The nominations process is where most awards nights are quietly won or lost. By the time you're finalising the run sheet, it's too late to fix a nomination form that collected the wrong things. A good nominations process gives judges clear evidence, protects you from personal bias, and makes the final call easier to defend. A bad one leaves you guessing.
Start with what you actually need from a nomination
Before you design any form, decide what a judge needs to make a fair decision. For a sporting club, that might be attendance records and match contributions. For a workplace award, it could be a specific project outcome or a peer endorsement. The form should collect exactly that, nothing more.
Vague prompts produce vague answers. "Tell us why this person deserves the award" returns a paragraph of adjectives that's hard to compare across nominees. Specific prompts return usable evidence. Try "Describe one situation where this person's contribution made a measurable difference to the team" instead. You'll get answers you can actually work with.
It also helps to be clear about word limits. Unlimited fields invite padding. A 150-word cap forces nominators to be precise, and precise nominations are faster to read and easier to rank.
Decide who can nominate and who can't
Open nominations feel democratic but they introduce noise. When anyone can nominate anyone, you get duplicates, campaigns from popular cliques, and overlooked candidates who simply didn't have vocal supporters. That's not a fair outcome.
Three models work well in practice:
- Self-nomination with peer endorsement. The nominee submits their own case, then two or three colleagues co-sign it. This filters out nominations made without the nominee's knowledge and adds a layer of social verification.
- Open nomination with a committee filter. Anyone nominates, but a small group reviews submissions before they reach the judging panel. The filter removes duplicates and checks that each nomination meets the minimum criteria.
- Panel nomination only. A nominated group does all the selecting. Faster and more consistent, but perceived as less inclusive. Works better for formal corporate awards than for community or sporting events.
Whatever model you choose, publish it clearly before nominations open. If people don't understand the rules upfront, they'll question the outcome at the end.
Set a deadline and enforce it
Late nominations are the single biggest source of last-minute chaos in the awards process. Set a closing date at least two weeks before your event. That gives you time to follow up on incomplete submissions, brief your judging panel, and order the right awards without rushing the engraving.
Send one reminder four days before the deadline closes. One is enough. Two reminders feel urgent; four feel desperate and train people to ignore the first three.
When the deadline passes, close the form. Accepting late entries undermines the process and creates resentment among people who submitted on time. The only exception worth making is when a key category has zero nominations, in which case you extend that category quietly and specifically, not the whole process.
How to brief your judges
Even a well-designed form produces poor outcomes if the judges don't know how to weigh what they're reading. Brief your panel before they see any nominations. The briefing should cover three things: what each award category is actually recognising, how to score the evidence provided, and what to do if they have a conflict of interest with a nominee.
Conflicts of interest are common and rarely malicious. A committee member whose child plays in the same team as a nominee shouldn't judge that category. Make it easy for them to declare and step aside without embarrassment. A simple "flag it to the coordinator" instruction is enough.
Scoring rubrics don't need to be complicated. A three-point scale (meets the criteria, clearly meets the criteria, exceptional evidence) applied consistently across nominations gives you a defensible ranking. If two nominees score identically, the judging panel votes. Document the decision.
This is especially worth getting right if your event is on the larger side. The structure that works for a corporate awards night differs from a sporting club night, but the need for a clear judging brief applies to both.
Keep nominations confidential until the night
Publishing shortlists in advance creates problems. Candidates who don't make the shortlist feel publicly excluded, and those who do face awkward conversations before the result is known. Keep the shortlist internal until you're ready to announce it on the night, or at most 48 hours before if you need printed programs.
Judges should also keep their deliberations private. One leaked opinion can colour how the audience receives the final decision, even if the process was sound.
What to do when nominations are thin
Low nomination numbers usually signal one of three things: people didn't understand the process, the deadline was too tight, or the category doesn't resonate with the membership. Each has a different fix.
If it's a process problem, simplify the form before the next cycle. If it's a timing problem, open nominations earlier. If it's a category problem, retire the award or replace it. Running a category with one nomination isn't embarrassing on the night if you handle it well, but running a category with no credible nominees is. It might be worth reviewing how to choose award categories that the audience genuinely cares about before you open nominations next time.
Storing nominations for future reference
Nominations shouldn't be discarded once the night is over. A strong nomination that didn't win this year could be the foundation of a stronger case next year, and a written record protects you if a decision is ever questioned.
Store submissions securely, whether that's a locked folder in a shared drive or a simple password-protected spreadsheet. Keep them for at least 12 months. Sporting clubs with perpetual trophies should keep records longer, because past winners and the evidence supporting them become part of the award's history.
A nominations process that's documented, consistent and clearly communicated doesn't just make the judging easier. It makes the whole event feel more credible, and that's what people remember long after the trophies are handed out.