2006 Jury & Judging

Jury

International Innovations Awards Programme submissions are judged by an international jury of esteemed public sector leaders.

The 2005-2006 jury members are:

• Harry Ganoo, Secretary to Cabinet and Head of the Civil Service, Mauritius  (Chair)
• Jennie Granger, Second Commissioner of Taxation & Compliance, Australia
• Avril Gollop, Secretary to Cabinet, Barbados
• Tony Dean, Secretary to Cabinet, Ontario, Canada
• P.I. Suvrathan, Additional Secretary, Administrative Reforms and Public Grievances, India
• Anare Jale, Chief Executive Officer, Public Service Commission, Fiji
• Tlohang Sekhamane, Secretary to Cabinet, Lesotho
• Yaacob Hussin, Director General, MAMPU, Malaysia
• Charles Polidano, Director, Strategy & Planning, Office of the Prime Minister, Malta
• Lucy DeGroot, Executive Director, IDeA, United Kingdom

Judging

The Awards Programme is about innovation:  to make new, to alter, or to take a novel approach.  The evaluation criteria outlined below will be applied at all stages of judging.

• Effectiveness -- Has sufficient time passed to demonstrate results, and thereby the initiative's effectiveness? (Note: The initiative must have been commissioned or chartered after June 30, 2001, although the policy decision which gave rise to the initiative may have been taken earlier.)  In addition, particular attention will be paid to the costs of implementation, any savings achieved and the benefits realised.
• Innovation -- Is the initiative genuinely innovative within the public sector?  Innovation may take the form of a successful experiment; the implementation of effective organisational change; the translation of new ideas into practice; or harnessing new technology.  Where innovation involves technological change, the emphasis will be on how the technology was introduced into the organisation.
• Relevance -- Is the innovation consistent with the Awards theme, and also relevant in its context?  The impetus for the innovation and the purpose and objectives of the change should be noted.
• Significance -- Does the submission demonstrate significant benefits of the innovation, either actual or potential? Significance can be on a local as well as national basis.  Significance will not be evaluated simply on the grounds of the size and scale of benefits.
• Replicability -- Has the innovation been, or will it be, replicated in some manner by other governments or agencies?  If replication has taken place, the nature, extent and success should be noted.
• Appropriateness to context -- How appropriate is the initiative to local economic and socio-economic conditions?  Particular technologies may be more appropriate to the situation or context (i.e., capital financing versus labour intensive improvements).

CAPAM acknowledges regional differences in practice.  Accordingly, the context of each submission will be taken into consideration.  Winners are chosen based onn the criteria used for all submissions.