Creative Circle scraps current points system

Firstly, one of the reason's the points system was created was because various publications and others in the industry were creating their own points list which differed from each other, which created a bunch of confusion in the marketplace. So the idea was to standardise the points for all the endorsed awards festivals, and then for the creative circle to take ownership of that and release a yearly table by agency group and immediately after every endorsed award.

Clearly, this year, even with our points system, much confusion and, ahem, debate reigned post the last Loerie awards. The points system was interpreted in a number of different permutations by the industry and the agency groups, depending on how an agency or agency group wanted to swing it, compounded by the fact that an initial different Loerie points list was sent out first, followed by an official Creative Circle one.

Also, as everyone has pointed out, there has been a growing obsession with the point list. There has been debate over the points system and group vs. individual agency ranking than pretty much anything else at the exco's [sic], as opposed to figuring out how to make the work better. There have been more complaints over the amount of awards versus quality versus amount of points versus etc. than ever before.

So after seeing the Olympics table in the morning paper a little while ago, it struck us that their table is simple, works universally, without language, without caveats and explanations, and realised we'd possibly overcomplicated the issues with regards to the complex, interpretive, statistically heavy points system. By scanning the Olympic results table, one can immediately pick up who is the overall winner, and who has won the most golds, silvers etc, leaving everyone with a much clearer picture of who the strongest agency is in terms of quantity and quality.