Site Visits and Interviews

No affiliate links on this site, and no competition is named here as good or bad.

Where a programme includes a visit or an interview, it is assessment rather than a formality, and it tests something the written entry cannot.

What it is testing

Whether the entry describes a real organisation. For a practical reference outside the awards context, see further details.

An assessor is checking that the claims correspond to something — that the process described exists, that the people mentioned are there, that the figures come from somewhere. A useful outside reference for comparison is Ad Age, which provides a useful contrast to the specific process described here.

Not whether you are impressive. The scoring criteria still apply, and the visit supplies evidence against them rather than replacing them.

And frequently whether the entry was written by somebody who knows the work, which is visible within minutes and is one reason a professionally written entry can be a liability if nobody internally can discuss it.

What assessors notice

Whether other people can describe the thing.

A visit where only the founder speaks tells an assessor that the account may be one person's — and where an entry claimed an organisational capability, that is a finding.

Whether the place matches the description. Not that it is impressive; that it is consistent with what was written.

Whether staff recognise the initiative the entry described. A programme nobody on the floor has heard of is a programme that exists on paper.

And whether documents appear when asked, which is the verification half.

Preparing legitimately

Have the evidence to hand. Every figure claimed, with its source, in one file.

Tell people it is happening and what the entry said, so that nobody is ambushed by a question about a project they were not told had been entered.

Decide who speaks about what — and include the people who did the work rather than only those who manage it.

Reread the entry. It was written months ago.

And answer the weakest criterion in advance, since a competent assessor asks about it.

What not to do

Do not stage anything. Assessors visit many organisations and recognise arrangement — a floor cleared for the occasion, staff briefed on answers, a display assembled that morning.

Where it is noticed, everything else becomes suspect, which is a worse outcome than an ordinary working day would have produced.

Do not answer for people. An assessor asking a question of somebody else and receiving an answer from you has learned something.

And do not hide a known problem. Naming it, with what you are doing about it, scores better than having it discovered — and it frequently is.

The interview version

Same purpose, less context.

Usually a panel, usually short, and usually structured around the criteria rather than around the entry.

Which means the preparation is the criteria rather than the document: for each, what is the evidence and what is the honest limitation.

Take somebody who did the work. The person who wrote the entry and the person who delivered it are frequently different, and the second answers better under questioning.

And keep answers short. A panel with a timetable has questions remaining, and an entrant who talks through the allocation prevents their own case being made.

Confidentiality

A visit gives outsiders access to your premises, staff and documents.

Ask what the programme's arrangements are — most have them, and few volunteer them.

Three questions: who attends, what is recorded, and whether anything shown is treated as confidential.

Where commercially sensitive material is involved, say so before the visit and offer it under a stated condition rather than declining outright — assessors are used to this and it does not count against an entry.

And where judges are practitioners in your field, they may be competitors, which is worth raising in advance rather than discovering on the day.

What to do afterwards

Send anything you promised, quickly, and nothing you did not.

An assessor who asked for a document and received it within a day has had the entry's claim about responsiveness demonstrated rather than asserted.

Thank them, briefly.

And note what you were asked, which is the most accurate available guide to what the panel actually cares about — useful next year regardless of the result.

The question you will be asked

Almost always some version of: what was hardest about this?

It is not small talk. The criteria frequently include something about challenge or learning, and the answer supplies evidence against it.

Prepare a real one. A genuine difficulty, what you did, and what you would do differently — which is a stronger answer than a triumph and is what an assessor is listening for.

"Nothing was particularly hard" is a bad answer to any question in this family, and it is the one people give when unprepared.

Remote visits

Increasingly common and different in one respect.

An assessor cannot see the place, which means the human evidence carries more weight: who speaks, whether they know the work, whether accounts corroborate.

Have more people on the call than you would take to a panel, briefly, rather than one person for an hour.

And test the arrangements beforehand. A visit spent resolving connection problems is a visit spent on nothing, and the impression it leaves is not neutral.

If it goes badly

It happens, and a poor visit does not always decide the result.

Send the missing document afterwards where something could not be produced. Assessors record what was promised.

Do not send a lengthy correction. One short message with the specific item, and nothing else.

And note what went wrong, which is the same review that follows any result and is more useful while it is fresh.

The short version

• A visit or interview tests whether the entry describes a real organisation, not whether you are impressive
• Assessors notice whether other people can describe the thing, whether the place matches the account, and whether documents appear
• Prepare by assembling the evidence, telling people, deciding who speaks, rereading the entry, and answering the weakest criterion in advance
• Do not stage anything: assessors recognise arrangement, and once noticed it makes everything else suspect
• Name a known problem with what you are doing about it, since discovery scores far worse than disclosure
• Keep answers short — a panel with a timetable has remaining questions, and talking through the allocation prevents your own case