The Say Communications Excellence in Communication Through Creative Execution

Sponsored by:

This award celebrates the power of creativity as a tool to communicate key messages to target audiences. The judges will be looking to understand how creative ideas and choice of execution link back to research and insights relevant to the target audience. They are keen to understand the core creative idea behind specific executions, and the rationale for choosing any particular route over another. What mindset changes were identified, and how did the creative seek to deliver that change? What rationale and validation did the creative go through to ensure success? How was the creative measured?

Entries can showcase words or images, digital, print or any other medium, along with an explanation of why you feel this particular execution delivered against a clearly defined need. Of course, the judges will also be looking for stunning imagery and cleverly worded copy, but we’re also keen to understand the brief and how your creative has answered it. So, to win this award you need to show:

• What research and insights powered your creative brief and inspired the core idea
• An explanation of the idea itself
• The rationale behind the creative direction taken
• Stunning creative that delivers against the rationale
• Why you chose to take the route you did in terms of media
• The design and selection of specific methodology to measure the impact of your creative execution
• Effectiveness and results – evidence that it delivered against the intention and objectives.

Entries should demonstrate first-class strategic thinking and exceptional implementation (in line with the ABPI, EFPIA and PAGB Codes of Practice).

Work conducted during the 18-month period between July 2019 and December 2020 will be eligible. If the submission has been entered previously, the current entry must provide benchmarks to clearly demonstrate how the programme was evaluated and how it has developed over time.

Remember: Entries into this category
DO NOT need to be anonymised.

Don’t forget:
- provide a copy of any previous submission for this work
- be open! Were there any other contributors to the programme?

JUDGING CRITERIA AND ENTRY FORMAT:

Entry Title

Please give a simple title for your entry of no more than ten words

Executive Summary – 200 words. 0 (zero) marks

This will be used if entry is selected as a finalist and does not need to be anonymised.

Main entry

• The word/character limit for each criterion will be outlined via the online entry system, which is new for 2021.

1. Budget Band Information, as below:

Band A under £10,000
Band B £10,001-£25,000
Band C £25,001-£50,000
Band D £50,001-£100,000
Band E £100,001-£200,000
Band F over £200,001.

If your client has declined to allow this, you must state this within your submission.

• Failure to provide the budget band seriously impacts the judge’s ability to assess the entry against other entries and may result in the entry being disqualified
• The budget band provides important context for judging the innovation, delivery and impact of a piece of work.
• Impressive work is not always dependent on budget size, so there is no right or wrong budget.

2. Situation Analysis and Benchmarking – 15 marks (300 words)

• In this section you should show the judges how well you understood the situation at the start of the project
• Use this situation to clearly lay out benchmark data that you will refer to in your measurement of effectiveness later
• Show the judges the best information, data and insights you have about uptake of health interventions, current practice, defining/ segmenting audiences, identifying educational or information needs, which channels will best reach the audience, competitive environment, creative landscape before the start of your work

3. Objectives – 15 marks (250 words)

• Describe the objectives for the project or programme and how these will be measured

4. Strategy – 15 marks (250 words)

• Please outline what your strategy was and why
• Refer to the data and insight in the situation analysis section
• Explain why this was the right strategy and any points to emphasise bold or innovative strategy selection

5. Implementation – 15 marks (400 words)

• Please describe how you implemented the project or programme
• Please briefly outline why these specific tactics were selected
• For a programme this should include describing what tactics were deployed to implement the strategy
• For a meeting or stand-alone event this should describe how the meeting or event was delivered

6. Effectiveness: Outcomes vs Objectives – 20 marks (400 words)

• Show clearly how the programme or project delivered against the stated objectives
• Help the judges to understand how the effectiveness was measured so they can judge the strength of the evaluation
• Include comments from third party stakeholders in this section but ONLY if they clearly help to demonstrate the impact of the work and were a planned part of the measurement approach

Supporting Materials

Please remember that the first round of scoring is based only on the content of the two-page entry form. No supporting material is viewed at this stage.

Please only send information that helps the judges to see how you researched, planned, implemented and measured the programme within each specific category, e.g.:

• Information illustrating how the strategy was brought to life is helpful but we don’t need a copy of every item
• Information supporting the evaluation and measurement is the most relevant
• ESSENTIAL: a summary sheet must be supplied detailing each piece of supporting material and clearly identifying where evidence can be found to support claims in the entry
• PLUS: An approved visual image or video that supports the entry for use in print, results pages online and in the AV.