We could say it’s a secret, but it’s not: we like the idea of a level playing field and would like people to understand how we will judge the categories. 

First, the category description will need to be understood and you must qualify. Anyone submitting a nomination which simply doesn’t qualify may not be informed until the shortlisting takes place. Please pay attention to the type of entity that qualifies – a person, a company, a team or other – then any specific details, with regards to the nature of the endeavour we are aiming to celebrate.
 
Each category will be judged on the same criteria:

  • 1. Impact – has the entrant made a significant impact?

  • 2. Innovation – has the entrant shown a level of innovation or uniqueness?

  • 3. Ambition – has the entrant gone beyond their normal frame of reference or that of the industry?

  • 4. Awareness – has the initiative, entrant or endeavour positively raised awareness of the industry and its value?

  • 5. Time – has the entrant invested time in their endeavour?

  • 6. Quality of the submission (language and case making)

  • 7. Quality and credibility of the testimonials or references

Shortlisting

Under a non-disclosure agreement the judges are sent a list of entrants. If they have a conflict to disclose they will not receive the nomination file for that nominee. The judges will score each response on a scale of 1-10.

Shortlists will be compiled by Ben Cooper (Editor in Chief of the Travel Risk Review). Those who have been shortlisted will be notified following their submissions and public announcements with details of all shortlisted nominees will be made available on Thursday 6th February. Further information may be requested from nominators by the Editor in Chief ahead of final judging.

Final decision 

The final judging will take place 72 hours before the event in a Chatham House Rules event. Conflicted judges will be asked to stand outside the room during specific categories. The judges will be asked to discuss their decisions and the additional evidence, while the Chair will present the empirical findings from the anonymous shortlisting. If no decision can be reached or there is an impasse, the Chair and Assistant Chair will make the final judgement.