Draft:Design competition management

• Comment: I'm declining this because it is essay-like rather than a viable encyclopaedia article draft. However, it would probably be more correct to call it a 'how-to-guide' for running a design competition, and we do not publish how-to-guides.
  There are vast swathes of content without any referencing – where does all this information come from? Which is another way of saying that Wikipedia articles summarise what reliable and independent sources have previously published; they are not written based on what the author knows, or wants to say, about a subject.
  Of the few sources cited, apart from the two PDFs, it isn't clear what sources #6 and #7 are; #8 is just a wikilink to another Wikipedia article (you cannot cite Wikipedia as a source on Wikipedia); and #9 purports to be a link to the author's own book, but doesn't actually return what the citation suggests it would.
  In conclusion, this requires extensive, possibly complete, rewriting, following the approach outlined in WP:GOLDENRULE. DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:40, 17 July 2026 (UTC)

---

Jury meeting of a design competition in Lahr

Design competition management refers to the planning, organization, and documentation of design competitions in fields such as architecture, urban design, landscape architecture, art, public art, civil engineering, and product design. Professionals providing these services are commonly referred to as competition managers, competition consultants, or competition organizers. Related English-language terms include “competition advisors”, “competition organizers”, and “professional or technical advisors” (UIA Guide, Art. 9 and Annex..).

The competition manager is the so-called “architect of the first phase”, as the role initially involves tasks similar to those of a designer at the early stage of a project. Like an architect or urban designer engaged in the initial planning phase, the competition manager supports the client in clarifying, defining, and coordinating the project’s fundamental requirements.

Unlike a conventional design commission where a designer is responsible for the entire design process, this preparatory work forms part of the competition brief for the subsequent competition organized by the competition manager. As a result, the role includes a broad range of organizational, moderational, managerial, and documentation-related responsibilities.

Depending on the nature and scale of the project, this early phase may also include strategic advisory work on the conceptual, political, economic, and regulatory context of the project, often in coordination with user representatives, public authorities, and other stakeholders such as local residents, citizens, or employee representatives.

Competitions are organized either by the promoter’s own staff or by external offices, or the work is shared between the two. The external partner is usually an architectural or urban design firm or a project management company. In countries with a well-established competition system, a niche has developed for this area of activity and many of these offices regularly undertake this task or are fully dedicated to consultancy and management in this area.

Selecting the project partners: competition organization

At the earliest possible stage, it should be clarified who will be responsible for the organization (preparation and execution) of the competition and whether, or to what extent, external support should be brought in for this purpose. Depending on the competence and capacity of the sponsor as well as the complexity of the construction task and the planned procedure, the total effort and thus also the services to be provided by external support can vary greatly. Also, the position of external partners as competition organizers can be very different. The role of external consulting in the project follows worldwide and even regionally different traditions:

• Competition advisor: A single experienced external person (widespread e.g., in North America) who advises the sponsor on strategic issues, but the major workload is covered by the sponsor's team itself or by another external firm not necessarily experienced in competition support.
• Competition consultant: An external consulting firm supports the competent sponsor as an "extended workbench" through capacities and selective expert advice, thus rather with the character of a "competition secretary", in which the sponsor continues to be responsible for selected central administrative parts of the procedure.
• Competition manager: In this scenario, the external company specializing in this service offers a complete service, and the promoter can concentrate on their tasks as the sponsor, that is defining the planned use and deciding on strategic issues prepared by the competition manager.

Significance

The initial stage of the design process typically involves analyzing requirements, assessing site conditions, and developing a preliminary design concept. Subsequent phases include the refinement of the design, the preparation of technical and structural documentation, the procurement of construction contracts, and the execution of construction works. As a project progresses through these stages, opportunities for optimization —such as cost reduction or quality improvements— tend to diminish.

The early phase is therefore critical, as it involves fundamental decisions regarding the project’s location, scale, and function, as well as the composition of the project team. These decisions require careful preparation and a well-founded basis. Relevant experts and stakeholders are brought together step by step in a “round table” setting to facilitate open discussion and collaboration. In many cases, this phase also requires establishing the economic and political framework for project delivery, both internally, within the client organization, and externally, with local authorities, funding bodies, and the wider public.

For this reason, the initial design phase is regarded as particularly significant for the long-term success of the project, with the aim of achieving high standards of design, functionality, and economic performance.

Qualifications

Competition managers are typically architects, urban designers, or project management companies specializing in advisory and management services within this field. Some guidelines for the conduct of design competitions specify minimum qualifications, stating that competition managers should possess at least the same professional qualifications as the competition participants (UIA Guide, Art. 9: “… preferably an experienced architect …” , RPW 2018 §2(5): “… they have the same professional qualifications as the participants. Knowledgeable promoters may also carry out competition management themselves.”

