Criteria

The three main criteria for assessment of entries, as briefed to the Jury members, are as follows:

— Innovative expression of an idea (creativity)
— Execution of the concept (craft)
— Relevance to the intended audience (communication).

Specialist categories such as Design Effectiveness and Design for Good have additional aspects to the work such as Business and Social impact.

Method

The jury is assembled in a warehouse for three days to assess the work, with some follow up reviews done remotely. Jurors sit across multiple categories based on their particular speciality. The jury is guided by a group of Jury foremen who are the AGDA representatives during the process. The foremen are responsible for keeping the jury on task and to quickly assess any issues with the entries.

Scoring

Each juror gives an entry a score out of 100. The scores are then averaged across the jury for each entry. Jurors have the opportunity to adjust their scores after a groups discussion on highlighted work. We use the Olympic Method for calculating scores, where the lowest and highest scores are excluded from the average.

Anomaly scores

Jury members are given the opportunity to review any anomaly scores on each entry. An anomaly score is one that is significantly different to the mean average.

Anonymity

All entries are presented anonymously to the jury, all references to the designers, studios and collaborators are hidden during the assessment period.

Juror entries

AGDA allows jurors to enter their own studio’s work into the awards because we have the utmost faith in our process to maintain the integrity of the results. Jurors are excluded from scoring their own work, or any work that they have collaborated on. Jurors are expected to refrain from advocating for their own work or work that they have collaborated on within jury discussions.

Plagiarism

Any concerns about plagiarism are raised by jury members discreetly to the foremen who will investigate on behalf of the jury member who raised the issue. Jury members are asked to refrain from raising these concerns to the group until AGDA has finalised its investigation.

Jury

Awards

Andrew Ashton, Juror

Shannon Bell, Juror

Jane Cameron, Juror

Danielle de Andrade, Juror

Clem Devine, Juror

Rob Duncan, Juror

Nicole Liedberg, Juror

Angela McCarthy, Juror

Fabio Ongarato, Juror

Matthew Remphrey, Juror

Rachel Terkelsen, Juror

Kylie Timpani, Juror

Specialist

Dan Agostino, Juror

To be named

Scott Geersen, Juror

Despina Macris, Juror

To be named

Lindsay Tucker, Juror

Sonia Uznadze, Juror

Kieran Wallis, Juror

Volunteers

Awards Volunteers, Juror

Criteria

Method

Scoring

Anomaly scores

Anonymity

Juror entries

Plagiarism

Register

Lapsed Members / New Members

Jury

Awards

Andrew Ashton, Juror

Shannon Bell, Juror

Jane Cameron, Juror

Danielle de Andrade, Juror

Clem Devine, Juror

Rob Duncan, Juror

Nicole Liedberg, Juror

Angela McCarthy, Juror

Fabio Ongarato, Juror

Matthew Remphrey, Juror

Rachel Terkelsen, Juror

Kylie Timpani, Juror

Specialist

Dan Agostino, Juror

To be named

Scott Geersen, Juror

Despina Macris, Juror

To be named

Lindsay Tucker, Juror

Sonia Uznadze, Juror

Kieran Wallis, Juror

Volunteers

Awards Volunteers, Juror

Criteria

Method

Scoring

Anomaly scores

Anonymity

Juror entries

Plagiarism

Login

Register

Lapsed Members / New Members