Achieving Excellence in Marketing Communications: Straight from the Judges' Mouths
J. Rossi, CMO, Burt Hill Kosar Rittelmann Associates, and Chair, 2005 MCA Program
The SMPS National Marketing Communications Awards Program showcases the strides made by A/E/C firms and honors the best in our business.

Jurors are selected for their expertise in marketing and communications in the A/E/C industry. In the past articles have been written about the winning entries once they have been announced, but in this article we thought we'd share the actual judging process including actual comments from the judges (in quotes throughout) to help you better prepare for next year's competition.

This year, 53 jurors—clients, vendors, and peers—arrived in The Music City, Nashville, TN, to judge almost 300 entries in 18 categories. The jurors devoted a beautiful spring Saturday to reading, reviewing, and evaluating the entries. The entire group gathered in a central location in the offices of Barge Waggoner Sumner & Cannon Inc., who graciously donated space and staff to host the judging. The day started, after a shot of caffeine of course, with jurors getting instructions from Donna Corlew, FSMPS, CPSM, the chair of this year's program. Jurors were divided into groups to judge in categories most applicable to their expertise and sent to areas spread throughout Barge Waggoner's beautiful offices to put noses to the grindstones. 

The judging process is clear: Entries are judged on marketing objectives, creativity, quality, content, and measurable results. One juror commented about the process: "I was amazed at the number of people it takes to run such an event to make it successful. Our judging group had a nice, diverse mix of talent that brought a unique perspective to each submission, which we found to work out really well. After we got a process going, we worked very efficiently together and had a lot of fun. I learned how to objectively judge pieces to determine if their goals were met and the results achieved."

It is important to note that the judges took their responsibilities seriously. The aim of the process is not only to honor the best but to educate as well.

One of the real lessons to be learned during this process was found by watching the judges evaluate the work and seeing, firsthand, why a particular piece would be put aside and not considered worthy of recognition. The bottom line is: If a direct-mail piece, or a web site, or a book, or any of the components that make up your marketing program doesn't draw attention and stand out, it doesn't do what it should for your firm. "It takes some serious creativity and thoughtful execution to really make an impact in the sea of marketing materials." "The most effective pieces went outside the box and/or combined excellence in graphic design, photography, and copy."

Jurors were asked to comment on what made an entry stand out from the rest of those evaluated. Their comments included:

• "The total package: headline, copy, photos." (Advertising Category)
• "The challenge of demonstrating business results in an interesting and engaging way is very large. Good entries were beautiful, interesting, good photos, minimal text, engaging." (Annual Report Category)
• "Compelling messages. When objectives were achieved." (Book/Monograph Category)
• "Uniqueness—in size, graphic elements, context, positioning of firm—as compared to other submissions." (Brochure Category)
• "Creativity and refreshing quality—different from the norm." (Corporate Identity Category)
• "Creativity, thinking outside the box, keeping it simple, making judges laugh." (Direct-Mail Category)
• "Organization. Brevity. Conciseness. Succinctness. Specific results." (Feature Writing Category)
• "The 'wow' factor." (Holiday Piece Category)
• "Simplicity and creativity." (Internal Communications Category)
• "Clarity of linkage between client problems and solutions. Visual appeal. Timeliness and relevance of articles." (Magazines Category)
• "Creative and quality packaging. When done well, it set a high expectation for the electronic component." (3D Modeling Category)
• "A successful integration of content and graphic creativity." (External Newsletter Category)
• "Creativity. Well-stated objectives—clearly articulated. Quantifiable results." (Promotional Campaigns Category)
• "Clear, sharp graphics and images. Stated goals apparent visually. Focused mission." (Special Event Category)
• "Graphics, quality, uniqueness." (Specific Project Marketing Category)
• "Visual impact, first impressions." (Target Market Brochure Category)
• "Simplicity in graphics and message. Innovative style. Strong bones." (Web Site Category)

In offering advice for those planning to enter the competition in the future, the judges were quite clear. Their responses included:

• Be creative.
• Follow instructions.
• Write a solid, concise clarification statement, one that is of the same quality as the entry.
• Be specific in the clarification statement. Quantify, quantify, quantify the results.
• High-quality photography is absolutely imperative.
• Have a strong message.

Creativity and clarity were what judges said were the most important elements about an entry that made them vote favorably for it. "Truly innovative approaches got our attention."

In the 300 entries, the judges saw many outstanding pieces of work. Entrants who did not win should not be discouraged, rather encouraged and challenged!

About the Author
J. Rossi is Chief Marketing Officer for Burt Hill Kosar Rittelmann Associates in Philadelphia, PA, and Chair of the 2005 SMPS National Marketing Communications Awards Program. She can be reached at 610.566.2958 or j.c.rossi@worldnet.att.net.

  [ return to top ]