2023 Committee Members
- Greg Adamson, Olympus
- Matt Barry, Astellas
- Vicki Colman, Eisai
- Jeff Hartzler, UCB
- Mark Lockett, Sanofi
- Melissa Lowe, Philips
- Alison Quinn, Kite Pharma
- John Sjovall, SK Life Science
- Mike Sullivan, Intra-Cellular Therapeutics
- Julia Taylor, Horizon
Staff Liaison: Christine Gaudet, Director of Events
If you are interested in learning more about this committee or how you can get involved, email Christine at cgaudet@L-TEN.org.
The LTEN Excellence Award Judges are to serve as a quality control measure for the award submissions.
Duties & Responsibilities
- Review no more than 10 workshop submissions and provide constructive feedback that may be provided to those workshops not selected on ways to improve.
- Award Judges must be directly employed by the pharmaceutical, biotech, medical device or diagnostic industry within the learning/training department. There will not be any judging by the secondary market learning professionals. If by chance you are assigned a submission that involves your company we ask that you recuse yourself.
- Provide quality assurance for the LTEN Excellence Award submissions.
Rate each submission according to judging criteria:
- 9-10 (Breakthrough and/or Role Model): For learning practitioners or supplier companies considered “breakthroughs” and/or “role models” for the learning and development industry. The challenge is considered to be extreme (across an entire industry) or global (large numbers of learners, many stakeholders, very difficult to accomplish), and the nominees have demonstrated role-model leadership.
- 6-8 (Outstanding): For learning practitioners or supplier companies who did an outstanding job, met or exceeded all of the criteria as described and accomplished all goals. The complexity was significant and/or the nominees demonstrated clear leadership.
- 3-5 (Meets the criteria): For learning practitioners or supplier companies whose initiatives met the criteria, but did not or could not provide clear or reliable evidence to identify initiatives as breakthrough or outstanding.
- 1-2 Provided some evidence but does not meet the criteria): For learning practitioners or supplier companies whose initiatives contributed to the criteria, but did not or could not provide clear or reliable evidence to identify initiatives as breakthrough or outstanding.
- 0 (Does not meet the criteria): Did not meet the criteria established or failed to document how the criteria were met.
Reviewers have not been assigned more than 10 submissions to review. This process of reviewing submissions should not take you longer than two hours from start to finish. You are welcome to review at your own pace. The deadline for reviews is February 24th.