Competition managers operate at a similar level to the decision-makers on the client side as well as the architects and planners participating in the competition. This requires not only professional and personal qualifications ensuring a comprehensive understanding of all relevant subject matter and client objectives, but also the ability to guide clients through potential decision-making processes and to advise on strategies and the implications of individual decisions. In this sense, the term “competition manager” or “coordinator” can be somewhat misleading, as the role also involves strategic consulting, including the preparation and coordination of complex processes, though is not limited to them.

Prior training and experience as an architect or urban designer provide a solid foundation for the specialized advisory and technical aspects of the role, since most project competitions are conducted in this field. However, the requirements extend beyond the typical professional profile of architects or planners: practical knowledge of business administration and law, as well as a broad range of technical and organizational skills, is also required.

A key requirement for performing the role is familiarity with the full scope of architectural and urban design practice, combined with the ability to act as a mediator among project stakeholders. In addition, experience is required in areas such as construction and procurement law, commercial and legal project development, graphic design, public relations, and IT logistics. Personal competences such as negotiation, moderation, and the ability to think in complex technical, economic, and political contexts are also essential. In this respect, the role of competition manager is closely aligned with strategic consulting rather than conventional engineering practice, ultimately a combination of both.

Remuneration

The role of a competition manager is more comparable to that of a management consultant than a practicing architect. Thus, the standard fee calculation methods used for architects and urban designers in Germany —defined by the Fee Structure for Architects and Engineers (HOAI) as a percentage of expected construction costs or project size— are not suitable in this context. Instead, fees are usually based on the actual effort required and the complexity of the project. A lump-sum fee, possibly combined with tiered rates or adjustment clauses for specific aspects —such as the number of required meetings or the number of design entries to be reviewed in the preliminary examination— can typically be determined without difficulty.

Fee calculation relies largely on the competition manager’s experience and an assessment of the expected workload. Accordingly, both the amount of remuneration and the scope and quality of the services provided may vary depending on the manager’s expertise and the project’s requirements. There are no established minimum standards in the form of binding service specifications for competition management.

According to the UIA Guide for International Competitions in Architecture and Town Planning, fees for professional and technical advisors, as well as any additional consultants —such as those involved in defining the spatial and functional program— should be determined based on the workload and local context. Incidental expenses and travel costs are generally covered by the promoter.

Procurement of competition management services

Competition manager services are typically subject to open tendering only for larger projects, depending on applicable procurement and budget regulations as well as the overall level of fees involved. As a result, only a limited number of suitably qualified competition managers are usually invited to submit proposals, based on their experience and relevant references.

Since the scope of services cannot be fully defined in advance and must be adapted to the specific project and procedure, it is generally not described in exhaustive detail. Instead, bidders are expected to further develop and specify the service scope within their proposals, including an implementation concept. Contract awards should therefore not be based solely on price, but also on qualitative criteria (quality-based selection, QBS). Given the advisory nature of the services, the qualifications of the proposed project team are considered as important as the firm’s general experience in delivering comparable assignments. Accordingly, proposals are usually evaluated on three main criteria, which also form the basis for selection. The weighting of these components is determined by the promoter, although it is generally advisable to place particular emphasis on the first two.

• Scope of services and implementation concept
• Project team
• Fee proposal

Tasks of the competition manager

Depending on how far the project has already been developed and coordinated at the time the competition manager is appointed, their scope of services includes strategic advisory work on clarifying fundamental issues:

• Project objectives: economic goals and program requirements
• Framework conditions: technical, political, and planning/legal constraints
• Procurement process: which services are to be commissioned through which procedure and within what timeframe
• Communication: involvement of political bodies and the general public, as well as selected stakeholders

This is followed by more detailed services related to the implementation of the competition process. In this context, the competition manager is not only an organizer but also a facilitator of substantive coordination processes, particularly in the development of spatial and functional programs, and, where applicable, also initiates and conducts these processes. The typical tasks include:

1. Clarifying and describing the project context and planning basis
2. Defining the scope and objectives of the competition
3. Preparing the competition documents (brief, drawing, model of surroundings)
4. Advising on the selection of jury members and technical experts
5. Advising on the choice of competition format and procedure
6. Drafting and coordinating the formal rules and conditions of the procedure
7. Publishing the competition and, if applicable, managing a prequalification procedure for participant selection
8. Communicating with participants through written questions and colloquia
9. Preparing, moderating, and documenting all related events
10. Conducting the preliminary examination of submitted designs
11. Participating in the jury meeting(s)
12. Organizing exhibitions and press releases
13. Conducting negotiation meetings
14. Creating a project website for information and data exchange
15. Managing costs and scheduling

Clarifying and describing project context and planning basis

A competition manager is typically commissioned in response to an identified need to construct, expand, or refurbish a building to meet a defined — though not always fully detailed — purpose. This need may also extend beyond architecture to include urban design, landscape architecture, engineering, product or exhibition design, or even the creation of artworks.

