[Skip to Content]

The quality of the nomination is important. Past award judges have compiled a list of suggestions for creating a quality nomination package. Check out this webinar on 4 June to learn more about submitting a strong nomination. ISACA Members can earn 1 free CPE. 

Candidates may not be part of the nomination process:

  1. The QUALITY of a nomination is far more important than the QUANTITY of nominations received. Soliciting nominations for yourself is inappropriate and voids the ethical guidelines established by the ISACA Awards Working Group in the ISACA Awards Operations Manual. One complete and descriptive nomination has a higher chance of success than multiple nominations containing bare responses. Nominations are scored individually, not collectively.
  2. The nominator should utilize the space allotted within the nomination form and provide detailed responses to the questions with examples of the candidate's achievements. Endorsement letters are an excellent way to expand upon the candidate's work to create a comprehensive picture of his/her contributions.

A compelling nomination package should be structured to reveal how an individual/chapter has:

  1. affected or enriched the lives of its professional community or body of knowledge;
  2. demonstrated past or ongoing inventiveness, leadership and dedication;
  3. encouraged and exemplified strong professional contribution;
  4. demonstrated continual and altruistic voluntary professional service;
  5. earned the respect of peers and/ or achieved the status of a worthy role model in their professional field or community;
  6. demonstrated novelty, creativity and innovation in formulating lasting solutions/contributions/results/outcomes.

The package must include logical and progressive details showing:

  1. how things were before and after the achievement in focus;
  2. what knowledge(s) the proposed candidate had of the circumstances in focus and what actions they took that made their outcome/result/solution worthy of note;
  3. status of the achievement/result/solution if already completed or still ongoing;
  4. sustainability of the achievement/result/solution;
  5. impact of the achievement/result/solution on professional community and how it has enhanced/improved the lives of others (professional or otherwise);
  6. what made contribution/result/solution an outstanding achievement worthy of note;
  7. illustrate any (with aid of historical background or statistics if feasible) extraordinary circumstances/situation/challenges the candidate surmounted to arrive at result/solution/contribution;
  8. how the candidate's achievements are different and outstanding from others doing similar thing.

The package should be relevant and authentic:

  1. External validation - have others testified in some way to what the candidate's contributions meant to them? It is recommended that the nominator request endorsement letters from colleagues/contacts to supplement information or examples included in the standard form.
  2. Quality of the nomination form - is it expressive and interesting?  It should take information that may be challenging for a less-experienced or more generalized person and make it easier to understand. (Given the global nature of ISACA Awards, leniency is given for nominators whose native language is not English.)
  3. Consider the specific scope and judging criteria for each award and ensure that supporting details are relevant to the award. 

Endorsement letters should support the candidate's achievements:

  1. Endorsers should be familiar with the candidate's work as it relates to the scope of the award and be able to describe in detail how the candidate's achievements are exceptional and deserving of recognition.
  2. Endorsement letters must be submitted using the unique link within the email request. Endorsers should NOT start a new nomination form as this weakens the candidate's presentation to the reviewers.
  3. At least one endorsement letter is required. Up to three letters are highly recommended as they provide additional insights into the personal accomplishments of the candidate not specified within the nomination form.