|
|
Judging Procedures of the Kenneth R. Wilson Awards
WRITING CATEGORIES
TIER 1
Four panels of three conflict-free* English judges from the B2B writing community will be
responsible for assigning scores to entries in 2-3 categories. Their scores will be averaged and will
determine a maximum of 10 finalists in each category. A French panel of three conflict-free* judges will be
responsible for assigning scores to all French language entries.
Specifically, the judges will be sent the entries and working individually, are instructed to score entries
from 0 to 100, using the four (4) KRW judging criteria of writing style, content, overall impact, and
leadership. The only stipulations are that all finalists have an average score of 80 or more, and that the
number of finalists in each language be proportionate to the number of entries received in that category.
The basic criteria for Written Categories is:
Writing Style: 25 points
Content: 25 points
Overall Impact: 25 points
Leadership: 25 points
The total score for each submission is out of 100. Judges are advised to consider the following guidelines
for arriving at final scores:
90+ One of the very best articles of the year: a potential winner in its
category
80-89 A worthy finalist, possibly a winner if outstanding from the vantage points of other
panellists
70-79 A decent article; possibly a finalist if it has special virtue in the eyes of other
panellists
< 70 Not an article worthy of recognition
Judges will be further advised to consider that the length of articles is not the deciding factor; and that
topic matter should not influence their decisions, as an "insignificant" topic may be well written and
researched while an "important" topic may not be.
Panelists should ask themselves whether the article is thorough and authoritative, but also: Is this new
information or insight (or was it when published)? Has the writer made it sufficiently clear and meaningful
to the intended audience? How does this article score as journalism? Is the article excellent magazine
journalism? Is it likely to engage the interest if the audience described?
If a panellist determines that an article may be entered in the wrong category, he/she should bring this to
the attention of the KRW staff to solicit feedback from other panelists. In most cases an article deemed
incorrect for the category will simply not be given a high enough score to qualify as a finalist. Articles
entered in an incorrect category cannot be moved to another category once the judging process has begun.
All discussions, scoring results and finalist entry names must be kept strictly confidential until the
winners are announced at the KRW awards.
TIER 2
The finalists, up to a maximum of 10 in each category, then proceed to the second tier of
adjudication, the bilingual jury. At the second level, a common bilingual panel will judge both French and
English finalists from each category. Three bilingual judges score each finalist. The goal of the bilingual
panels is to integrate the French and English language finalists judged to be at the top of their language
groups by the tier one judges.
The bilingual panel’s task is to determine where the English and French entries sit in a combined list.
Because these entries have already been determined to be finalists, bilingual judges must make their minimum
score for an entry at this level no less than 80% (the minimum score for a finalist). The scores of these
three judges are added to the original scores of the French or English judges, to determine the final
scores.
Final scores are an aggregate of first-tier scores and second-tier scores. The weighing split is 50/50.
The top score in each category receives the Gold Award. The second-highest score receives the Silver Award.
The remaining finalists receive Honourable Mention.
In the case of a numerical tie, the KRW staff may ask a judging panel to convene by teleconference to break a
tie for a Gold or Silver award.
VISUAL CATEGORIES
A panel of five people judges all four visual categories. Panel members should include an illustrator, a
photographer, two magazine art directors and an editor, at least one of whom is bilingual. They will review
and score all entries through an online judging module then meet via a moderated teleconference to determine
finalists and winners.
As with written categories there may be up to 10 finalists per category -- with Gold and Silver winners and
up to 8 honourable mentions.
While aesthetic considerations will be the main criterion for visual categories, winning entries should also
be appropriate to the text they accompany, to the magazine medium and to the intended audience.
The entries are to be evaluated against each other in representing the 'best of the year participating
publications.' Gold and Silver winners must be awarded in each category, with additional Honourable Mentions
(to a maximum of 8).
Conformity to the latest trends in visual style is not a criterion. The jury is instructed to consciously
avoid a faddish sensibility. Aesthetic concerns must be balanced with the practical. The work is not intended
to be judged against international standards or work that might find in other ‘markets’.
All discussions, scoring results and finalist entry names must be kept strictly confidential until the
winners are announced at the KRW awards.
INTERNET CATEGORIES
A panel of three people judges all Internet categories. An ideal panel includes at least two web editors and
a web creator on both the visual and editorial sides, as well as an art director with experience in digital
media. At least one panellist should be bilingual.
Panel members evaluate the submitted entries individually. They may be asked to submit numerical scores in
advance of convening by teleconference to determine the finalists and winners. Judges are instructed to
evaluate web sites for their overall quality in the category rather than for individual articles or design
elements.
All discussions, scoring results and finalist entry names must be kept strictly confidential until the
winners are announced at the KRW awards.
OTHER INFORMATION
Submitting Scores:
Where judges are required to submit numerical scores, all scores are submitted electronically via
the KRW’s online judging module. There is no need for judges to submit scores on paper by courier or fax –
this eliminates errors and effort to tally the scores. Each judge will have a secure login username and
password to access his or her online score card. The online score card will also contain instructions and
criteria as references.
The KRW awards will tabulate all results of the scoring and keep this information confidential until the
awards are announced. In the case of a numerical tie for a Gold or Silver award, the KRW staff may instruct
the judges to convene by teleconference to break the tie.
Timelines:
The judging process for the KRW awards should be approximately seven weeks in length.
First-tier written-category judges should have a minimum of three weeks to evaluate and score all
entries.
Second-tier written-category judges should have a minimum of two weeks to evaluate and score entries.
Internet- and Visual-category judges should have approximately four weeks to evaluate their entries before
they are asked to finalize their scores/results.
All scores should be finalized no later than April 15, 2010.
Conflict of Interest:
A person shall be considered ineligible to judge in a category in which that person is entered as a
writer, handling editor or other contributor. A person who appears on the masthead of a magazine entered in a
particular category may not serve as a judge for that category.
If a person is the subject of an article, has a close association with the writer, is a regular contributor
to one of the entering publications, or has any other conflict, that person may still be eligible to judge
that category but may be asked to abstain from judging the entry for which a conflict of interest exists. In
this case, the judge will be asked to enter a ‘C’ in place of a numerical score (and thereby be factored out
of the scoring for that particular entry) and not to participate in any teleconference discussion, if
applicable, of the piece for which he/she is in conflict.
Transparency:
The Kenneth R. Wilson Awards is committed to a fair and transparent judging process. Please contact us for
more information about the judging process.
|
| |
|
|