Depending on the project type, the preparation phase for a competition includes compiling existing project documentation and feasibility studies, as well as researching all relevant site conditions. These may include the characteristics and buildability of the property (such as soil composition, topography, existing structures, and utilities), transport access, climatic conditions, and the historical development of the area.

Construction projects generally require planning permission — whether from municipal authorities, regional governments, or other stakeholders whose consent or at least support is essential to the project. It is therefore important to establish approval readiness by involving these stakeholders at an early stage. In this sense, the preparatory phase also serves as a platform for dialogue — a “round table”. Early stakeholder involvement typically facilitates subsequent planning and approval processes and can be a significant factor in project success.

As part of this service, the competition manager may also review and refine the promoter’s initial project specifications to ensure clarity and precision in the competition brief. In all cases, the competition manager must verify that all relevant information is complete and up to date, and coordinate the collection of any missing data.

Definition of the competition brief

In addition to clarifying the existing situation, the competition manager’s scope of services includes defining and describing the project’s objectives. These are typically strategic, urban planning, economic, and functional in nature. To specify functional goals, it is necessary to identify the needs the project is intended to address — whether improving a design situation, creating new spaces, providing transport solutions, or pursuing similar aims.

Based on the needs assessment, the competition manager develops the functional and/or spatial program for the competition. This program translates the identified needs into quantifiable spatial requirements (measured in square meters) and includes relevant technical specifications (such as target ceiling heights, building physics, and lighting conditions, and the desired spatial relationships between individual spaces and functional areas).

Developing these programs requires extensive coordination with various stakeholders, such as end users, specialist consultants, and may include reference to comparable projects, standards, and guidelines. Conflicting expectations must be reconciled through a structured moderation process. Ultimately, it is the competition manager’s responsibility to formulate a competition brief in a clear and consistent manner, ensuring a consensus among all parties involved.

The coordination process concludes with the jury colloquium, in which all jury members meet for the first time to discuss the competition contents and formally adopt them as a consensus document. The preparation, moderation, and documentation of this event, as well as any accompanying program such as a site visit, are carried out by the competition manager.

Preparation of competition documents

All information regarding the project’s framework conditions and objectives must be organized and presented in a way that ensures the project’s intentions are clearly understood by all competition participants and that the necessary information is made available to participating firms for the development of their proposals, typically through downloadable materials provided via the competition website.

Competition brief (brochure)

The primary medium for communicating the competition’s content is the competition brief. The brief consolidates all essential information in textual, tabular, and graphical form and, where required, in multiple languages. Since participants are often unfamiliar with the project site and must be able to quickly grasp the design task, it has proven useful to present the content as clearly and unambiguously as possible, with a strong emphasis on visual communication. A well-designed brief reflects the importance and ambition of the project.

The quality of the description of the task is the most important guarantor of project success. The more complete, better coordinated and clear the brief, the greater the likelihood that design teams will understand the objective and be able to develop appropriate designs on that understanding.

As each project is unique, the competition brief must be created anew for each project; an effort that is worthwhile and cannot be reduced to copying together existing text modules.

The structuring of the competition brief documents is a particular challenge because the design tasks are usually characterized by a high degree of complexity. The central topics must be highlighted as such in order to be comprehensible in the multitude of information required. In the case of detailed information, it must be considered whether it is necessary for the next design step and can therefore be omitted (at this point), if needed.

The complexity of the construction tasks can be explained more easily and precisely in many points with the help of plans, photos, and other graphics, which is why a proper competition brief is also characterized by the quality of its illustrations.

Drawings and plans

Overview of the information plans for a competition for the „Wien Museum“ as provided to the competition participants

An essential component of the competition materials is the set of drawings and plans on which participants are expected to base their design proposals. This includes reviewing the available materials, supplementing them where necessary, and compiling them into a coherent, logically organized set of documents. These materials also help ensure that the jury evaluation and final decision are made based on consistent and reliable reference information. Any discrepancies between plans originating from different sources must be resolved before the documents are issued to the participants. It is the competition manager’s responsibility to commission additional surveys where necessary —for example, a land survey— to ensure that accurate baseline data is provided.

Site model

Site model used during a Jury Meeting in Fez

A key tool for presenting design concepts in a design competition is the physical architectural model, produced at an appropriate scale. In design competitions, models are typically built at a scale of 1:500 and, in some cases, 1:200, while urban design competitions commonly use scales of 1:1,000 or 1:500. These models enable the jury to effectively evaluate the spatial quality and overall impact of the submitted designs. To facilitate evaluation within the broader urban or landscape context —such as the surrounding built environment and site conditions— it is standard practice to create a model of surroundings. This model depicts the topography and existing buildings in the surrounding area, leaving an empty space corresponding to the competition site. The models submitted by participants (insert models) are then precisely fitted into this space.

