Each week, I share no-fluff pageant coaching that helps you win. Both on stage and off. After coaching titleholders in Miss Universe, Miss USA, Miss America, and 350+ pageant interviews, this isn’t theory. It’s what works.
Let me run a crazy idea past you - one that might help us increase the chances of choosing the most suitable, best-qualified candidate for the job of pageant queen (for whatever system we’re talking about). The person best suited for the year-long job of being a title holder.
The idea I couldn’t shake
By and large, the way pageant judging is done right now is based on a very short window - one night, or over a few days if it’s a multi-day competition. Interview, gown, swimsuit, talent… we look at those phases and crown the person who nails that snapshot in time.
What if we changed it so that instead of picking the contestant who performed best just on that night, we picked the contestant who is best qualified to perform the job over the entire year?
Score the job, not the moment
If we’re serious about choosing the best person for the year-long job of title holder, then the scoring has to reflect qualities that actually map to that job. That means looking at a contestant’s track record and capacity rather than just a single performance. Things like:
Commitment
Professionalism
Communication
Engagement on social media
Branding and marketing
Take a very specific case. You’re a director. You want your title holder to help grow your pageant business. The metric for that is simple: more people competing next year than this year.
If you crown the person who happens to walk best on the night, there’s no guarantee you’ll get someone who is A) interested in helping you grow the business or B) actually has the skill set to do it. How someone walks on stage is no measure of their capacity to help you grow your pageant business.
Think like a director
Put yourself in the shoes of a director and ask: What would they want from their ideal title holder? Yes, I know most of you reading this are contestants, and there’s a tendency in the industry to demonize directors, but let’s be honest, there are dodgy contestants too.
So, from a director’s perspective, what qualities matter?
Someone who can help grow the business
A genuine role model: responsible, shows up on time, professional
A communicator who’s relatable yet articulate, coming across as intelligent without ostracizing people
Someone who can build rapport with a wide range of people - especially the target demographic, which in this context is likely young women
If you think about that list, and then you look at the way most pageants are judged, the mapping simply isn’t there. It’s not surprising, then, that we often see systems crown a title holder who does absolutely nothing for the entire year.
More recently, there have been several high-profile cases of title holders resigning, or directors saying they fired them, depending on who you believe. Either way, it shows a mismatch between what the system or director wanted and what the title holder wanted or was prepared to do.
That’s why I believe we should be using our scoring systems to more accurately pick the best contestant for the year-long job of being a title holder.
Be transparent about what actually counts
I know this might sound like putting the power in the hands of the system or director, but think it through. We want systems and directors to be upfront about exactly who they want. The qualities they prioritize and the ones that don’t really matter as much.
Take advocacy, for example. Some systems place a very high priority on it. Others talk a good game, but if you look at their scoring, it’s actually very low. You want to know this before you commit your blood, sweat, and tears to that system. You don’t want to prepare for months, spend the money, do the work, and then realize you never had a real chance because you weren’t what they were looking for.
This happens much more often than it should: contestants prepare for an entire year, convinced it’s their dream title, only to realize they never had a chance of winning to begin with. Transparency up front helps everyone make better choices.
What changing the scoring really takes
By the way, I don’t think this is particularly hard to implement. It will take a shift in mindset, because it’s a different way of scoring, and a lot of people are just against change in general. The line is usually, “Well, the way we’ve done it in the past has always worked, so we’re going to keep doing it.” I would argue it’s not working - certainly not as well as it could.
Changing the scoring system, and being transparent about it, can go a long way to fixing that mismatch. But there’s another crucial part: you need to pick judges who are qualified, knowledgeable, and who care enough to implement such a scoring system.
Your scoring system is only as effective as the people who are applying it.
Your turn
This whole idea stuck with me because of a simple phrase I came across the other night:
Pick the person who’s going to be best for the year-long job, not just someone who looks good on the night.
So let me know your thoughts. How would you change scoring? Would you change it so that the contestant best suited for the job of being a title holder for that system is actually selected?
Tell me what you think!
Timestamps
0:00 Intro — Why “pick for the year, not the night”
0:24 The idea I couldn’t shake
1:18 Score the job, not the moment
2:42 Think like a director
4:15 Be transparent about what counts
5:37 What changing the scoring really takes
6:55 Your turn & wrap-up
I offer a limited number of private coaching sessions per month for women serious about elevating their pageant journey. Click below to book yours.
Pageantry is evolving, and you deserve coaching that’s more than surface-level. Book in if you're ready to go beyond the crown.
