Each year, the International Collegiate Business Skills Championships brings together students who are ready to test themselves beyond the classroom, but this year’s competition carried a different kind of energy. Across every event, from rapid-response challenges to fully developed strategic presentations, competitors raised the level of performance and set a new standard for what these Championships can represent.
“This was one of the strongest years we’ve seen across all competitions,” said Wesley Lopez, Director of Competitions. “What stood out wasn’t just the level of talent, but the consistency. Students showed up prepared, adapted to each format, and delivered in ways that reflect real-world expectations. That’s exactly what these Championships are designed to do.”
From the opening rounds of the Business Knowledge Bowl to the final presentations in the Case Study Competition, that standard held. What followed was not just a series of results, but a full demonstration of how knowledge, communication, analysis, and execution come together when students are given the opportunity to perform.
The Business Knowledge Bowl opened the Championships with a format that leaves no room for hesitation. Competitors begin with a qualifying exam designed to identify the top individual performers from each institution, effectively determining each school’s representative champion. From there, those champions are seeded into a bracket-style competition, advancing through elimination rounds that steadily raise the stakes until only the strongest remain. By the time the finals arrive, what’s left is not just knowledge, but composure, speed, and the ability to execute under pressure.
In the Invitational Division, that pressure produced a tight and competitive field. Austin Gartzman of Stephen F. Austin State University emerged in first place, navigating each round with consistency and control. Close behind, Jacque Galligan and Shelby Sams of New England Institute of Technology secured second and third, respectively, both demonstrating the same level of command that kept the bracket competitive from start to finish.
The Undergraduate Division followed with a similarly disciplined group of competitors. Gil Rathman of Commonwealth University of Pennsylvania claimed first place through a steady, confident performance across rounds. Xavier Blodgett of Georgia Southwestern State University earned second, while Samuel Bean of Tennessee Tech secured third, rounding out a group that combined strong preparation with the ability to respond in the moment.
At the Open Division level, where experience and expectations both run higher, the margin for error narrowed even further. Jules Johannemann of Florida State University captured first place with a performance that held up through every stage of the bracket. Drew Elfers of Ohio Northern University finished second, and Diego Leaver of New England Institute of Technology earned third, closing out a final round that reflected just how competitive the field had become.
That demand for precision did not disappear as the competition progressed. It simply changed form. What began as rapid recall and instant decision-making evolved into a test of how well competitors could organize their thinking and deliver it with clarity under the same pressure.
The Extemporaneous Speech Competition is one of the most demanding individual events in the Championships because it strips preparation down to its essentials. Competitors are given a prompt and a limited window of time to organize their thoughts before delivering a structured response. There are no notes to lean on beyond what they can quickly develop, and no opportunity to revise once they begin. Success in this setting requires more than knowledge. It demands clarity of thought, the ability to build a logical argument on the fly, and the confidence to deliver it with presence and control. The strongest speakers are not just answering a question. They are shaping a message in real time and making it land.
In the Invitational Division, that level of performance was on full display. Shelby Sams and Leah E. Huxhold of New England Institute of Technology shared first place honors, reflecting just how strong the top tier of speakers proved to be. Joey Nassar of the NEIT Early College Program earned second place with a composed and thoughtful delivery, while Stephanie Encarnacion of New England Institute of Technology secured third, rounding out a group that consistently demonstrated confidence and command under pressure.
The Undergraduate Division brought a different mix of styles but the same level of intensity. Jaydan Fabe of New England Institute of Technology earned first place through a clear, well-structured approach that held together from start to finish. Dylan Santa Cruz of Spring Hill College followed in second with a strong, composed performance, while Helena Easey of Stephen F. Austin State University placed third, showing the ability to organize ideas quickly and communicate them effectively in the moment.
At the Open Division level, the competition reflected a higher level of polish and experience. Hailey Long of Clayton State University earned first place with a confident and controlled delivery that stood out across rounds. Jules Johannemann of Florida State University secured second place, continuing a strong overall showing across the Championships, while Benjamin Newbury of New England Institute of Technology placed third. Each of these competitors demonstrated the ability to think clearly, speak with purpose, and deliver when there was little time to prepare and no room to hesitate.
From there, the Championships shifted from individual performance to collaborative execution. The focus moved away from immediate response and toward structured thinking, where teams were given the space to analyze, build, and refine their approach before presenting a solution.