In addition to its use during jury deliberations, the site model —together with the inserted model of the winning design— plays an important role in public communication, especially in exhibitions and project presentations, for example during a press conference. The organization and production of the site model are the responsibility of the competition manager. This includes several key tasks:

• Advising the competition commissioner on the appropriate model size and scale, taking into account expected production and transportation costs
• Preparing the digital plans and data required for the model maker
• Managing the procurement process for the model-making services and commissioning the selected contractor

Advising on the selection of jury members and experts

Jury meeting for add design competition for BMW AG’s Research and Innovation Center in Munich

The experience of a competition manager plays a crucial role in identifying the right individuals for a given project —including jurors, technical experts, and, where appropriate, competitors— and in assembling a team that is well qualified for this demanding responsibility.

The technical jury serves as the promoter's principal advisory body throughout the competition. It plays a key role in shaping the competition brief and is responsible for determining the competition outcome. At the same time, it helps ensure that the competition is conducted fairly and transparently for the participating design teams and the public.

Because of this, selecting the members of the technical jury requires careful consideration. A well-balanced jury typically consists of an independent technical jury and a general jury comprised by stakeholder representatives who reflect the promoter's interests and expertise, as well as the perspectives of other key project participants, such as future users, neighboring property owners, permitting authorities, and funding agencies.

Beyond its functional role, the composition of the jury also sends an important message about the promoter's priorities and values. Its size and makeup, the balance between local and international members, the breadth of disciplinary expertise, and the diversity of the panel in terms of gender, age, and professional perspectives all shape how the competition is perceived.

The neutrality of the competition manager as an advisor –rather than an advocate or even a competitor– enables the necessary channels of communication and contact during the competition. Unlike parties who may have a vested interest in the outcome or who compete in the same market, the competition manager maintains a neutral position that enables open and effective collaboration among all stakeholders. The competition manager must not be in direct competition with any of the parties involved in the competition. Rather, the role is that of a trusted partner — serving both the client and the planning process, with the ultimate objective of achieving the best possible outcome for the project.

Advising on the choice of the competition format

There are many different types of design competitions, with design competitions serving as a representative example of all competition types involving architects, landscape architects, urban planners, and engineers. Depending on the project’s significance, scale, complexity, and procurement or competition regulations, the procedure can be tailored to suit the specific needs of the project. In this context, professional associations such as the respective architects’ chamber typically provide advisory support.

A key decision is whether and how the competition will be publicly announced, how many participants will be invited, and what qualifications they must meet. For example, in specific cases, participation by multidisciplinary teams may be recommended or even required. It is also possible to structure the process in multiple stages, allowing for a more intensive dialogue during the design and evaluation phases. In complex projects, it may further be beneficial to waive anonymity in favor of direct communication with participants. In advising on and selecting the appropriate procedure, it is essential to make effective use of the legal framework governing design competitions in the respective country, in the best interest of the project and all stakeholders.

Defining and aligning the formal conditions of the competition

The competition manager is also responsible for defining the conditions of the procedure in a binding manner for all parties involved, thereby establishing the contractual framework of the competition. This includes:

• Identification of the parties involved
• Explanation of the procedural conditions (competition type, approval by the chamber, eligibility requirements, selection criteria, exclusion criteria, prize money, contract award commitments, intellectual property rights, etc.)
• List of competition documents
• Description of the required submissions
• Definition of timelines and deadlines

Publication and/or implementation of a prequalification procedure for participant selection

Restricted competition

In the context of participant selection for design competitions, the goal is to determine which designers are suitable for addressing the task at hand, which criteria should be applied, and/or which body is responsible for selecting participants. It is easy to imagine that this phase can either set critical positive conditions for the subsequent project process or result in decisive errors. Therefore, to ensure that the procedure is neither formally nor politically contestable, careful guidance and consultation are essential at this stage. Ultimately, the objective is to assemble a participant field that is sufficiently large, competent, and heterogeneously composed for each specific project. Applicable procurement law must be observed, which for public competitions typically requires that the opportunity to participate be publicly announced. Selection is then carried out either by lottery or according to predefined criteria. In the case of private competitions, participant selection may occur without adhering to public procurement regulations; however, transparency, accountability, and careful definition of selection criteria should still be maintained. To make such procedures manageable for all parties, it is recommended to provide clear guidelines for applicants and to limit the requirements for participation to a reasonable scope. The competition manager is responsible for overseeing the entire process. This includes advising on the overall approach, defining selection criteria, preparing application forms, receiving and organizing submissions, moderating the selection process, and documenting the proceedings.

