Notes:

The above model is a guide designed to illustrate how voters / award judges can objectively evaluate nominees in an awards process. Using this sort of model will minimise human error or bias whilst making the system accountable and transparent.    

The above model is applicable for the ‘Best Novel’ and ‘Best Collection’ categories though it could be easily modified for other categories. For example, a ‘Best Publisher’ category should reflect annual output, originality of offerings, quality of output, value-for-money, etc. ‘Best Journal’ should rate editorial and reviewer capabilities as well as price, frequency, format etc.

It would be good practise for judges to publish their reasons for awarding points in certain key categories e.g. ‘Originality’ and ‘Prose Style’.

Judges should publish scores for each short-listed award nominee so that the general public can see how decision arrived at.

Special / Lifetime Achievement Awards could be decided upon via a similar process, after being initially decided upon by voter recommendations.