The jury
Judged by practitioners, protected by design
JIMSO is judged by people who build, ship and evaluate software for a living: product leaders, engineers, designers and operators. Recognition here only means something because the process behind it is credible — and that credibility is engineered, not asserted.
Why practitioners take part
Serious people give their time to serious work
Jurors take part because JIMSO applies a clear, shared standard and shows how decisions are made. The rubric is defined ahead of scoring, the selectivity is real, and judging means assessing what an entry can demonstrate — outcomes, product quality and the value delivered to real users.
That is the kind of evaluation good practitioners want to be associated with. It is also why the jury is chosen for relevant domain experience, not title or profile.
What jurors sign up to
- A rubric defined in advance
- Judging against evidence, not hype
- Real selectivity, with the right to name no winner
- Confidential deliberations and scores
How independence is protected
The result is only worth as much as the process behind it
Several controls keep the outcome tied to the standard rather than to any single person or relationship.
Conflict declaration
Before reviewing, every juror declares relationships that could compromise objectivity — current or former employers, clients, investments, advisory roles, close personal ties and competing products.
Recusal and reassignment
Known conflicts are blocked at assignment, so a juror is never routed an entry connected to them. Where a conflict surfaces mid-review, the juror recuses and the entry is reassigned.
Separation of review and judging
Eligibility and evidence review is handled independently of the jury that scores entries. Jurors do not contact entrants, and entrants cannot contact jurors to plead a case.
A shared, weighted rubric
Every entry is scored against the same weighted 0–100 criteria, with a written rationale required for each. Outcomes reflect the standard rather than personal taste.
No single decider
At least two jurors score every eligible entry, carried out separately so one view does not anchor another. No one juror can determine a finalist or a winner alone.
A genuine threshold
Jurors can decline to name a winner in a category if no entry meets the standard. An empty category is an honest result, not a gap to be filled.
Jury composition for each cycle is published in role-based terms before scoring begins. The strength of the jury is shown through how it works — not through borrowed names or invented endorsements. How judging works.
Autumn Awards 2026
This cycle’s jury
Composition is published in role-based terms before scoring begins, so the make-up of the jury is known and fixed in advance.
The jury for this cycle is announced before scoring begins.
Roles and composition are published in advance. Check back closer to the judging window.
See how judging worksWant to put your product in front of this jury? Enter the current awards.