Open Competition

A special case is the open competition, in which any professional with the relevant qualifications may participate. In this format, there is no preselection of participants; the winner is determined in a single step solely based on the quality of the submitted design. The open competition therefore represents the “pure form” of the competition. In Europe, such competitions can attract very large numbers of participants, making them feasible only under special circumstances due to the high workload for all parties involved. The role of the competition manager in an open competition is primarily to manage participant registration and facilitate communication with participants, for example by answering queries or distributing additional competition materials.

Dialogue with participants through written questions and colloquia

Participants' colloquium of the competition Wien Museum

In design competitions, participants are given the opportunity to raise questions and discuss aspects of the project. This process serves a dual purpose. On one hand, it is intended to ensure that all participants gain a clear and comprehensive understanding of the project and its framework conditions. On the other hand, it reflects the fact that the competition is also designed to draw on the experience and creativity of all involved at an early stage: Questions and suggestions should provide the opportunity to reconsider, refine, or even revise certain aspects of the project. This dialogue is traditionally facilitated through a participants' colloquium held at the project site. In addition, participants may submit questions in writing. In practice, this is often handled via an online forum, where participants can submit questions over a defined period and receive responses. This approach has the advantage of allowing issues that arise during the preparation process to be addressed as they emerge. It is essential that all participants have the same level of information; therefore, all questions and responses are documented and made available to all parties as part of the working material. The complete record of questions and answers thus becomes an integral part of the competition brief itself.

In cooperative competitions, the participants’ colloquium may also include interim presentations by participants to the jury, followed by discussion of the design approaches with the aim of further clarifying the brief and the project requirements.

Preparation, moderation, and documentation of all events

It is part of the competition manager’s responsibilities to prepare, moderate, and document all events throughout the competition process. This includes the creation of agendas, organization of meeting rooms including furniture and seating arrangements, preparation of handouts and presentations, as well as the moderation and documentation of the meetings.

Preliminary examination of submitted designs

Before the jury begins its evaluation of the submitted designs, an initial preliminary review phase takes place. This phase is crucial to the success of the competition, as it lays the groundwork for the jury’s deliberations and serves as an important strategic step for the promoter. The quality of all preparatory steps should reflect both the complexity and significance of the decisions to be made and the promoter’s standards for the overall decision-making process.

The time available during the jury session is typically insufficient to examine every aspect of the submissions in detail. For this reason, staff members —usually from the competition manager’s team— are given adequate time to conduct a comprehensive review of the entries in consultation with relevant experts. The purpose of this preliminary review is to assess, in an impartial and systematic manner, whether and to what extent the requirements established by the client have been fulfilled. All findings are documented in a preliminary review report, which is then submitted to the jury for consideration.

Along with selecting the competition format, appointing participants (competitors, jurors, and experts), and defining the competition brief, the preliminary review is widely regarded as the fourth critical element of a successful competition. If often accounts for a substantial share of the competition manager’s workload and requires the greatest concentration of personnel resources within a relatively short period. The preliminary review team typically consists of a coordinator, a team responsible for formal compliance review, reviewers with qualifications comparable to the competition participants, and assistants responsible for quantitative and technical verification.

Preliminary examination process

According to Annex IV of the Guidelines for Planning Services (RPW 2013), the standard preliminary review procedure includes the following steps:

1. Verify that all competition entries were submitted on time.
2. Create and maintain a master register, including the sealed envelopes containing participant names.
3. Open the submitted competition entries.
4. Cover identification numbers with anonymous codes.
5. Prepare review checklists.
6. Review submissions for: compliance with formal competition requirements; fulfillment of the program requirements; adherence to measurable evaluation criteria; and compliance with applicable building codes and regulations.
7. Check all required documents (special programs, floor areas, occupancy and usage data, technical calculations, cost estimates, and other required materials) as well as compliance with any additional building requirements established by the promoter.
8. Identify and separate non-compliant submissions and any additional services submitted outside the required scope.
9. Prepare a report summarizing the results of the preliminary review.
10. Reproduce completed review checklists for all jury members.
11. Provide recommendations regarding the eligibility of submissions for jury review.
12. Display the competition entries for evaluation by the jury.

In practice, the preliminary review can be better understood as consisting of the following sub-processes:

1. Receipt and formal verification of competition submissions, including anonymization when required and the repair of any model damage incurred during transport.
2. Quantitative evaluation of measurable and objective criteria, such as areas, volumes, functional relationships, and compliance with applicable regulations.
3. Qualitative evaluation of non-quantifiable aspects, including urban context, design elements, and functional organization.
4. Involvement of experts to review specific aspects prior to the jury session.
5. Preparation of the preliminary review report, summarizing all findings for the jury.

