The Judges
All categories are awarded based on the decision of an independent panel of judges. They determine their decision purely on the basis of the submission from the entrant or nominee.
Keep checking this website for updates on our panel of judges.
2008 Judges
A big thank you to our 2008 judges who gave of their valuable time:
- Elvin Harris, Chief Director, Department of Public Enterprise, South Africa
- Paul Runge, Director, Africa Project Access, South Africa
- Alfred Nalitolela, Director General, SUMATRA, Tanzania
- Hubert Danso, Chairman, Africa Investor, South Africa
- Howard Rosen, Chairman, Rail Working Group, Switzerland
- Stanley Mkoko, Africa Representative, UIC, South Africa
- Mervyn Panzera, Safety Advisor, Railway Safety Regulator, South Africa
The Judging Process: HOW ENTRIES ARE JUDGED
JUDGING PANEL
- Entries are judged by a panel of expert judges. The focus of the judging panel is on business information and not client perceptions, unless the category calls for a customer service criteria.
- Your entry is judged against the criteria of each category, not against your competitor. This means you stand an equal chance to win regardless of your size or where you are based.
- After entries are discussed by the panel each submission is evaluated and scored by every judge. Judges may not participate in judging their own entries.
- The scores are entered into a database which adds them together, calculates the average score per entry and ranks them. The short-list and winners are the entries which score highest.
JUDGING RULES
- Judges sign a declaration which binds them to be impartial and treat all information in confidence.
- Judges may re-allocate entries entered into the wrong category, and may call for verification of information. Where the information provided is not verifiable the judges may disqualify an entry.
- Judges may decide not to make an award in a particular category.
- The organisers and sponsors have no influence over the decisions reached by the Judges.
- Both the short-list and eventual winners’ list, when issued, are considered to be final.
The judging process used in the Africa Rail Awards is rigorous and designed to be scrupulously fair. The integrity of the judging is built in from the selection of judges, to the judging process itself, right through to the final choice of winners. The process even allows for winners to be questioned after the awards ceremony.
How the judging avoids bias
To ensure all bias is removed judges may not evaluate entries in which they have an interest, and they are required to sign a declaration of Impartiality and Confidentiality. Judges are bound to treat all information, forming any part of any entry received via the adjudication process, in complete confidence.
The organisers and sponsors have no influence or input over the decisions reached by the Judges. Neither Terrapinn nor our sponsors may sit on the judging panel.
Most importantly every entry is judged by all 8 judges, so even if one judge did attempt to influence the outcome they could only affect an entry's score by at most 8.3% - and then only if they scored the entry 0% or 100%.
This is made even more difficult because after all judges have scored the entries they all get to see the other scores - and scores that are clearly out of line have to be justified by the relevant judge.
How entries are judged
Every entry is judged by every judge. In the first step of the process the judges read and score each entry received. At this point the Judges do not discuss entries, although they may ask questions for clarification. They may also question the facts given in an entry - and these questions are later discussed.
All the scores (12 scores per entry) are entered into a Database which adds the scores for each entry together, and generates an overall score per entry out of 100. The entries are then ranked according to the scores (so the highest scoring entry is at the top of the list and the lowest score at the bottom).
The judges then review the list and have an opportunity to discuss the results. At this point the judges will also discuss any questions they may have about an entry - for example if a judge does not believe the information provided. They can also look at the other judges scores and question any scores which appear to be out of line.
After discussing the results the judges are allowed to revise their scores if they wish. Any revisions are again input into the database and the ranking is generated again.
Choosing the winners
Once the judges agree on the final ranking of entries based on their scores, they must decide on two cutoff point below which entries cannot qualify for an award. The first cutoff is usually between 60% and 70% below which an entry cannot be a Finalist. The second cutoff is usually 80% and only entries that score higher may qualify as winners. (If no entry scores above this cutoff then no award is given).
What happens if an entrant lies on an entry?
The Awards assume that a level of integrity exists in the industry and that most entrants will not lie on their entry forms or make unsubstantiated claims.
Because entries are submitted in writing, and evaluated by a panel of the industry's preferred colleagues and peers, we assume that the likelihood of lying is very low.
However, the process does make provision for dealing with questionable entries:
Before the Awards Ceremony
- Every entrant submitting the online nominations agrees to the declaration on the form that the information in their entry is true and correct.
- Judges, all experts in their field and active in the industry, are likely to spot questionable claims.
- Judges will debate any questions about an entry, and may call for substantiation from the entrant.
- Judges may disqualify an entry that has no substantiation.
After the Awards
- Concerns about any winner may be sent to Terrapinn Ltd in writing.
- The Awards Committee will review all concerns and may call on a winner to respond.
- If a concern is found to be valid Terrapinn Ltd will withdraw the award from the winner.
|
