IDEA

This description of the IDEA process is one of the best that I have ever read. It is lifted in large part from the blog of one of this years jurors, Rob Tannen. Very useful when trying to decide whether or not to enter.

The review process began with 20 jurors working independently. During this phase of judging, each juror independently reviewing the submitted documentation (forms, images, videos, etc) entries within a a set subcategory.

Each subcategory was assigned to two jurors. Following their independent reviews, pairs would discuss their recommendations with each other. When there was disagreement about particular entries, a juror had to convince his or her partner about whether or not to advance the entry to the finalist round.

In the next round, each judging pair reviewed their selected finalists in person. This year's IDEA awards judging was improved over previous year's, because for the first time (!), the jurors had access to most of the actual products for the design finalists. Consequently, the discussions were more focused on issues such as details, comfort and finish - much like they would be in a design review of refined prototypes. Again, each juror had to "make the case" to his or her partner for the designs that deserved merit.

The iterative review process continued with a larger review cycle. This time three or four pairs of jurors discussed the designs that they had selected. At the conclusion of this phase, each of the award winners had been selected and agreed upon by the majority of each working group.

Finally, all of the designs (both award winners and finalists) were open for discussion to the entire group of 20 jurors. In this last-check round, any juror could suggest raising or lowering the award recognition of any item.