Receipt and formal examination

After the allotted competition period —usually eight to twelve weeks— participants submit the required materials (plans, models, forms, texts, and digital files) by mail or courier to the issuing authority, typically the competition manager’s office. A key principle of competitions is anonymity, meaning that jurors do not know which participant submitted which design. To ensure this, all submissions are delivered anonymously: every document, including its packaging, carries an identification number rather than the participant’s name. With each submission, participants also provide a sealed envelope containing an authorship declaration, which links the project to the corresponding anonymous number and thus identifies the author. These envelopes are kept sealed and are only opened after the final decision has been made.

The task of the preliminary review, typically performed by the competition manager, begins with the formal examination of the submissions, which includes:

• Ensuring that submission deadlines are met
• Maintaining the anonymity of the submissions
• Verifying the completeness of the submitted materials

This organizational part of the preliminary review may also include the repair of models that were damaged during transport and the professional photography of the submitted models.

Review of quantifiable and objective criteria

One component of the preliminary review focuses on quantifiable criteria, that is the measurable aspects of the submitted proposals. These include the dimensions and performance metrics of the proposed design solution, such as gross floor area (GFA), net floor area (NFA), site coverage ratio (GRZ), floor area ratio (FAR/GFZ), building volume (gross building volume), surface areas where relevant (e.g., daylighting areas), and room counts. The review evaluates the extent to which each proposal complies with the project requirements and compares with other submissions in these measurable respects.

To support this assessment, the plans and data sheets submitted by participants are reviewed for consistency and plausibility, and selected information is verified through spot checks and manual measurements. The findings are summarized in the preliminary review report using tables, charts, and comparative analyses.

Review of non-quantifiable aspects

The second component of the preliminary review addresses the professional evaluation of the submissions' non-quantifiable characteristics. Depending on the nature of the project, this may include assessing compliance with required functional relationships as well as adherence to applicable building and planning regulations.

This phase also involves studying the underlying design concept, including its architectural expression, spatial organization, and overall design approach, in order to provide the jury with a concise explanation of each proposal's principal ideas and qualities.

The results of this review are documented in the preliminary review report in both narrative and, where appropriate, graphical form. During the jury session, the preliminary reviewers present these findings to support the jury's deliberations.

While individual elements of the preliminary review could theoretically be performed by professionals from other disciplines —such as business, law, or graphic design— the inherent complexity of architectural and urban development projects requires reviewers who possess qualifications comparable to those of the competition participants themselves. In most cases, this means architects or urban planners who are capable of understanding, interpreting, and evaluating the full range of technical and design-related information contained in the submissions.

Involvement of technical experts

The role of technical experts is to advise both the competition sponsor and the jury on specific subject areas, typically of a technical nature. To ensure that informed judgments can be made during the jury's deliberations, it is advisable to involve the designated experts—such as structural engineers, fire protection specialists, and other consultants—during the preliminary review phase rather than only during the jury session.

In a focused expert review meeting, these specialists evaluate all submitted proposals from the perspective of their respective disciplines and prepare written assessments. Their findings become part of the preliminary review report and are therefore incorporated into the jury's evaluation process. When questions arise during the jury session, the experts are generally available to explain and discuss their conclusions directly with the jury.

Preparation of the preliminary review report

The preliminary review report, presented in printed form to all jury members at the start of the jury session, contains all results of the preliminary review. It serves as both a working document for the jury and a record of the submitted designs. The preliminary review report typically includes:

• Report of the formal examination
• Report on the involvement of experts
• Comparisons of key metrics
• Individual reports on all submissions, including textual explanations of each design, results of the quantitative review, photographs of models, reproductions of drawings provided by participants, any additional analyses from the preliminary review

Participation in the Jury Meeting (decision-making body)

Jury meeting for a design competition for a project in Mekka, Saudi Arabia

Jury meeting for the project „Technical Municipality Düsseldorf“

Jury meeting for the project „Thyssen-Krupp Quarter in Essen“

In principle, the jury is divided into two groups. The first group consists of general jurors, who are typically appointed primarily by the competition promoter. These jurors approach the project mainly from the practical perspective of its function and use. For example, in a hospital project, these would be medical professionals the hospital director; in a production facility, the people responsible for production and logistics. Often, municipal or public-sector representatives are also included. The competition manager’s role is to ensure that all relevant stakeholders—whose participation is strategically important—are appropriately represented. The competition manager’s role is to ensure that all key stakeholders, whose participation is strategically important, are appropriately represented.

