Awards are supposed to recognise the best of the best, but too often the process is let down by a lack of transparency around judging and criteria that’s as clear a muddy puddle. If the questions are so wishy-washy they’d fit on a bumper sticker, it’s more a popularity contest, not an award that recognises achievement and growth.
Not having clear criteria is creating a credibility crisis and the reason why many don’t enter or bag the whole awards space. Poorly designed criteria and clueless judges turn awards into a playground for bias and inconsistency. A Harvard Business Review study found over 60% of awards they looked at had at least one question with no proper criteria, just a vague overall impression. That’s not judging; that’s guesswork.
I’ve written over 2,500 award submissions across just about every industry you can think of, property, wellness, tech, education, disability, you name it. I’ve seen every trick in the book: from look how many likes our campaign got to here’s a photo of our CEO hugging a puppy. The best awards, the ones that mean something, reward facts over fluff, substance over spin.
There’s a few things that separates the good from the garbage, the recognition from vanity.
Clear criteria.
If you think criteria is there to make your life harder, it’s not. Clear criteria is the difference between a fair fight and a free-for-all.
Shows what good looks like
Criteria force you to ask: what are we actually rewarding here? Growth? Impact? Innovation? How do we measure that? Without that clarity, judges just make it up as they go, and you’re comparing apples with oranges and the occasional banana and maybe a cumquat. A global awards report from 2022 said the best awards all had one thing in common: clear, evidence-based criteria that matched the award’s purpose. That way, judges can’t fudge the outcome, even if they wanted to. This’s why good quality questions are vital to pull the gold out. A good question is about getting the right answer. Too many awards go for the easy stuff, the crowd-pleasers. Good questions dig deep. They force entrants to think critically and back up every claim. They separate the doers from the talkers. They make it impossible to fake your way to the top spot.
A good question is specific; not ‘Tell us about your impact on the community,’ more like ‘Provide measurable examples of how your project delivered positive social, economic, or environmental outcomes. Include numbers, metrics, or case studies. A good question is evidence-based. If a question doesn’t ask for proof, data, testimonials, hard facts, then it isn’t about substance.
Lose the hyperbole
Slick videos and sob stories that tug on the heartstrings. That’s not what a business award is meant to be about. Great criteria cuts through the noise and gets to the guts of submission – the proof, facts and insights.
Equal judging field – overcome unconscious bias
Five judges with no criteria sit on a lily pad. One loves innovation, another loves community impact, one is about the bottom line, the fourth isn’t sure how they got roped into this and the fifth has been in business for six micro seconds and still working it out themselves. Good luck getting a fair outcome. Solid criteria gets everyone on the same page so no one’s left wondering what the hell they’re supposed to be looking for.
Outcomes vs sob stories
Judges are human. They love a good story. A strong story can make an entry come alive, showing the journey, struggles, and wins. But it’s got to be backed up by proof. The best awards bring storytelling and data together. The ‘why’ that makes you care, and the ‘what’ that proves it’s not just hype.
Awards that ask for stories but don’t demand evidence are giving trophies to the best spin doctors, not the best doers. I’ve written thousands of entries and the ones that hit the mark nail the story and the stats. This’s why those emotional questions kill the credibility of an award. When awards ask ‘tell us your story’ without requiring proof, it’stoo easy to give the trophy to the best tearjerker. That’s not just unfair, it makes the award worthless because it’s not about proof, it’s about heartstrings.
You want to add ‘judge’ to your resume
If you get tapped on the shoulder to judge an award, know you aren’t getting paid and it will be hard work. Clear criteria makes your job easy so you aren’t wading through waffle and story tangents. See if you tick the list of qualities that make a good judge:
Even with the best criteria, it’s the judges who call the shots. A good judge gets to know the award. They’ve read the guidelines, get the purpose and understand the criteria. According to the Australian Institute of Awards Professionals (AIAP), judges who attend pre-briefings score 25% more consistently than the ones who just wing it.
Good judges stick to the criteria: No frothing over a video or a celebrity endorsement or caught up in the emotional story. They weigh every entry against the same yardstick.
Good judges are objective but not robots. They balance gut feel with facts. They love a great story, but always ask: “Show me the proof.” The AIAP says judges using a mix of objective and subjective scoring get 35% fewer complaints about bias.
Good judges are curious, open-minded and honour the commitment. This means no speed-reading submissions with a glass of red in hand to win a free ticket to the event. Good judges take their time, click the links, look at the support documents and watch the video.
Good judges acknowledge they’ve unconscious bias. We all have them, favouring familiar faces or industries, but good judges know this and keep it in check.
One of the most important roles clearly articulated criteria plays is eliminating unconscious bias. Bias is the unwanted plus-one at every judging panel. Even with great criteria and great judges, it creeps in. If you want your award to be a fair process for ALL entries, you need to have diverse panels: different backgrounds, different perspectives.
A 2024 Judging Fairness Institute study showed that panels who did a calibration session first were 40% more consistent than those who didn’t. This is spending time training your judges, educating them on the criteria and the purpose of the awards. Real training is more than a 10-minute briefing about logistics.
Judges need to understand the criteria, know what the award is all about, and agree on what excellence looks like. Have training on what a 10 looks like, here’s what a 5 looks like, so everyone’s singing from the same hymn sheet. I’ve worked with judges that I’ve wondered if we are on the same planet when they’ve scored an entry a 10 and I ‘ve gone a 5. It’s because they have no idea what they are looking and and how they FEEL. Give them a solid scoring system; not just pick which one you like.
A good award also makes it easy to cross-check evidence. If a claim’s in the submission, there should be proof attached. Judges shouldn’t have to go hunting for it. Awards should demand entrants back up their claims with real data, every time. Invest in a decent platform because if you’re running an award using Google Forms for the fifth year in a row, you’re making it hard for judges to judge fairly. Perhaps have a think about why you’re running an awards program – benefit you or benefit the entrants. It can be both but if it’s a marketing exercise for you, you’re in it for the wrong reasons.
If your awards are about celebrating true excellence, make your judging criteria public.
If your awards are a cash cow for sponsors or about elevating you, keep them hidden, but don’t be surprised when people start asking awkward questions.