The Written Case Competition slows the pace of the Championships, but raises the level of expectation in a different way. Teams are given a complex business scenario and asked to work through it methodically, identifying key issues, evaluating options, and developing recommendations that are both thoughtful and actionable. This is where structure matters. It is not enough to have a good idea. Teams must organize their thinking, support their conclusions, and present a solution that can realistically be implemented. The strongest submissions reflect discipline, clarity, and a clear understanding of how analysis translates into execution.
In the Invitational Division, New England Institute of Technology earned first place with a submission from Leah E. Huxhold, Shelby Sams, Jacque Galligan, and Brandon M. Silva that demonstrated both depth and precision. The NEIT Early College Program team of Benjamin Saccoccio, Joey Nassar, Davis Collette, and Michael Silva secured second place with a well-developed and structured approach, while Stephen F. Austin State University’s Austin Gartzman and Will Phelps earned third, delivering a focused and effective solution that held up across evaluation criteria.
The Undergraduate Division featured a strong field of teams that balanced analytical rigor with practical application. Tennessee Tech claimed first place with Aidan Spires, Carson Hall, and Jamie Pierce, presenting a solution grounded in clear reasoning and execution. Spring Hill College followed in second with Michal Goral, Alex Clifton, and Kamonte Westbrook, whose work reflected consistency and attention to detail. Georgia Southwestern State University’s Demarion Williams, Briggith Machuca, and Petrona Valencia secured third place, rounding out a group that demonstrated a strong command of the case and the ability to translate insight into action.
At the Open Division level, the expectations shifted toward a higher level of polish and complexity. Marshall University earned first place with Chris Hermann, Brandon Kelley, Clare Walker, Michael Borsuk, and Eli Howard, delivering a comprehensive and well-supported recommendation. New England Institute of Technology placed second with Tyler Beaulieu, Kellen Masters, Diego Leaver, and Trevor Green, presenting a structured and effective approach to the problem. Florida State University secured third place with Curtis Austin, Brooke Abbott, and Jules Johannemann, whose submission reflected a clear understanding of both the challenge and the path forward.
That work, however, is only part of the equation. Strong analysis must ultimately be matched by the ability to communicate and defend it. The final stage of the case competition brings those two elements together in real time.
The Collegiate Case Study Competition brings everything into the open. Unlike the written portion, where teams have time to refine their thinking, the presentation round requires them to stand behind their recommendations in real time. Teams must clearly communicate their analysis, justify their decisions, and respond to questions that test both the strength of their ideas and their ability to adapt under pressure. It is not just about having the right answer. It is about delivering it with clarity, confidence, and control when it matters most.
In the Invitational Division, New England Institute of Technology earned first place with a composed and confident presentation from Leah E. Huxhold, Shelby Sams, Jacque Galligan, Ashley England, and Stephanie Encarnacion. Their ability to communicate clearly and respond effectively to questions set them apart. The NEIT Early College Program team of Benjamin Saccoccio, Joey Nassar, Davis Collette, and Abraham Oshinkanlu secured second place with a strong and well-organized delivery, while Stephen F. Austin State University’s Austin Gartzman and Will Phelps earned third, presenting a focused and credible defense of their recommendations.
The Undergraduate Division showcased teams that balanced strong analysis with effective communication. Ohio Northern University claimed first place with Aubrey Hattery, Emma Key, Brennon Ryan, Sterling Segal, and Alexa Lane, delivering a presentation that was both structured and responsive under questioning. Metro State University followed in second with Emily Gangl, Mubashir Diriye, Renzo Paredes Benites, and Justin Shukuru, demonstrating clarity and cohesion throughout. East Carolina University secured third place with Tristan Chitwood, Logan Holtz, Addison Carman, and Carter Ward, rounding out a competitive field with a confident and well-supported presentation.
At the Open Division level, the competition reflected a higher level of expectation and execution. Florida State University earned first place with Curtis Austin, Brooke Abbott, and Jules Johannemann, delivering a presentation that combined strong analysis with confident, controlled delivery. Ohio Northern University placed second with Olivia Bacon, Grant Israel, Emersyn Gerken, Drew Elfers, and Kevin Vonderwell, presenting a well-organized and responsive case. Stephen F. Austin State University earned third place with Lydia Sattler and Zala Ule, demonstrating the ability to communicate effectively and defend their recommendations in a demanding, real-time setting.
