A panel of three conflict-free* English judges from the B2B writing community and specific industry experts will be responsible for assigning scores to entries in a given 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 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 three (3) KRW judging criteria of writing style and creativity, content and impact. 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:
Style and creativity : 1/3 of score
Content: 1/3 of score
Impact: 1/3 of score
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 panelists
70-79 A decent article; possibly a finalist if it has special virtue in the eyes of other panelists
< 70 Not an article worthy of recognition
Judges will be further advised to consider that the lab report writing service 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 panelist 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.
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 or if a clear winner is not apparent, the KRW staff may ask a judging panel to convene by teleconference to break a tie for a Gold or Silver award.
A panel of three people with diverse backgrounds judge each of the visual categories. Depending on the category, panel members may include an illustrator, a photographer, a magazine art director and/or an editor. If a clear gold and silver winner cannot determined by averaging the scores submitted by the judges, a bilingual moderator will facilitate a conference call with the judging panel to discuss and select winners. Their decision is final.
As with text categories there may be up to 10 finalists per category, with gold and silver winners.
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.
All discussions, scoring results and finalist entry names must be kept strictly confidential until the winners are announced at the KRW awards.
A panel of three to four judges will adjudicate the digital categories.. An ideal panel will include a web editor 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. All discussions, scoring results and finalist entry names must be kept strictly confidential until the winners are announced at the KRW awards.
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.
The judging process for the KRW awards should be approximately seven weeks in length. The written-category judges should have a minimum of three weeks to evaluate and score all entries. Digital 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 18, 2015.
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.
The Kenneth R. Wilson Awards is committed to a fair and transparent judging process. Please contact us for more information about the judging process.