Any case of breach of this code of conduct will be considered by the ERASG. Sanctions may include complete removal from the judging role, discounting of individual results for a category, or any penalty incurred through breach of the APM code of professional conduct. Matters reported under this code may also result in action against an entrant. In case of any dispute, the final arbiters will be APM.
In the first instance, Education and Research Awards judges will be bound by the terms of the APM code of professional conduct. This is the baseline and beyond this, the following special conditions will apply:
- Confidentiality: Judges undertake to maintain the confidentiality of their role with respect to the identity of applicants, the marks awarded and the identity of other Judges.
- Conflict of interest: All judges must notify APM immediately when he or she becomes aware of any potential, real, or perceived conflict(s) of interest. This may include any previous professional or personal relationship between the Judge and an applicant, or the organisation of an applicant. A judge must also declare any potential, real or perceived conflict(s) of interest that they are aware may apply to another judge.
- Communication: In order to provide transparency, traceability and clarity of communication, all emails should be sent directly to APM via firstname.lastname@example.org who will then undertake to ensure appropriate circulation of messages. This is important in association with point 1 above. Information could wrongly be passed to others and breach confidentiality.
- Promptness: The dates for submission of scoring and feedback will be made available to all judges in advance and judges will be required to comply with these dates. In case of difficulty, Judges must notify APM immediately when a delay presents itself as a possibility.
- Obligations: Judges undertake to provide not only marks, but also feedback for applicants, which should be constructive and of value for the candidate’s future improvement. A template for feedback will be provided.
- Responsibility to feedback: All judges must address any concerns on outcomes and process (such as criteria and judging process) by giving feedback to APM. A judges’ feedback survey will be made available to facilitate this after the judging has finished.