1. Choose three claims the reader should understand
Write three concrete statements about work completed, a problem addressed or experience gained. Replace broad descriptions such as industry-leading with a statement that can point to an actual example.
Keep one claim on each line. If a sentence combines quality, sales and overseas growth, split it into three entries and find the relevant evidence for each. One photograph should not have to carry several unrelated conclusions.
2. Give each source a short evidence ID
Use IDs such as E01 and E02 to connect a claim with a case-study page, video timecode or original report. Record a readable location while keeping the original in the team's existing folder structure.
For example, a claim about completing a bilingual website might point to an approved public delivery page and its acceptance date. This is an illustration of the method; replace it with work your own team has actually completed.
3. Record the period and version separately
Include the period covered by the evidence, the file's update date and the colleague who checked it. A reporting period and the date a slide was edited answer different questions.
Mark missing source material as unverified. Renaming a file cannot make it verified. Keep earlier versions in their original location, link to the version being used and note why it replaced the previous one.
4. Decide what can be shared
Add a status for public use, named-reviewer use or permission pending. Check customer names, screenshots, contractual material and personal information separately; permission to publish one photograph does not cover every attachment.
If only a summary can be used, record who checked that summary. Keep restricted originals in their controlled location. The index is a map to the evidence, rather than a reason to consolidate confidential documents.
5. Run a five-minute reverse lookup
Ask a colleague who did not write the draft to select three claims and find their sources using only the index. Record missing files, access problems and unclear links between claims and evidence.
Fix those issues before polishing the cover. Hand over a short version note listing the evidence used, open questions and the person who will answer them. Reuse the index when updating the company profile later.
A worksheet you can copy
| Field | What to record | Final check |
|---|---|---|
| Claim | One specific, checkable statement | Does this line make one claim? |
| Evidence ID and location | E01; file location, page or timecode | Can another colleague find it? |
| Period and version | Evidence period, update date and checker | Are event and editing dates separate? |
| Sharing status | Public, named review or permission pending | Were names, images and attachments checked separately? |
| Status and next step | Verified or unverified; owner and reply date | Is an open question presented as fact? |
Before sharing
- Each selected claim has a source
- IDs match usable file locations
- Periods and update dates are separate
- Sharing permissions have been checked
- A colleague has completed the reverse lookup
Common questions
Should the index include every file?
Begin with the claims actually used in this document. Other material can remain in its original folders without padding the index.
Is this an official entry checklist?
It is an internal preparation worksheet. Compare it with the requirements published for the relevant edition before submitting anything.
Official reference and year
These guides provide original preparation methods. The 2026 material is a historical reference; formal 2027 requirements depend on the relevant edition's announcements. The worksheets do not replace official rules, eligibility decisions or professional advice.
- Awards and judging: 2026 edition reference — checked 2026-11-01
