What Indian advertising awards can learn from our western counterparts

With Goafest underway, India’s creative awards circuit is bustling. In early 2025 the country’s flagship shows set new records, for example, the Abby Awards drew 4,076 entries (2,678 creative, 1,398 media), the largest ever for the event. In total, 233 organisations (164 creative houses and 69 media outlets) participated. This surge, often fueled by tie‑ups with global bodies like The One Show, is seen as a sign that Indian festivals aim to measure up to international standards. Indian agencies are also shining abroad: at Spikes Asia 2025 India tied with Australia for the most Grand Prix (five apiece), and at The One Show 2025 six Indian agencies brought home ten Pencils (two Silver, eight Bronze). Even Cannes Lions 2024 saw India earn 18 Lions (including Silver and Bronze awards), evidence of growing creative prowess. 

Yet as the trophies multiply, industry observers say this moment is also one to ask some pointed questions: are India’s awards keeping pace with global benchmarks in fairness, inclusivity and impact?

Representation and inclusivity

Diversity has become a watchword in the global creative community, and Indian awards are no exception. But many point out that women and marginalised groups are still under‑represented. For example, a recent study found less than 1% of Indian ads feature LGBTQIA+ people or people with disabilities. This lack of representation on screen often echoes behind the scenes, at one major festival in 2025, only about 35% of jury members were women, meaning men made up roughly two‑thirds of the judges. In other words, decision‑making panels remain heavily male-dominated.

Judging transparency and credibility

With big budgets and reputations on the line, the integrity of judging is always under scrutiny. Organisers and jurors insist that Indian awards have robust processes. Yet many in the industry point out that the inner workings of awards remain something of a black box. Unlike some international competitions, few Indian shows publish scoring rubrics or summaries of judges’ feedback. 

Entrants typically see only the outcome (shortlist, finalist, winner) with no explanation. By contrast, festivals like Cannes Lions and D&AD have started to emphasise transparency: Cannes now asks shortlisted campaigns to submit evidence of business impact, and D&AD gives entrants written critique (for a fee). There are calls for similar openness here, for example, publishing basic scoring criteria or allowing entrants to request anonymised feedback after judging.

Equally, conflicts of interest are handled behind closed doors. While rules require jurors to recuse themselves from their own agency’s work, there is no public record of which jurors recused or how votes were tallied. Adopting more formal ‘blind judging’ or quantitative scorecards would boost confidence. The hope is that by shining a light on the process, awards can reinforce their credibility.

Access for smaller and regional agencies

Agency of the Year remains one of the top honours at Indian award shows, but its current format raises eyebrows. Most festivals award it based on total wins, which naturally favours large network agencies that can afford to flood categories with entries. As a result, smaller or independent shops, even those producing standout work, often get sidelined by sheer scale.

The title in its essence should reflect quality, not just quantity. Alternatives like factoring in win rate, giving more weight to major awards (like Grand Prix), or creating separate categories for indie agencies could help level the field.

This debate ties into a wider issue: access. With entry fees between ₹9,500 and ₹14,000 per submission, and added travel costs for ceremonies in metro cities, many smaller agencies are priced out. Some efforts to address this, like Kyoorius’ 75% subsidy for indie entries or the ABBYs’ no-fee 'Red Abby' category, have improved participation from tier-2 cities. But many believe deeper structural changes are needed: regional editions, online judging, and low-cost indie tracks could go further in making awards more inclusive.

If awards are truly meant to champion the best of Indian creativity, they must offer a fair shot to all, not just the biggest budgets and numbers.

Purpose and impact categories

In recent years, Indian award shows have increasingly embraced special categories for purpose-driven work, focusing on sustainability, inclusivity, and social good, mirroring global trends where cause marketing has taken centre stage. This shift has encouraged recognition of campaigns tackling real-world issues such as education, the environment, and equity. However, as the popularity of such categories grows, concerns have also surfaced around ‘purpose-washing,’ where campaigns adopt a social message superficially, without genuine impact.

Moving forward, juries could strengthen this effort by rewarding demonstrated outcomes, such as shifts in behaviour, engagement metrics, or community-level change, to ensure that the spotlight remains on campaigns with both heart and impact, not just good intentions.

Originality versus adaptation

Plagiarism and originality continue to be sensitive fault lines in India’s awards circuit. There have been instances in the past where top honours were revoked after entries were found to closely mimic international campaigns. More recently, disputes over creative credit have sparked public debates, highlighting the need for stricter vetting. While most Indian shows rely on agencies to self-certify the originality of their work, critics argue that this isn’t enough. As the industry matures, there’s a growing push for juries to uphold a higher creative standard, one that rewards fresh, contextually Indian ideas rather than reworked global templates. To maintain the credibility of awards, juries must be ruthless in calling out uncredited adaptations and holding originality to a higher bar. 

Post-award reflection and learning

One of the lesser-discussed aspects of Indian advertising awards is what happens after the applause. While the announcement of winners generates headlines and LinkedIn posts, there is minimal emphasis on what the campaign actually achieved in the real world. In contrast, global shows like Cannes Lions and the Effies have increasingly embedded effectiveness into their frameworks, rewarding not just creativity, but creativity that drives outcomes. 

In India, this culture of post-award accountability is only beginning to take shape. A few festivals now ask entrants to provide business metrics, sales lift, brand recall, engagement rates, but these requirements are still uneven. More critically, there’s little follow-up. Most awards stop at the trophy stage, rarely tracking whether the work had lasting value or changed consumer behaviour.

India’s creative talent has already proven it can compete on the world stage. Now, it’s the awards ecosystem that must evolve, by championing diversity, originality, and real-world results. Do that, and the applause will last long after the confetti settles.