Make your ESA Awards entries count!
Whilst Awards entries are very familiar to some, the judging criteria remains a head scratching mystery to others.
Thus, ahead of the 2019 ESA Awards ceremony, taking place on Thursday 28th February 2019 at Café de Paris, London, we’ve asked a couple of our esteemed judges, ESA Board Directors Matthew Leopold and Jamie Macken, for the very ingredients and superior outcome that our panel of ESA Awards judges want to see in an entry, and, maybe more importantly, what they would advise against.
Here’s what ESA Awards judge and ESA Board Director, Matthew Leopold has to say:
- We have a very clear points-based marking system. Maximise your chances by please reading the accompanying notes!
- We are looking for sponsorship excellence. That means a strong strategy accompanied by strong execution. You need to have both.
- We can only give marks for what you write. Don’t assume judges know your activation.
The most common mistakes are:
- Failing to explain the business challenge that the sponsorship is trying to solve. Don’t just jump to execution. Prove that the strategy is worthy and appropriate!
- Remember, your objectives and targets should be SMART. They should be relevant to the business challenge you are trying to solve.
- When giving your results, make sure they refer back to the objectives you stated at the start. Also, exceeding your target by a substantial % suggests you got the target wrong. Make sure you explain and justify your results. We are not looking for amazing results. We are looking at your interpretation of the results. The judges are very experienced professionals – we know the result inflation game, so just be honest!
- There are a substantial number of marks available for critically analysing your performance and identifying the learnings that you will use in future work.
- Don’t send long videos. We are marking hundreds of submissions, so don’t have time to watch it all. Send something short and snappy that offers a feeling of the activation.
What I would love to see:
- A clearly explained business challenge and why Sponsorship is the right solution. An explanation as to why a property was chosen and a clearly articulated set of sponsorship objectives.
- Well written, spell checked work.
- Submissions that don’t cite media AVE or impressions as justification for an investment or as evidence of a job well done.
- Use the amplification section to talk about your segmentation and targeting of customers. How did you get in front of the right people? How did you make them care?
ESA Awards Judge and ESA Board Director, Jamie Macken advises:
What I would expect and would love to see:
- Diligence – entries that are clearly answering the questions and responding to the criteria needed to be marked!
- Planning – proof of thorough planning and insight development that forms the foundation of the strategy (and measurement plan)
- Creativity – more entries that show sponsorship at the centre of marketing comms strategy, not a bit part. Thus, more entries that are representing brand marketing strategies, not just sponsorship.
Clear proof that the sponsorship had measurement baked in from the start, not retrofitted for the entry – proof of effectiveness does not have to be complex data modelling or econometrics, just proof that the strategy was linked to clear objectives and measured as such. This can be as simple as clearly defining the objective, which metrics were being assessed/measured and the results.
What not to do:
- Not bothering to answer certain questions or paying attention to word count – these things matter!
- Don’t assume that your brand or sponsorship is universally known and successful – judges will only mark what is in front of them.
- Judges can only mark based on the criteria set out in the submission form. So it is critical for entrants to answer and respond to each criteria as it is detailed in the entry form. Often, the correct information is detailed in the incorrect place on the form, thus making it impossible to mark!
- Don’t waffle – define the challenge, how the sponsorship was leveraged and the results.