Judging at Spikes

Each year, much interest is focused on the winners of the Spikes Asia awards. The Asia-Pacific campaigns, agencies, clients, networks and countries that have been successful are given a platform in our region.

But before there are winners, there’s judging.

Enormous consideration is given to who will judge the work and how. The high calibre of our juries is matched by the high standards that we hold them to and the rigorous processes they undertake.

This is what sets Spikes Asia apart and ensures it continues to be Asia Pacific’s most respected creative accolade.

How the Judging Works

Judging consists of three rounds involving viewing, voting, discussion and awarding of trophies.

In the first round, judges consider and score each entry on a scale of one to nine based on whether they consider it a shortlist candidate. The second round is a review where judges will consider whether entries on this provisional shortlist are worthy of being shortlisted only, a possible winner or a definite winner. Typically about twenty per cent of entries will make it to this stage.

In the final round, guided by the Jury President, judges review and debate entries before voting on whether they consider each a gold, silver or bronze winner, or shortlist only. It takes a two-thirds majority vote to claim a trophy and only about 9% of entries will do so.

After voting, results are read out and juries confirm the decisions. Candidates for Grand Prix, selected from among Gold winners, are also identified and further discussion follows before a last vote to determine the Grand Prix winner. Entries for public awareness messages, non-profit organisations and charities aren’t eligible in their category, but will be considered for the Grand Prix for Good.

Final results aren’t made public until the awards ceremonies.