What these competitions reveal on their own is impressive. What they reveal together is something more complete. The ability to move from rapid recall to structured communication, from written analysis to live defense, is what ultimately defines performance across the Championships. That full body of work is what the Overall Team standings are designed to recognize, capturing not a single moment, but the consistency it takes to perform across every stage.
The Overall Team competition reflects sustained excellence across all events, rewarding teams that can adapt, collaborate, and deliver regardless of format. In the Invitational Division, New England Institute of Technology secured first place behind the collective efforts of Abigail Marino, Ashley England, Jacque Galligan, Leah E. Huxhold, Shelby Sams, and Stephanie Encarnacion, a group that consistently set the tone across competitions. The NEIT Early College Program team of Abraham Oshinkanlu, Benjamin Saccoccio, Davis Collette, and Joey Nassar earned second place through steady, well-rounded performance, while Stephen F. Austin State University’s Austin Gartzman and Will Phelps secured third, demonstrating strength across multiple events.
In the Undergraduate Division, Spring Hill College earned first place with Michal Goral, Alex Clifton, Dylan Santa Cruz, Ellie King, and Kamonte Westbrook, a team that maintained a high level of performance from start to finish. Stephen F. Austin State University followed in second with Helena Easey, Evelyn Maure, and Issac Velasco, delivering consistent results across disciplines, while Harding University placed third with George Garner, Chris Beller, Kaeden Cory, and Timothy Henry, rounding out a competitive division defined by depth and balance.
At the Open Division level, where expectations are highest and the field is most competitive, Florida State University claimed first place with Jules Johannemann, Brooke Abbott, and Curtis Austin, combining strong individual performances with cohesive team execution. New England Institute of Technology secured second with Lucas Sutton, Diego Leaver, Kellen Masters, Tyler Beaulieu, Jacob Kalif, Mike Huxhold, and Benjamin Newbury, demonstrating both depth and resilience across events. Clayton State University earned third place with Hailey Long, Yulianny Matias Medina, and Dania Flores Rivera, closing out a division where consistency across every stage proved to be the difference.
And while team performance tells the story of collaboration and consistency, the Championships also create space for individuals to separate themselves within that broader effort. Across events that demand different skills and different forms of execution, a small group of competitors distinguished themselves by delivering at a high level again and again. The Overall Individual standings capture that distinction, recognizing those who did not just contribute to team success, but consistently stood out within it.
In the Invitational Division, Jacque Galligan of New England Institute of Technology earned first place through a series of strong performances that carried across multiple events. Davis Collette of the NEIT Early College Program secured second, demonstrating a steady and reliable presence throughout the competition, while Austin Gartzman of Stephen F. Austin State University earned third, adding another layer of achievement to an already impressive showing across events.
The Undergraduate Division reflected a similar level of individual consistency. Michal Goral of Spring Hill College claimed first place by maintaining a high standard of performance across disciplines, contributing to both individual and team success. Xavier Blodgett of Georgia Southwestern State University earned second with a composed and effective showing throughout the Championships, while Helena Easey of Stephen F. Austin State University secured third, demonstrating the ability to perform under pressure in key moments.
At the Open Division level, where the margin for separation is often the smallest, Jules Johannemann of Florida State University earned first place through a complete and consistent performance across events. Lucas Sutton of New England Institute of Technology followed in second, delivering a strong and steady showing that held up across formats, while Hailey Long of Clayton State University earned third, reinforcing her impact across both individual and team competitions. These competitors did more than stand out once. They did it repeatedly, across the full scope of the Championships, which is ultimately what defines individual excellence at this level.
Taken together, the performances across every competition tell a clear story. This was not a year defined by a single standout moment, but by a sustained level of excellence that carried from start to finish. Across divisions, disciplines, and formats, competitors consistently delivered, raising expectations and setting a new benchmark for what these Championships can be.
“These competitions give students a chance to apply what they’ve learned in ways that truly matter,” said SAM President Hank Johnson. “What we saw this year was more than strong performance. It was real-world application, problem solving, and communication at a high level. That’s what prepares students for what comes next, and it’s why this experience is so valuable.”
With that foundation in place, this year will stand as one for the record books. It showcased not only the depth of talent within the field, but the impact these competitions can have when students are challenged to perform at their best. And if this year is any indication, the expectations for what comes next have already been raised, setting the stage for an even larger and more competitive Championships in the year ahead.