is the percentage of startups that get rejected compared to those that qualify for the next rounds in an accelerator's selection process. This ratio helps you as an accelerator understand how selective you are and how well you are attracting the right kind of startups, including considerations for industry-specific, industry-agnostic, or demographic-focused criteria.

Here's a deeper look into the importance of this metric and how it can be effectively managed.

1. Indicator of selectiveness: This ratio shows how tough or easy it is to get through the selection process. A high rejection rate might mean the program is very selective, targeting only startups that meet a high threshold of potential and fit. On the other hand, a lower rejection rate indicates broader acceptance criteria, which can be part of a strategy to encourage diversity or support a wider range of industries or demographics.

2. Aligning with program goals: For industry-specific or demographic-focused accelerators, this ratio can indicate how effective their outreach and selection processes are in targeting and attracting the right kinds of startups. For industry-agnostic programs, it can reflect their ability to identify potential across a diverse range of business ideas and models.

Managing the rejected vs. qualified startups ratio

1. Setting clear criteria: Clearly defining what makes a startup a good fit for the accelerator, especially whether the program leans towards specific industries or demographics, helps both applicants and evaluators better understand the expectations. This clarity helps attract the right startups and maintain a healthy balance in the rejection vs. qualification ratio.

2. Feedback loops: Providing feedback to rejected startups can help them understand why they weren't a good fit and what they could improve. This helps them in their future endeavors and maintains a positive relationship, encouraging them to reapply when they align more with the program's criteria later in the future.

3. Review and adjust: Regularly reviewing this ratio and the criteria used can help accelerators adjust their selection process as needed. If too many startups are getting rejected, particularly from targeted industries or demographics, it might be time to revisit the outreach strategies or selection criteria to ensure they are appropriately inclusive and not unnecessarily stringent.

Monitoring the percentage of rejected versus qualified startups helps you, as an accelerator, fine-tune your selection process to consistently select startups that are likely to thrive in your program. This balance is crucial for maintaining your accelerator's quality and reputation and aligning with specific industry or demographic goals, ensuring the program remains relevant and practical.

Time spent by startups or applicants between each round of selection action

The time between applicant actions during the selection process is an important part of how startups experience your accelerator. Shortening these intervals (the time between each step startups need to take) can improve applicants' feelings about your application process.

Here's a look at the significance of time between actions and how it improved applicant or startup experiences.

1. Significance of time between applicant actions: When startups apply to an accelerator, they're eager to move forward and get feedback. Long waits between submitting forms, interviews, and updates can make the process slow and frustrating. On the other hand, if these waits are short, startups think that the process is dynamic and that the accelerator is actively engaged in their application.

2. Improve the applicant experience by reducing intervals: Reducing the time between actions means startups can immediately know what's happening next. This can make the whole application process feel smoother and more efficient. It also shows that the accelerator values the startups' time and commitment to the program.

Ways you can reduce time spent on actions and optimize them for speed

1. Form submissions: Instead of waiting weeks for the next steps after submitting a form, aim to review submissions quickly and send responses or requests for additional information within a few days.

2. Interview scheduling: Use automated scheduling tools like AcceleratorApp to allow applicants to choose their interview times soon after they qualify for this stage. This reduces the back-and-forth often associated with scheduling and speeds up the process.

3. Progress updates: Regularly update applicants on their status, whether moving to the next round or needing more information. Automated emails or an applicant portal where they can check their status can make these updates immediate and less labor-intensive.

AcceleratorApp uses automated features to help you handle the actions mentioned above, schedule interviews, and update startups on their progress. Focusing on these actions and how quickly they happen can significantly improve how applicants perceive the selection process. It shows that the accelerator is efficient and cares about keeping things moving, which can be a big plus for startups looking to grow in a fast-paced environment.

Cohort-to-cohort comparison

When you run an accelerator program, comparing different groups of startups from one program cycle to another (called cohorts) is a smart way to see how your selection process and overall program improve over time. This means looking at how each group performed and what changes you might need to make for future groups.

Why do you compare cohorts?

1. Track progress: By comparing different cohorts, you can see if the changes you've made in the selection process or in the program itself are helping startups do better. For example, if the latest cohort has more successful startups or seems more satisfied with the program, you know you're on the right track.

2. Learn from trends: This comparison can also show trends, like whether certain types of startups are doing better than others or if changes in the market are affecting them. This helps you adjust your program to be more effective.

How do you compare cohorts?

1. Gather data: Collect key metrics from each cohort, such as the number of startups that succeeded, the time applicants spent in each round, the percentage of accepted to rejected, the average score, qualified startups' growth metrics, and feedback from startups.

2. Analyze changes: Look at what differed between cohorts (like your selection criteria or the resources you offered) and see how these changes might have influenced the outcomes.

3. Implement improvements: Use what you learn from these comparisons to improve your program. You may need to focus more on a specific industry, offer different kinds of support, or tweak how you select startups.

Comparing one cohort to another gives you valuable insights that help you make smarter decisions for your program. It's all about learning from the past to improve the future for the startups you will yet help.

Number of people involved in the selection of applicants

The number of people involved in selecting applicants for an accelerator program can greatly influence the process. Here’s why involving more people can be beneficial and how it impacts the selection process:

1. Diversity of opinions: Having a diverse group of evaluators involved means you get multiple perspectives on each startup. This can lead to a more balanced and fair decision-making process, as different evaluators will notice different strengths and weaknesses in each application.

