Reflecting the broad spectrum of Interaction Design, we have created categories that speak to the nature of the interactions as opposed to the forms that they take. Platforms, domains, and professional status will help the jury to understand the context of the work better, but the ultimate decision is based on the quality of work and the design sensibility of the peer reviewers and the Jury. That’s why we worked hard to find tough, fair and collegial judges.
Each project is judged in and of itself along the following four dimensions, allowing the jury to later evaluate across wildly varying scopes of projects. We want to see how well a project met its objectives for the people who needed it most, and the craft and impact with which it achieved those things.
Opportunity: Looking at the driving force behind the project, what challenge or opportunity is the project addressing? Is the intent clear and well-founded?
Audience: How well did the project team understand the people most impacted by the project –its intended audience– and design for that audience? In what contexts is this product or service at play?
Impact: How well did the project deliver on its intended impact, against the challenge at hand (opportunity addressed), the audience (needs & behavior addressed), and the business (profit, cost, brand)?
Craft: How well did the project team employ and convey their design process? How well did the final project demonstrate its elegance in language, functionality, and use, as it supports human interaction? How well does the final project demonstrate attention to detail, fit and finish, and how the chosen medium serves the purpose and goals of the design?