|
One was through a place of employment, and awards were given out based on classification, as well as for teams who did something amazing. To decided how many awards were granted, we had a mathematical formula of how many people worked in each class, and sought a certain amount of nominees based on that number.
The people who rated/judged the nominees knew who they were, and we were assisted by previous year winners from each employment category. Everyone was based upon the same scale, but the packets varied widely as some people had a lot of support that didn't mean much, and others had a few letters that were really strong and informational (reminded me so much of the rec process for sorority recruitment, ha!).
Everyone on the committee read the nominees' supporting material, and there was discussion and a vote. it was kept secret until the ceremony, and all people who were qualified nominees were invited, as well as their coworkers.
As much as collegiate opinions may be valuable, it may be good to have just alumni do the scoring, though include student input in some of the categories. Maybe if the student is elected to an inter/national position and is already at a level of impartiality it could work.
I'd also make sure that chapters are looked at in a way there can be some "normalizing" of standards. Even if chapter A has the highest GPA, maybe chapter L brought there's up a larger percentage. If chapter Q did X amount of community service hours, it would be great to see how that spreads out over membership, and give an award for manpower, overall, and maybe for an individual. This can kind of spread the love around and I saw this work on my campus when events with participation changed from sheer numbers to percentages. Helped equalize the 100 man and 25 man groups for recognition. Maybe even include something for chapters to nominate non-members (administrators/professors/departments) who have been integral and useful, but aren't regular advisors.
|
Linear Mode