2. Spotting unique opportunities: With more eyes on each application, it’s easier to spot unique ideas or promising aspects that might be overlooked by a smaller team. This can be particularly valuable in identifying startups that don’t fit the usual mold but have potential to disrupt the market.

3. Consistency in evaluation: More evaluators can help balance out individual biases and lead to a more consistent evaluation across the board. This means that the selection process is not overly influenced by one person’s opinion, making it fairer for all applicants.

4. Training and development: Including a variety of evaluators, especially new team members or interns, can be a great training opportunity. It allows less experienced team members to learn from seasoned professionals about what makes a startup a good fit for the accelerator.

5. Feedback quality: More evaluators can provide richer feedback to applicants. Whether or not a startup is selected, receiving detailed feedback from a range of perspectives can be invaluable for their development and future applications.

6. Networking and community building: Each evaluator brings their own network and expertise, which can benefit the startups, even those not selected. This network effect can help build a community around the accelerator, increasing its value and appeal.

The number of people involved in the selection process is more than just a logistical detail, it plays a crucial role in improving the quality of decisions, ensuring fairness, providing educational opportunities, and building a supportive community.

Average score of each candidate

In an accelerator program, the average score of each candidate is an important measure that helps determine which startups are ready to benefit most from what the program offers. The average score is calculated based on the ratings given by evaluators across various criteria such as the startup’s business model, market potential, team capability, innovation level, and more. This score provides a quick snapshot of how well each startup aligns with the program’s objectives and expectations.

Importance of the average score

1. Benchmarking score levels: The average score helps to compare startups against a standard benchmark. This makes it easier to identify which ones stand out for their excellence or need improvement in certain areas.

2. Objective assessment: It offers a more objective way to assess each application. Instead of relying on a single evaluator’s judgment, the average score aggregates multiple perspectives, reducing bias and leading to a fairer selection process.

3. Prioritization: Programs often have limited spots available, so the average score helps in prioritizing which startups should advance. Those with higher scores are typically seen as more promising and likely to succeed within the accelerator’s framework.

4. Identifying trends: Analyzing average scores over time can help identify trends in the types of projects or entrepreneurs that are applying, which might influence future marketing or outreach strategies.

5. Feedback for improvement: Sharing the average score with applicants can provide them with valuable feedback. They can understand where they excelled or fell short, which is crucial for their growth and future applications.

Average score on AcceleratorApp

During the selection process, each evaluator assigns scores to the startups they review. These scores are then averaged to determine the final score for each startup. This average score is used to rank the startups, helping in the decision making process to decide which ones will move on to the next round or be accepted into the program.

The average score of each candidate is a key tool in the accelerator’s selection process. It helps ensure that the process is transparent, fair, and focused on finding the best startups that are most likely to thrive with the accelerator’s support. This score not only aids in making applicant decisions but also serves as constructive feedback for all applicants, enhancing the overall quality of future applicant pools.

Time spent by evaluators evaluating applicants

Managing how much time evaluators spend looking at each application is important for ensuring an accelerator program picks the right startups quickly and fairly. Using a tool like AcceleratorApp can make this part of the process much better. Here’s how:

1. Quality evaluations: Adequate time on each application ensures evaluators can thoroughly understand what each startup offers. Structuring this time effectively means the focus remains on making well-informed decisions.

2. Efficiency: It is important to conduct thorough reviews and keep the process moving quickly. Automating routine tasks like score calculations can help evaluators spend more time on thoughtful analysis than administrative work.

3. Fairness: Ensuring each application receives consistent attention is key to a fair selection process. Standardizing the tools and guidelines for evaluators helps maintain this consistency.

How you can improve evaluation time

1. Clear evaluation guidelines: Specific questions and checklists can streamline evaluators' review processes, making them quicker and more focused.

2. Automatic number crunching: AcceleratorApp can quickly add up scores and organize feedback. This means less manual work for evaluators and faster overall process.

3. Collaborative tools: Program managers can see evaluators notes and scores right away through AcceleratorApp. This makes it quicker to agree on which startups are the best.

4. Tracking and analytics: Monitoring the length of evaluations and the outcomes achieved can help identify areas for further efficiency improvements.

Read how AcceleratorApp helped the CGIAR Accelerate for Impact Platform (A4IP) collect applications and reduce the time spent on evaluations.

By focusing on these areas, you ensure that your accelerator’s selection process is effective and positions you as a leader in fostering innovation and growth among new startups.

Need help improving your startup selection process?

Managing an accelerator, incubator, or innovation program requires precision, especially during the crucial application selection phase. This stage sets the foundation for the success of your program and the startups involved. Yet, many managers still rely on outdated tools like spreadsheets and manual workflows, which can slow down and complicate the selection process.

Transition to a more streamlined approach with AcceleratorApp, which offers custom-built software automation designed specifically for the dynamic needs of modern innovation ecosystems. Our platform improves efficiency through automation, organizes application data effectively, and ensures that the selection process is both thorough and transparent.

For example, German Accelerator has leveraged AcceleratorApp to dramatically improve their operations. They have managed the applications of over 850 startups, helping them raise over $15.6 billion globally. Features like customizable application forms, real-time integrated dashboards for tracking progress, and detailed analytics across the application and evaluation stages have made it possible to maintain a high standard of selection while expanding their reach globally.

Chat with our team to get started on a free trial by booking a demo call to see how AcceleratorApp can streamline your operations and produce impressive results similar to those of German Accelerator and over 200 other accelerators and incubators worldwide.