Since the task at hand is a planning and design problem, the group of general jurors is complemented by a second group of experts who advise the promoter on technical matters and ensure a professionally qualified decision. These expert jurors should have qualifications at least comparable to those of the participants. It is customary for the number of expert jurors to be greater than the number of general jurors, so that in the event of disagreement, the decision is more likely to reflect the architectural and planning perspective. This arrangement is primarily rooted in German public procurement regulations. In general, it is important to assemble the jury in a way that supports proper and informed decision-making and to structure both the discussion and the decision-making process so that conflicts between general and technical jurors are minimized in the first place. Ensuring this balance is one of the responsibilities of both the jury chair and the competition manager.

During the jury meeting, the submitted proposals are first presented by the preliminary reviewers, who explain the findings of the preliminary review. Once all entries have been presented and clarified, the jury engages in a discussion of the projects and the evaluation criteria, which then leads to an initial round of voting. Designs that do not receive any support in this round are eliminated, while the remaining proposals proceed to subsequent rounds of increasingly detailed review and discussion.

The proposals remaining in the decision process form the “shortlist,” comprising all entries considered eligible for awards or mentions. Before the final decision on the ranking of the shortlisted designs, the jurors prepare a written report for each entry, outlining its strengths and weaknesses. This is followed by a final discussion and a vote on the ranking of the selected proposals, and thus on the winner of the competition. Since the outcome involves not only recognition but also, as a rule, a potentially significant planning commission, a high level of skill is required by the jury chair, who must act as moderator, mediator, and ultimately advocate for the interests of both the promoter and the participants. It is evident that this role requires a highly experienced architect. At the same time, the competition manager plays an important supporting role as a secondary moderator and a trusted advisor to the promoter.

Sitzung des Preisgerichts

Once the winning project has been selected, participant anonymity is lifted by opening the sealed envelopes containing the authorship declarations and announcing the names of the authors. At this point, the jury meeting is typically concluded. A full record of the proceedings is then prepared, including the results of all votes, the key points of the discussion, and the written evaluations. This report is signed by all jurors and distributed to all participants after the session. In addition, documentation of all submitted proposals and the preliminary review findings is provided to all involved parties. The purpose of this documentation is to ensure that the decision-making process is as transparent and understandable as possible, thereby increasing acceptance of the decision that has been made.

Exhibition and press release

Exhibition within the framework of the design competition for the Wien Museum

AExhibition within the framework of the urban design competition for the reorganization of „Siemensstadt 2.0“ in Berlin

AExhibition within the framework of the urban design competition ThyssenKrupp Quarter in Essen

The public exhibition of all designs submitted to the competition, along with information about the jury’s decision, primarily expresses respect for the effort and work of all participating offices by showing that not only the prizewinners of a competition, but all participants contributed to the development of the project and to jury deliberations. Additionally, it serves to create acceptance for the project. In general, the exhibition is complemented by publications in professional journals and a presentation of the results on the project’s homepage.

The task of the competition manager is to organize the exhibition, also including labeling the designs with the names of their authors, compiling materials for the press, and supporting the promoter during any press conference that may be held. To provide the exhibition with the desired comprehensive informational content, it is helpful to equip it with additional informational panels about the purpose and objectives of the competition, the process, and so on. In elaborate exhibitions, for example, the participants’ plans may be reprinted to achieve uniform printing and paper quality, or screens may be set up to display images and films from the competition events, which are also produced by the competition manager.

Negotiation meetings

After competitions, negotiations are conducted either only with the author of the design awarded first prize or with all prizewinners regarding the commissioning of further planning services. In the case of public promoters in Germany, these negotiations are conducted on the basis of the VgV, the Public Procurement Regulation, or the Regulation on the Awarding of Public Contracts. The competition manager can also take on tasks on behalf of the organizer during these negotiations, for example:

• Preparing, coordinating, and drafting forms
• Developing components of the tender documents, including contributing to the formulation of the performance description for the contract
• Issuing invitations to submit offers
• Receiving bidder questions, developing and coordinating responses, and issuing replies
• Conducting preliminary evaluations of offers for formal compliance
• Preparing negotiation meetings, including scheduling and issuing invitations
• Moderating and documenting the negotiation meetings
• Drafting and distributing awards and rejection letters

Creation of a project homepage for information and data exchange

The project website, coordinated by the competition manager, serves as a platform with multiple functions for communication among competition participants:

• Announcing the procedure to the general public and attracting professionals to participate
• Providing project information, including plans and images
• Managing the preliminary selection process via online application forms (if relevant)
• Enabling registration for open competitions
• Possibility for registration in open competitions
• Allowing applicants and participants to submit questions and view responses
• Providing access to project files
• Hosting an online exhibition of the competition results

Control of costs and deadlines

For the term of the appointment, the competition manager is responsible for coordinating the project schedule. This initially requires the development of a master schedule that can be integrated into the overall project timeline, which in turn defines and tracks the timeframe through to project completion. Once the jury members have been appointed, coordinating the timing of all events becomes one of the competition manager’s key responsibilities, including maintaining and updating the schedule in the event of project delays.

