Judging Process

This year’s Go Global Awards will be adjudicated within three weeks of entry submission by a distinguished panel comprised of select Board Members from the International Trade Council (ITC) and the International Centre for Trade Transparency (ICTTM). Our judges bring extensive expertise in global commerce, economic policy, and industry best practices, ensuring that each nominee receives a thorough and equitable evaluation.

Judging Timeline

• • Nomination Period Closes: All entries and nominations must be submitted by the specified deadline.
  • Review Window (3 Weeks): Within three weeks of the nomination deadline, our panel will convene to assess each candidate. This accelerated timeframe allows for a rigorous—but timely—decision process, enabling finalists to be notified well in advance of the Awards ceremony.
  • Finalist Selection & Notification: At the conclusion of the three-week review, successful nominees will be informed of their finalist status.

Judging Panel

Our judges are drawn from the International Trade Council and ICTTM Boards—senior professionals who have demonstrated leadership in trade promotion, investment facilitation, and supply chain innovation. The panel includes:

• • International Trade Council Board Members: Seasoned diplomats, economic advisors, and former trade commissioners with deep insights into cross-border market dynamics.
  • ICTTM Board Members: Thought leaders in trade transparency, digital commerce, and compliance, who represent a wide range of industry sectors and geographic regions.

By combining perspectives from both organizations, we ensure a balanced and knowledgeable review that upholds the Awards’ reputation for excellence.

Evaluation Criteria

Each nominee is evaluated according to a structured scoring rubric that reflects both universal business principles and context-specific considerations. The primary criteria include:

1. • Business Impact
     • Demonstrable results—such as revenue growth, market share expansion, or employment creation—directly attributable to the nominee’s strategic initiatives.
     • Tangible benefits to stakeholders, including customers, suppliers, and local communities.
   • Stability
     • Evidence of consistent performance over time, whether measured in financial metrics, operational resilience, or organizational governance.
     • Adaptability to market fluctuations, regulatory changes, or supply chain disruptions.
   • Scalability

• • • The nominee’s capacity to replicate or expand their model—locally, regionally, or globally—without compromising quality or core values.
    • The presence of systems, processes, or partnerships that demonstrate readiness for growth.
  • Sector & Industry Context

1. 1. • Alignment with best practices and benchmarks pertinent to the candidate’s industry—whether agriculture, manufacturing, technology, or services.
      • Responsiveness to sector-specific challenges, such as regulatory compliance, sustainability requirements, or technological innovation.

• • Cultural & Economic Environment
    • Consideration of the nominee’s operating environment, including socioeconomic factors, infrastructure constraints, or geopolitical dynamics.
    • Recognition of achievements relative to local or regional norms—acknowledging that success in an emerging market may differ from established economies.

• • Innovation & Thought Leadership
    • Novel approaches to product development, business models, or process improvements that have influenced industry standards.
    • Contributions to thought leadership—whether through research, public policy advocacy, or capacity-building programs.

• • Social & Environmental Responsibility
    • Evidence of corporate social responsibility initiatives, such as community engagement, ethical sourcing, or philanthropic activities.
    • Implementation of sustainability measures—ranging from carbon footprint reduction to circular economy practices—that reflect a commitment to long-term impact.

Scoring & Deliberation Process

1. 1. Initial Screening: Each nomination is first vetted for completeness and eligibility by the Awards Secretariat.
   2. Individual Scoring: Judges independently score each nominee against the criteria above, using a standardized rubric with weighted categories.
   3. Panel Deliberation: After individual scoring, the full panel convenes—either in person or via secure video conference—to discuss high-scoring candidates, reconcile scoring disparities, and address any potential conflicts of interest.
   4. Final Selection: Through consensus or majority vote, the panel confirms winners in each category. All decisions are recorded and archived to maintain transparency.

Confidentiality & Integrity

• Conflict-of-Interest Declarations: Judges recuse themselves from evaluating any nominee with whom they have a direct or indirect financial, familial, or advisory relationship.
• Non-Disclosure: All deliberations, scoring sheets, and nomination materials remain strictly confidential. Judges commit to non-disclosure agreements to safeguard the integrity of the process.
• Transparency: While the identities of individual judges are not publicly disclosed during deliberations, the composition of the panel (ITC and ICTTM Board Members) is fully transparent to uphold trust in the Awards.