“Open” Criteria for Innovative and Motivated Businesses

Vietnam Business Forum interviews Ms Pham Thi Thu Hang, General Secretary of the Vietnam Chamber of Commerce and Industry (VCCI) and member of jury boards for many prestigious business awards, on this issue. Thu Huyen and Thu Ha report.

 

We all know that criteria are created as a measure and a basis for juries to review, approve and decide the granting of the title. These criteria are not only constructed specifically, but also have certain weights and reflect primary objectives of the award. But, this is only a tool for juries to assess and quantify a target company in an objective manner rather than disclose it in detail.

 

Indeed, it is undeniable that many business awarding organisations construct their criteria not really logically and scientifically. For example, some prizes aim to award some leading companies in each industry, but many awardees are operating in different industries; thus, the classification and awarding are rather complicated. This is a challenge for awarding organisations, but it also significantly asserts the prestige of those awards.

 

Each award should have certain objectives. Businesses, entrepreneurs and other candidates should introduce themselves fully and honestly to show that they are striving for those objectives. In addition to regulations on minimum qualifying conditions, the jury will base on award criteria (usually only for internal reference) to evaluate, compare and choose, not specify that a nominee must be this or that to be the winner. For instance, when evaluating the performance of corporate social responsibility (CSR), they must consider whether candidates have violated the Law on Environmental Protection or not, how their budget plans for these objectives are; what initiatives they have for these fields, how their operations impact the community development, continuity and sustainability of operations, etc. Normally, candidates are clearly conscious of these matters when they introduce themselves and know how to convince the jury.

 

The judges themselves may have different opinions about the criteria provided. However, after discussion, the majority will win.

 

That’s true. The criteria created are not an absolute measure, but a foundation for the jury to assess a business and compare it with other candidates to define which is better for the award. Taking the Corporate Social Responsibility Award as an example, the jury is only directed that a candidate company is responsible to the community and is given some specific orientations. It is not defined in detail how it must be responsible. It is possibly thought that in any competition the jury will have very specific criteria and those best meeting the criteria are the winners. However, that is not the case. Each company will have its own initiatives which may be very different from others, but still meet general criteria and minimum requirements to vie for the award. If 1,000 candidates compete for the award, there are thousands of interesting initiatives and innovative ideas. The jury is unable to enumerate all those initiatives in their provided “measure.” Taking the criterion of “take care of employees” as an example, Company A may achieve it by ensuring high incomes for its employees, while Company B do it by improving working skills of its employees or recruiting workers’ offspring into the company. The creativity of companies diversifies objectives of the award.

 

We all know that companies have been operational before they take part in the award. They only report on their achievements and their works done. If criteria are not open enough, they will restrain the companies from developing their creativity.

 

The prestige of the award is mirrored by its jury. Any prestigious award should invite judges with high qualification and expertise. They are primarily responsible and highly independent persons. The organisation board provides the criteria but the jury selects and scores candidates. They must fully understand the criteria for selection and make the final decision.

 

The “heart” of the jury is presented by fairness, impartiality, devotion, and ultimate responsibility. In case the jury is not fair and not conscious of its responsibility, the award is valueless. The awarding is just superficial, also directly affecting the personal prestige of each member of the jury.

 

Of course, there are possibly subjective opinions, but juries I have been on all discuss very carefully on the basis of most fundamental requirements, have thorough analysis and reach high consensus before making a final decision.