 Design
While the definition of "Design" could differ for each different discipline, here we refer to aesthetics of form and shape, texture, finishing, graphical communication, colors and color options, material, innovation, emotional values, social context, targeted segment relevance, engineering, ease of use, surprise element, timelessness of design, design of the packaging or protective casing, overall complexity or simplicity. For each design competition category, the relevant "design" details are addressed and are voted by three different juries, the juries have equal weight at this point, the questions are answered on a scale from zero to eleven.
Engineering
The scope of "Engineering" depends for each discipline, however what we refer in general is the function, ergonomics, usability, details, technical engineering, ease of production, efficiency of production, economies of scale, marketability, technological availability, safety, cost advantage, resource friendliness, sustainability, reparability, durability, impact on nature, recyclability, reusability, responsiveness and similar details. The Engineering criteria are discussed and voted by three different juries, the professional and academic jury's votes are given more importance according to the relevant question and criteria, each questions are answered on a scale from zero to eleven.
Presentation
Presentation of design, visualization of use and maintenance, clearness representation and relevant details are addressed and are voted by three different juries, the focus group jury's votes are given relatively more importance, the questions are answered on a scale from zero to eleven. In addition we have developed a unique methodology and process to remove the "Positive Presentation Bias". We suggest all participants to use the submission optimizer to maximize their presentation scores.
Specific
For each different design award category and also for realized and concept stage products, the evaluation criteria will be different or would have different weights, and there is possibility of category specific evaluation criteria to be present. At this step details are discussed and are voted by three different juries and the professional and academic jury's votes are given more importance. The questions are answered on a scale from zero to eleven. Before voting, the jury members are kindly asked to suggest new criteria for evaluation of the entries in their design discipline, this ensures that we annually update and use relevant criteria to judge the designs to judge the entries in a fair manner. Scoring Interface
The scoring starts by explaining in detail what the criteria stands for, the scoring continues by explaining what the score ranges means, and it will have necessary notes to make it more clear for all the jury members to clearly understand it. Most of the criteria are scored from a range of 0 to 11, while some of them will be yes or no questions. You can view the example scoring criteria and how the jury members see it by clicking here.
Standard Score
After voting, the scores given by the jury members are normalized and weighted, normalization of the scores helps to eliminate personal biases, while weighting the results make sure that specific questions are answered by the relevant parties; such as the votes of professionals will be higher on engineering and realization related questions and vote of academics will be higher on sustainability etc. To learn more about the standardization process click here.
Research and Findings on Evaluation Criteria
The A' Design Awards is one of the most prominent design awards, celebrated for their unwavering commitment to transparency and meritocratic principles. At the heart of this competition lies a fundamental challenge: the objective evaluation of design quality. A' Design Award and Competition is committed to organizing a meritocratic and equitable design awards program thus invests significant amount of energy into understanding evaluation criteria used by jurors and communicating these to prospective participants. This commitment is underpinned by our ongoing engagement in research and analysis of evaluation criteria used in design awards. Regularly publishing our findings, as part of Evaluation Criteria sections in our design award category pages, we aim to assist prospective participants in understanding how their work will be evaluated. For each award category, we not only present the actual criteria jurors use in their evaluations but also offer recommendations for future evaluation criteria, such as emphasizing sustainability.
How Do We Determine or Recommend Evaluation Criteria?
We have two surveys that we ask jurors to complete when they first vote a category. Open ended questions and criteria weight surveys.
The first stage consists of open-ended questions, allowing jurors to express their individual perspectives on design criteria within specific categories. The second stage involves a point distribution system, where jurors allocate points to predefined criteria, revealing their prioritization of design aspects. The analysis of open-ended and point distribution survey responses revealed a diverse range of criteria used by jurors in evaluating design entries. The wide range of criteria mentioned by jurors in the open-ended questions highlights the importance of maintaining flexibility in evaluation standards. This flexibility allows jurors to consider unique aspects of each design entry, tailoring their assessment to the specific category and context. The inclusion of novel and category-specific criteria by jurors suggests that design excellence cannot be fully captured by a static set of standards. It evolves with changing trends, technologies, and societal needs. The point distribution system offered quantifiable insights into the relative importance jurors assign to different criteria, highlighting discrepancies with pre-determined weights and pointing to evolving trends in design priorities. The findings from this study advocate for a dynamic, data-driven approach to evaluating design quality. This approach allows prominent and important design competitions like the A' Design Awards to adapt to changing trends and maintain relevance in an ever-evolving industry. |
