X. Awards · Methodology

How entries
are judged.

The standard applied to every entry is published in full. Anyone deciding whether to enter can read exactly how the work is evaluated, what is weighted and how results are decided, before submitting.


The dual evaluation

Every entry is read twice, independently, against one published standard.

A defined AI system reads every entry first, applied identically to every submission in the category, with no drift between early and late entries. A senior expert panel reads the same entry on their own, with no sight of the AI read. At reconciliation, the panel brings the two reads together, makes every final decision and signs the reasoning. The first judging process in the sector to run a defined AI read inside the evaluation, giving the panel a consistent second read to test their own judgement against.

  1. One entry is submitted against one published standard, with its AI disclosure attached.
  2. The entry is read twice, independently and in parallel. Read one is a defined AI system applied identically to every entry. Read two is a senior expert panel reading every entry on its own. Neither read sees the other.
  3. At reconciliation the panel brings the two reads together. Where they agree the result stands. Where they diverge the panel reviews both reads and decides, and the divergence is recorded.
  4. The panel makes every final result and signs the reasoning. The reasoning is published.
Step 01 · The entry

One entry, one standard

Every entry is judged against a single published standard, with its AI disclosure attached.

Read one · applied identically

The defined AI read

A defined AI system, run the same way on every entry. It gives a consistent second read at a scale and evenness no panel can reach. The first time the sector has done this.

Industry first
Read two · independent judgement

The senior expert panel

Senior destination brand and marketing leaders read every entry in full and score it on their own. They bring the sector knowledge, the context and the judgement that decide what good really means.

The senior read. The judges decide
Step 03 · Reconciliation

The two reads are brought together by the panel

Where they agree

The result stands.

Where they diverge

The panel reviews both reads and decides. The divergence is recorded.

Step 04 · The decision, signed

The panel decides, and signs

The panel makes every final result and signs the reasoning behind it. The reasoning is published.

The AI read and the panel

The explainer above shows the shape of the evaluation. This sets out the substance: how the AI read works, where it stops and what the expert panel does.

The AI read
A defined, consistent read
A defined AI system applies the published standard identically to every entry and produces a structured, criterion-level read with reasoning. It runs under a zero-retention agreement and is not used to train any model.
Translation and access
Entries are accepted in English and in French, German, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese and Dutch, with other languages welcome alongside a short English summary. The AI provides a working translation so the work is read fairly wherever the team is based. Two safeguards apply: every entry includes a short entrant-written English summary so the panel always has a human-authored anchor, and any shortlisted entry not in English is checked by a fluent human before a final decision is made.
Consistency
The AI flags duplication and inconsistency so the panel reads a clean, comparable version of every entry.
The expert panel
Human-only information
Entrants can mark information to be seen by the expert panel only and held back from the AI read. It is extracted before the AI evaluation runs. This is a normal part of the process for any entrant who has commercially sensitive or strategically confidential material to share.
What AI does not do
The AI does not decide. It does not see information the entrant marks for the panel only. It does not replace the panel. It gives the panel a consistent second read to test their judgement against.
The expert panel
A senior panel reads every entry independently, brings sector judgement, reconciles the two reads, decides every result and signs every reasoning note. This is where the credibility and the final decisions sit. The two reads together are more rigorous than either alone, because the AI removes drift and fatigue while the panel brings judgement and owns the outcome.
Choosing the right category

Most entries fit clearly. Two pairs overlap enough to be worth explaining.

Campaign vs content

Destination Campaign of the Year is for the whole campaign and what it achieved, strategy, delivery, performance and creativity together. Content and Storytelling is for the craft of the creative itself, the idea, message, narrative and quality, judged regardless of reach or budget. A small team with exceptional content but limited reach belongs in Content and Storytelling. A campaign with strong end to end delivery and results belongs in Destination Campaign of the Year.

Data vs digital innovation

Data and Insight is for investment in data, intelligence and knowledge systems, the serious building of capability and solutions. Digital Innovation is for the genuinely new and experimental, including work that does not fit a traditional category, judged on originality and potential as much as on results.

Destination Strategy: new or running

Entries begin with one question: is this a new strategy or one that has been running. The panel judges on the right basis for each. The strategy need not have results yet to enter.

A new strategy

Judged on its vision, the clarity and realism of its goals and its potential impact. Evidence and impact is read as potential and likelihood rather than delivered results.

A strategy that has been running

Judged primarily on its results. The entrant says which applies at the start of the entry. The screening question lives in the entry form; this page explains the basis.

The five criteria

Every entry, every category, scored on the same five.

01
Strategy and intent
A clear problem, a defined goal, and a sound reason this was the right response.
02
Craft and execution
The quality of the work and how well it was delivered.
03
Evidence and impact
What changed, shown with evidence, judged in proportion to the scale and budget disclosed.
04
Originality and contribution
What was new or notably better, and what others could learn.
05
AI disclosure and integrity
The completeness and honesty of the disclosure, and the judgement shown in how AI was or was not used.
The scale

Each criterion is scored 0 to 5. Whole numbers only.

