With our Headlinemoney Awards judging panels currently hard at work reviewing entries, in the third of his 'Chair's view' posts, Chair of Judges, David Worsfold, outlines the stringent process to determine worthy winners across over 30 categories.

Judging the Headlinemoney Awards is no easy task. Scrutinising and, ultimately, reducing hundreds of entries down to shortlists and winners demands a rigorous, multi-stage process.

Having been part of this process as a judge for several years and now as chair of the judging panel, I can confidently say it is a process that works, with everyone involved striving to reach the right decisions. That does not happen by chance. It is the result of a carefully crafted process with many experienced, professionals devoting a lot of time to make sure it does justice to the entrants.

The first stage is a relatively simple step. We need to check the eligibility of the submissions, to ensure each entry is complete, contains all necessary links and information, in the right category and eligible for that category. The challenges usually come around categories such as Rising Star, where there is a strict limit on the years a entrant has been working to qualify as a rising star.

The next stage is for entries go to the judging groups, made up of four to six different judges for each category. Selecting and assigning judges is a huge endeavour, requiring all parties involved to assess and avoid any potential conflict of interest. The judges that commit to taking part deserve a big thank you - we couldn't run the awards without the efforts and experience of the 100+ judges that contribute their time and experience to this process.

The judges then review and score the entries against carefully constructed criteria. A key focus here is to ensure that every entry receives adequate consideration from each judge. These scores are then collated, and from those scores the shortlists are drawn up.

At this stage, the shortlists for the PR categories are thrown open to the journalists to vote on. They decide the winners, a process that allows each and every financial journalist to have their say.

For the journalism awards, we move on to an intense week of over 25 hour long online judging sessions, facilitated by myself, or either Claire Beard or Michael Cleghorn from the Headlinemoney editorial team.

Predicting how these discussions will go is almost impossible. What looks an easy category, with an obvious winner from the scoring stage, often turns out to be one that requires lengthy debate. This is where the quality of the judges really shines through. These discussions are often illuminating and are never less than honest, thorough and ruthlessly objective.

If anyone thinks any of the decisions show some sort of bias or personal preference, I can assure them nothing could be further from the truth.

From that process the winners emerge. To come out on top at the end of this process is an achievement.

David Worsfold, Headlinemoney Chair of Judges