Competition processes are typically organized into four phases:

• Preparation (approx. 3 months to 3 years): The time required for this phase can vary considerably depending on the amount of preliminary work already completed (for example, whether a requirements program, site surveys, and accompanying studies are already available) and on the required extent of coordination of the specifications or other important parameters of the competition, e.g., with (political) committees, the public, or design partners. In the case of invited or restricted competitions, the selection of the competition participants may take place at this phase.
• Competition / design phase (2 to 3 months): Depending on the complexity of the task and taking into consideration the vacation calendar, a design period of an appropriate length should be provided to the participating offices. In the case of two-stage competitions, these periods are two, whereby the design period can be reduced to 4 to 6 weeks, depending on the required services.
• Jury deliberation and decision (1 to 1.5 months): Prior to the jury meeting, a preliminary examination takes place, in which the submitted materials are reviewed, analyzed, and prepared in a report for the presentation to the jury. The jury meeting itself typically lasts one to two days.
• Communication and commissioning (approx. 2 months): Following the conclusion of the competition, the promoter negotiates the contract with the selected team while also communicating the competition results to the public. This typically includes an exhibition of the submitted proposals (often accompanied by a public opening reception), an online presentation, if necessary, printed documentation as well as a press conference or press release.

Cost management also initially requires the preparation of a comprehensive cost estimate for the competition. In addition to the competition sum (prizes and honoraria), this includes, in particular, the costs for the participation of jurors and experts, event-related costs, printing and model-making costs, and, if relevant, travel expenses.

Since this is usually the largest item in medium-sized and large projects, the calculation of the competition sum is the most important part of the competition manager’s responsibilities. During the course of the competition, updating the total cost estimate based on actual costs and reviewing invoices are tasks of the competition manager. In addition, the effort required from the promoter’s own staff should not be underestimated.

Cost planning

The following items form the cost framework of a competition:

• Prize money and expense reimbursements (= competition sum) for participating offices
• Fees for external jurors and experts
• Event costs for venue rental, catering, display boards, transportation, etc.
• Procedural costs for document printing, model making, model photography, etc.
• Communication costs for exhibitions and websites
• Travel expenses
• Competition management (fee for the preparation and conduct of a competition)

Literature

• Anderson, E.; Bloxham Zettersten, G.; Rönn, M. (eds.) (2013): Architectural Competitions – Histories and Practice. Stockholm: The Royal Institute of Technology and Rio Kulturkooperativ. ISBN 978-91-85249-16-9.
• Bondar, H. (2017): Architectural and Territorial Development Competitions: Democracy in Action. Kyiv: TOB Kyiv Art Book. / Original title: Бондар, Г (2017): Архітектурні конкурси та конкурси розвитку територій: демократія в дії. TOB Київ Арт Книга.
• Chupin, J.-P.; Cucuzzella, C.; Helal, B. (eds.) (2015): Architecture Competitions and the Production of Culture, Quality and Knowledge: An International Inquiry. Montreal, Quebec: Potential Architecture Books.
• Collyer, S. (ed.) (2004): Competitions – Competing globally in architecture competitions. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Academy. ISBN 0-470-86213-0.
• Hossbach, B.; Lehmhaus, C. (eds.) (2005): phase eins – Die Architektur von Wettbewerben. Berlin: DOM publishers. ISBN 3-938666-02-1.
• Hossbach, B.; Lehmhaus, C. (eds.) (2024): Fundamentals of Competition Management – Preparation and Organization of Design Competitions. Berlin: DOM publishers. ISBN 978-3-86922-316-2. Also available in German and Ukrainian.
• Müller-Wrede, M. (2012): Der Architektenwettbewerb. Cologne: Bundesanzeiger Verlag. ISBN 978-3-8462-0105-3.
• Weinbrenner, E.; Jochem, R. (eds.) (1988): Der Architektenwettbewerb – Erläuterungen der Grundsätze und Richtlinien für Wettbewerbe. Wiesbaden/Berlin: Bauverlag. ISBN 3-7625-2552-8.

Weblinks

1. Information from the Federal Chamber of Architects on competitions
2. Information from the Federal Chamber of Architects and Consulting Engineers Austria on competitions
3. Information from the Berlin Chamber of Architects on competitions and awarding procedures
4. Information from the Chamber of Architects and Urban Planners Hessen on awarding and competitions
5. UIA guide for international competitions in architecture and town planning
6. Example of an online exhibition of an open competition – competition for the Wien Museum
7. Example of a project homepage of a competition – International open two-stage competition for “Place Lalla Yeddouna in the Medina of Fez, Morocco”
8. Example of another project homepage of a competition – Open two-stage competition for the Guggenheim Museum Helsinki