5
Exceptional
Best in class, fully evidenced, no material weakness. Rare by design.
4
Strong
Clearly above standard, well evidenced, minor weaknesses only.
3
Solid
Competent, meets the criterion, adequately evidenced.
2
Limited
Addressed but with significant weaknesses or thin evidence.
1
Weak
Barely addressed, assertion without support.
0
Absent
Not addressed, or no evidence at all.
The rules

Fixed and published before entries open.

01

Whole numbers only.

02

A score of 4 or 5 on any criterion must cite specific evidence from the entry. Without it, the maximum score on that criterion is 3.

03

Evidence and impact is judged in proportion to the scale and budget disclosed, not absolute reach.

04

Reach is not scored as quality. It counts only where it demonstrably changed an outcome.

05

AI extent is never penalised. Only disclosure quality and judgement are scored.

06

A missing AI disclosure caps that criterion at 1 and flags the entry for the panel.

How the weighting works

Each criterion is scored from 0 to 5 against the published standard. That score is taken as a share of the criterion's weight: a 4 out of 5 on a criterion weighted 25 contributes 20 points. The five weighted scores add up to a total out of 100.

The interactive below uses the AI in Destination Marketing weights. Adjust the scores to see how the total moves. The defaults reproduce the worked example further down the page.

Strategy and intent
Weight 15
Score
Craft and execution
Weight 20
Score
Evidence and impact
Weight 25
Score
Originality and contribution
Weight 15
Score
AI disclosure and integrity
Weight 25
Score
Weighted result
78/ 100
Strategy and intent 12.0Craft and execution 12.0Evidence and impact 20.0Originality and contribution 9.0AI disclosure and integrity 25.0

Each criterion is scored from 0 to 5. That score is taken as a share of the criterion's weight. The five weighted shares add up to a result out of 100. These are the AI in Destination Marketing weights. The defaults reproduce the worked example: 78 of 100, Strong.

Weighting matrix

The five criteria are constant. The weighting shifts so each category is judged on what matters most. Every row sums to 100.

Strategy-led categories
Destination Strategy weights Strategy and intent highest at 35, because the award is judged on the quality and clarity of the strategic thinking. For a new strategy, Evidence and impact is read as potential and likelihood rather than delivered results.
Evidence-led categories
Data and Insight, Digital Innovation and Sustainable Innovation weight Evidence and impact highest, because they are judged on proven effect.
Craft-led categories
Content and Storytelling and Destination Brand of the Year weight Craft and execution highest, because the quality of the work is the point. Destination Campaign of the Year weights craft and impact equally.
AI in Destination Marketing
Lifts AI disclosure and integrity to 25, the highest weight in any category, because the category is about AI in the work.
Early-stage categories
Breakthrough Destination and Start-up and Scale-up weight Strategy and Originality higher and Evidence lower, because work is judged on ambition and what is new, with impact in proportion to the stage.
Every category
Carries AI disclosure and integrity at a base weight of 10, because disclosure is required of every entrant.
CategoryStrategyCraftEvidenceOriginalityAI
Destination Brand of the Year
20
30
25
15
10
Destination Strategy
35
15
25
15
10
AI in Destination Marketing
15
20
25
15
25
Digital Innovation
25
20
30
15
10
Destination Campaign of the Year
15
30
30
15
10
Content and Storytelling
15
35
20
20
10
Data and Insight
20
15
40
15
10
Sustainable Innovation
20
25
30
15
10
Breakthrough Destination
25
25
20
20
10
Start-up and Scale-up
25
25
20
20
10
The bands

The weighted total falls into one of five bands.

85 to 100
Exceptional
Award standard.
70 to 84
Strong
Shortlist standard.
55 to 69
Solid
Credible.
40 to 54
Limited
Notable gaps.
Below 40
Weak
Not competitive.
Worked example

An illustrative entry showing how the scoring works in practice. Not a real submission.

Illustrative · AI in Destination Marketing
A national DMO · AI-assisted multilingual content programme
Criterion
Score
Weight
Points
Strategy and intent
4
×15%
12
Craft and execution
3
×20%
12
Evidence and impact
4
×25%
20
Originality and contribution
3
×15%
9
AI disclosure and integrity
5
×25%
25
Weighted total
78 of 100
Band
Strong · shortlist standard

The single point held back on Evidence and impact reflects one unverified metric. This is the kind of specific, fair feedback the method produces.

Eligibility

Work is eligible if it was delivered, launched or substantially active since 1 January 2025, up to the entry deadline. A single window applies to every category, since a piece of work can enter up to three categories and different windows would make that confusing. Destination Strategy is the one place timing flexes: the new or running question at the start of the entry handles it, so a recently launched strategy can enter and be judged on its potential.

Governance

The methodology is published and locked before entries open. Every result is decided and signed by the panel and the reasoning is published alongside it. The standard is the same for every entrant worldwide.

The standard is published in full. Entries are open worldwide.