The AIDA Awards follow a multi-step judging process to ensure fairness, rigour, and expert evaluation across all disciplines.

In the first stage, jury members review and rate all submitted projects online using a dedicated scorecard. Each juror evaluates entries based on their expertise and experience within their specific design field. The Africa International Design Awards scores projects on a scale of 10–100 points.

Once the initial scores have been tallied, jury members participate in group discussions to review the highest-scoring entries in each category. These collaborative sessions allow for the exchange of ideas, critical debate, and collective insight. Final deliberations determine the winners in the Professional, Independent Designer, and Emerging Designer categories.

Due to the high volume of submissions, our judges are unable to provide individual feedback on every project. However, if a judge includes specific comments on a project’s scorecard, we will be happy to share those insights with the applicant.

The evaluation process for entries to the AIDA Awards – Fashion Design category is guided by a set of flexible judging criteria. These are regularly reviewed and adapted in response to evolving creative, cultural, environmental, and social contexts. While not exhaustive, the criteria serve as a framework to guide the jury’s assessment — complemented by each juror’s expertise, perspective, and cultural background.

Each jury member is deeply committed to a fair and thoughtful evaluation process. Categories are assigned based on the jurors’ specific knowledge and professional experience. All entries are reviewed anonymously and randomly, ensuring a judging process that is both impartial and equitable.

Entries will be evaluated based on the following criteria, depending on the nature of the project and design discipline:

• Aesthetics – Overall visual harmony and design quality, including form, proportion, materiality, colour, texture, and finish.
• Innovation – Introduction of new design approaches, construction methods, spatial concepts, or reinterpretations of traditional forms.
• Functionality and Practicality – Effectiveness of the space in serving its intended use, including aspects such as circulation, safety, accessibility, maintenance, and user needs.
• Ergonomics – Quality of spatial experience, comfort, and optimisation of space in relation to human activity and movement.
• Durability – Use of quality materials and construction techniques that ensure long-term resilience, adaptability, and structural performance.
• Impact – Positive contribution to users, the surrounding community, and society at large — whether social, cultural, educational, or economic.
• Contextual Integration – Sensitivity to the site, environment, and cultural or historical context; how well the design responds to and enhances its surroundings.
• Ecological Compatibility – Environmental responsibility in terms of material sourcing, energy efficiency, construction methods, and sustainability strategies.
• Emotional Quotient – Beyond utility, does the design evoke a sense of enjoyment, connection, or emotional resonance?