JUDGING PROCESS

Annual Marketing Awards Program

Published: February 25, 2026

1. About the AMA South Florida Marketing Awards

The AMA South Florida Annual Marketing Awards is the flagship professional recognition program of the American Marketing Association — South Florida Chapter, a chartered professional chapter of the American Marketing Association (AMA).

AMA Fact	Detail
Founded	1937
Global Reach	Approximately 1.3 million marketers worldwide
Professional Chapters	65+ across the United States
Collegiate Chapters	320+ at universities nationwide
Flagship Journals	Journal of Marketing (est. 1936), Journal of Marketing Research, Journal of International Marketing, Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, Journal of Interactive Marketing
Professional Certification	Professional Certified Marketer (PCM®)
Recognition	Listed by the Library of Congress as a leading marketing association

The Awards program evaluates professional marketing campaigns across six categories: Marketing Campaign of the Year, Marketing Team of the Year, Best Branding of the Year, PR & Communications Campaign of the Year, Digital and Social Media Campaign of the Year, and Experiential Marketing Campaign of the Year. Submissions are open to marketing professionals, agencies, organizations, and students throughout South Florida. Judges are selected separately through a structured, merit-based process described below.

2. Judge Selection Process

The selection of judges follows a structured, multi-step process designed to assemble a panel of qualified professionals whose expertise spans the range of award categories.

Step 1: Candidate Identification

Potential judge candidates are identified through multiple channels: nominations by Board members and the Awards Committee, recommendations from prior-year judges, direct outreach to marketing leaders across South Florida, and review of qualified members with relevant professional credentials. The initial candidate pool substantially exceeds the number of judges ultimately selected for the panel.

Step 2: Qualification Review

Each candidate is evaluated against the published qualification criteria (see Section 3). The Awards Committee assesses whether the candidate’s professional background, industry experience, and areas of specialization align with the categories to be judged.

Step 3: Panel Formation

The Awards Committee selects the final judging panel from the pool of qualified candidates, balancing the panel to ensure coverage across all award categories and diversity of professional background and industry perspective.

Step 4: Formal Invitation and Conflict Disclosure

Selected judges receive a formal invitation from the Chapter President. Each judge confirms their participation, acknowledges the Code of Conduct, and completes a conflict-of-interest disclosure prior to receiving access to submissions.

Judges are not self-selected. The role is not available on a volunteer, first-come, or automatic basis. Selection is based on demonstrated professional qualifications and the needs of the judging panel for each program year.

3. Judge Qualifications and Requirements

Professional Experience

Judges are expected to hold a minimum of five years of professional experience in marketing, advertising, communications, brand strategy, digital media, public relations, or an allied discipline. Candidates should have a verifiable track record of professional achievement, which may include leadership positions, published work, professional awards or recognitions, industry certifications, or a notable portfolio of completed campaigns.

Evaluative Capacity

Judges must demonstrate the ability to assess marketing campaigns both strategically and analytically — evaluating not only creative execution but also strategic clarity, innovation of concept, and quality of implementation. Familiarity with current marketing practices, platforms, and performance benchmarks is expected.

Independence

Judges must be free of professional or personal relationships that could compromise their objectivity in evaluating any submission. All judges are required to disclose potential conflicts and recuse themselves when necessary (see Section 4).

Commitment

Judges must be available to complete their assigned evaluations within the program timeline and must adhere to the Code of Conduct and confidentiality requirements described in Section 7.

4. Conflict of Interest Policy

The integrity of the Awards program depends on the independence and objectivity of every judge. The following conflict-of-interest provisions apply to all members of the judging panel.

Prohibited Relationships

A judge may not evaluate any submission where the judge:

• Is currently employed by, or serves as a contractor or consultant to, the submitting organization or its agency of record
• Holds an ownership interest, board seat, or advisory role with the submitting organization
• Personally contributed to the development, execution, or oversight of the campaign under review
• Has a close personal relationship (family member, business partner, close personal associate) with any individual credited on the submission

Disclosure and Recusal

Judges are required to disclose any relationship that could create a real or perceived conflict of interest before evaluating any submission. Where a conflict exists, the judge is recused from that submission and it is reassigned to another qualified panelist.

Monitoring

The Awards Committee monitors conflict disclosures and may independently recuse a judge from a submission if a potential conflict is identified, even if the judge has not self-reported.

5. Evaluation Methodology and Scoring Rubric

Each submission is reviewed by a minimum of two (2) judges who evaluate the work independently and confidentially. Judges do not confer with one another during the evaluation process.

Evaluation Criteria

Judges assess each submission on four criteria using the AMA South Florida evaluation form:

Criterion	Format	What Judges Evaluate
1. Company Need (Written Assessment)	Qualitative	The judge provides a written analysis of the business or brand challenge that the campaign was designed to address. This assessment demonstrates the judge’s understanding of the competitive context and evaluates how clearly the entrant defined the problem.
2. Strategic Approach	1–10 Scale	How effectively the campaign’s strategy addressed the identified need of the brand or company. Judges evaluate the clarity of strategic thinking, the relevance of the chosen approach, and the overall capacity of the strategy to solve the business challenge. Scale: 1 (Very poorly) to 10 (Excellent).
3. Idea	1–10 Scale	How ingenious, innovative, and ambitious the core idea behind the campaign was. Judges assess originality, boldness relative to the category, and whether the idea represents a meaningful departure from conventional approaches. Scale: 1 (Mediocre) to 10 (Excellent).
4. Implementation	1–10 Scale	How well the campaign was developed and executed in practice. Judges evaluate quality of creative production, media deployment, tactical coordination, and overall professionalism from concept through completion. Scale: 1 (Very poorly) to 10 (Excellent).

