Monday, 9:12 AM. Coffee in hand. You open the drive. An Excel file: “Predictions contest - FINAL v7”. Tab 3: “The Pot.” €500 announced. Comments flying everywhere. Then, an HR message: “Are we approving this?”
Welcome to the nightmare (and the reality in plenty of companies).
Good news: it’s fixable and fast. Not with a 12-page document. With a simple framework, written down, and validated internally. No legal posturing here. Just pragmatic: a method, an internal checklist, and 2 ready-to-copy rule templates (right in this article, no download needed). For a step-by-step launch walkthrough: launch your contest.
You want an internal contest that stays… internal. So you focus on one objective: zero grey areas.
Here’s the Legal Safety Triangle (sounds serious, but it’s just common sense):
If you stick to this, you’ll save time. And you’ll avoid never-ending debates (the ones that start with “yeah, but I thought that…”).
The issue isn’t the game. The issue is confusion. It happens because of wording and habits (“we’ll do what we usually do, we’ll figure it out…”).
An internal contest is a structured activity. Period.
The organizer sets the rules. Prizes are announced. Participation stays free. And you cut off any mechanism that looks like a financial contribution among colleagues (even if it’s “just for fun”).
You want HR, DPO, Legal, and IT to sign off? Then be precise with your words. And repeat the framework. (Yes, even if it feels obvious.)
Wording: what to avoid / what to use
Avoid: “bet”, “to bet”, “stake”, “odds”, “win money”.
Use instead: “internal game”, “prediction contest”, “team activity”, “leaderboard”, “prizes provided by the organizer”.
Neutral example sentence:
“Join our internal prediction contest, a friendly, free team activity with prizes provided by the organizer.”
The "Official Rules" document isn't just administrative red tape. It prevents common headaches:
It protects the organizer by defining the scope, calendar, scoring system, and prize attribution. Keep it clear. Short if your mechanics are simple; detailed if you have bonus rounds or team phases.
Obstacles rarely come from the concept itself; they come from poorly defined details. It’s always the same culprits.
Vague prizes. Misunderstood scoring. Forgotten tie-breakers. Data collected “out of habit.” Internal channels catching fire (the perfect storm).
The Method: Internal validation before the start. Not at the end. Not after the launch.
Internal validation checklist (minimal)
HR / Internal Communication / Works Council: validate the tone, inclusivity (non-fans), mechanics, the nature of the prizes, and the communication channels.
DPO: validate the data collected, participant information, retention period, and the contact for data rights.
Legal: validate the rules, the dispute/arbitration clause, and the prize distribution terms.
IT / Procurement: validate access (optional SSO), security, and the distribution/participation method.
On the IT side, the preference is often the same: centralize access. Less friction. Less support. Fewer orphan accounts when someone leaves (you get the idea).
Scorecast Business offers, as an option, SSO authentication via OAuth2 compatible with Microsoft Entra ID. More specific needs can also be considered depending on the context. In the absence of SSO, password complexity rules can be adapted to the client's requirements. By default, we apply a robust password policy (12 characters minimum, with at least one uppercase letter, one number, and one special character), adjustable according to your internal standards.
Please note: Scorecast Business does not offer multi-factor authentication (MFA). If your internal policy requires it, prioritize access via SSO to remain aligned with your authentication standards.
Scorecast SAS was founded in 2019 and is based in Paris (France). Data is hosted in France by Scaleway and OVH. Data transfers are encrypted via SSL. Certain sensitive data (such as emails) are encrypted in the database (AES 256). Backups are performed annually with a weekly rotation.
An OAuth2 SSO compatible with Microsoft Entra ID is available as an option. Data export is possible via the platform administrator. Pentests are conducted annually with the support of ACESI.
Prizes: announce them before the launch. Describe them clearly. Explain how they are awarded and delivered. Stick to symbolic, collective, and easy-to-manage rewards. No surprises. No “we’ll see later” (that’s where the debates begin).Want a charitable touch? Great. But keep the rule: the initiative is led by the organizer, with no financial contribution requested from participants.
Want a charitable touch? Great. But stick to the rule: the initiative is led by the organizer, with no financial contribution requested from participants.
Collect only what you need. Generally: first/last name + professional email.State why you are collecting it. How long you are keeping it. How to exercise one's rights. That’s it.
By default, data deletion three months after the end of the event works well. Upon request, faster deletion is possible, with a certificate of destruction.
Want to avoid the “Monday morning internal tribunal”? Then lock down these three points.
Readable standard: 3 points for exact score, 1 point for the correct winner. Simple. (And if you adjust it for a final, announce it beforehand.)
Closing at kickoff: exactly at match time. Same rule for everyone.
Merit-based tie-breaking: ties broken by the number of exact scores. And plan for the next rule if the tie persists. (Yes, it happens.)
Scenario 1: the “great idea” of a pot among colleagues.
You thought you were boosting engagement. Instead, you created a sensitive issue and a restless Monday morning. Solution: prizes funded by the organizer, free participation, period.
Scenario 2: the coffee machine revolt.
Michel won 10 points “on a cancelled match” (according to Michel). No one can find the rule. The scoring is being interpreted on the fly. Result: disputes, tension, and a loss of trust. Solution: explained scoring, edge cases covered, and rules published from the start.
Scenario 3: the DPO raises their hand (and blocks everything).
You asked for too much info “out of habit.” Participants don’t understand why. The validation process comes to a grinding halt. Solution: minimize data, explain the purpose, and set a clear retention period.
Below you will find two templates: an express version (1 page) and a full version (3–4 pages). They are designed for an internal contest with no money involved. To be adapted to your specific context. These templates do not constitute legal advice.
Are we allowed to offer prizes?
Yes, as long as the contest remains an internal activity, is free to enter, features prizes defined by the organizer, and has clear rules.
How do we avoid confusion with sports betting?
By removing all stakes, avoiding vocabulary like “bets/odds/wagers,” announcing fixed prizes, and explicitly stating that the activity is internal and free.
What data should we ask of participants?
The bare minimum needed to manage the contest (usually first/last name and professional email), with clear information on the purpose, duration, and rights.
How can we handle ties without frustration?
By providing a simple rule (number of exact scores) and describing the next steps if the tie persists.
Can we open it to external people?
It is possible, but it changes the context and significantly complicates the framework. The rules and internal validation process would need to be adapted.
What if we want a charitable dimension?
It must be led by the organizer, without asking for any financial contribution from the participants.
You want the activity to build connections, not generate HR tickets. So: the Legal Safety Triangle, an anti-drama scoring system, minimal data, clear prizes, and rules published from the start. (And internal validation before the launch, not after.)
Do you want to frame an internal contest (with no stakes) and launch it quickly?