Scoring Scale

For each numerical criterion, judges assign a score on a scale of 1 to 10:

• 9–10: Excellent — among the strongest work the judge has encountered in professional practice
• 7–8: Strong — well above average professional standard; demonstrates clear excellence
• 5–6: Competent — meets professional standards but does not distinguish itself significantly
• 3–4: Below expectations — notable weaknesses in one or more areas
• 1–2: Very poorly / Mediocre — does not meet minimum professional standards for this criterion

Each submission receives three numerical scores (Strategic Approach, Idea, and Implementation) plus one written qualitative assessment (Company Need). The three numerical scores are combined to produce a composite score out of 30 points for each submission. The final score is calculated from the composite scores of all assigned judges.

6. Award Levels and Determination of Winners

Award levels are determined by absolute score thresholds, not by relative ranking among submissions within a category. This means the number of awards at each level is determined by the quality of submissions, not by a predetermined quota.

Award Level	Composite Score	Description
Gold Award	27–30	Recognizes the highest level of marketing excellence. The campaign demonstrates exceptional strategic thinking, creative originality, and professional execution across all evaluation criteria.
Silver Award	24–26	Recognizes outstanding professional marketing work that demonstrates strong performance and clear quality across all evaluation criteria.
Bronze Award	21–23	Recognizes professional marketing work of merit that meets a high standard of quality across the evaluation criteria.

Submissions scoring below the Bronze threshold do not receive an award. A category may have zero, one, or multiple winners at each level, depending on the quality of submissions received. There is no predetermined quota of awards per category. The decisions of the judging panel are final.

7. Judge Responsibilities and Code of Conduct

Evaluation Duties

• Independent review: Dedicate approximately 20–30 minutes per submission to thoroughly review the entry materials
• Scoring: Provide numerical scores on a 1–10 scale for each of the three quantitative evaluation criteria (Strategic Approach, Idea, and Implementation), reflecting honest professional judgment
• Written justification: Provide a written qualitative assessment of the Company Need — demonstrating understanding of the business challenge the campaign addresses, and noting specific strengths and areas for improvement
• Timeliness: Complete all assigned evaluations within the designated review period

Ethical Standards

• Confidentiality: All submission materials, scores, written assessments, and panel deliberations are strictly confidential and may not be shared with any party outside the judging process
• Independence: Judges evaluate submissions individually. Judges may not coordinate, discuss, or compare evaluations with other panelists during the review period
• Conflict disclosure: Any potential conflict of interest must be disclosed promptly, and the judge must recuse from evaluating the affected submission
• Impartiality: Evaluations must be based solely on the submitted materials and the published evaluation criteria, without regard to the identity or reputation of the submitting organization

8. Current Judging Panel.

Judge	Professional Credentials
Jessica Zuckier	President, AMA South Florida; 20+ years marketing leadership
Konstantin Zhuchkov	Director of AI & Learning Systems
Allison Moraga-Rodriguez	Marketing Associate, Neology Group; strategic marketing across real estate portfolio
Ana Meira	Founding Partner & Creative Director, Regular Animal; VP of Marketing, AMA SFL; global expertise in AR, NFTs, and Metaverse
Dr. Betty N. Carew	CEO, ADsource; former 3M executive; 30 years marketing and business strategy; AMA Board member; nonprofit founder
Daniella Valeriano	Regional Director PanLATAM & Andean Region, Meta; 18+ years digital marketing; former Director of Digital Products, Univision
David Del Rio	Director of Digital Marketing, AMA SFL; 8+ years paid media campaigns; former HBO Max, Havas Media
Alexander Serebriakoff	CEO & Founder of Learn Factory
Fabiola Rojas	Director of Content, AMA South Florida; MBA
Frida Alsterhem	MBA candidate; former AMA Palm Beach Atlantic President (led chapter to Top 5 nationally)
Ignacio Albornoz	Senior Marketing Strategist; 15+ years experiential marketing
Kristal Piccolo	B2B Marketing Executive, Ricoh; 18+ years digital transformation across Latin America; founder, Madres Ejecutivas; MBA (IESA); executive education, Kellogg and Cornell
Marcello Sasso	VP of Programming, AMA SFL; 20+ years market research, CX, and business intelligence; AI-powered insights for strategic growth
Michelle Zambrana	Founder, Cafecito & a Consult; former Twitter/AT&T/P&G
Mark Behar	Author and marketing executive; 15 years SaaS; marketing storytelling in 7 countries; clients include Burger King, Consumer Reports, BT Group
Mykola (Nick) Lukashuk	Founder & CEO, Marketing Link; Forbes Business Council member; data-driven growth strategy
Ricardo Felice	Marketing executive; 25+ years advertising and brand strategy; former Leo Burnett, DDB, Ogilvy; global marketing leader, Digicel; CPG growth, Industrias San Miguel USA

CERTIFICATION

The document was adopted by the Board of Directors of the American Marketing Association South Florida Chapter on February 1, 2026 and is effective as of that date.

Approved by:

Jessica Zuckier, President

Mark Behar, Secretary