Aims and regulations for the Pre-jury´s and the Jury's adjudication of applicants/candidates in Malko Competition
The Malko Competition is held by DR/Danish National Symphony Orchestra (DNSO). DR wishes to ensure, that the competition is organized within the highest standards for fairness, clear voting rules and transparency in all selection processes. Therefore, the present aims and regulations for the work of the pre-jury and jury have been developed for the Malko Competition.
1. SELECTION CRITERIA
1.1. The evaluation of candidates shall be based solely on the following criteria:
- the artistic level (“musicality”)
- the technical level (“conducting skills”)
- the candidates´ expected future potential as a conductor.
1.2. Candidates shall be evaluated disregard of any other factors such as sex, ethnic origin, political or religious persuasion.
2. THE PRE-JURY
2.1. The pre-jury shall consist of 1 chairman and 4 members and can be composed of the following:
- The chief conductor of DNSO.
- Experienced and active musicians of DNSO, appointed by the board of the orchestra.
- External music consultants with extensive international expertise in conducting and talent-spotting.
2.2. On the pre-jury web-platform, the pre-jury has access to the following material submitted by each applicant:
a) 1-3 video recordings of the applicant conducting an orchestra
b) CV
c) Information on age
d) Information on nationality
e) Photo
2.3. Each applicant shall be assessed by the jury primarily on the basis of a), b) and c).
2.4. Voting
2.4.1. Prior to any voting, the pre-jurors shall declare any links (personal, professional, commercial etc.) with any of the candidates. In such case, the pre-juror shall recuse him/herself from voting on these candidates and the votes of the remaining pre-jurors shall be considered as 100%. Links which are not conclusive on whether they constitute conflict of interest are to be discussed amongst the pre-jurors and management for decision on whether the juror will be able to vote.
2.4.2. Each member of the pre-jury has equal voting power. (Taking into consideration point 2.4.7.)
2.4.3. Pre-jurors shall vote on the pre-jury´s online voting-platform.
2.4.4. Pre-jurors shall vote independently and may not discuss the candidates until after the voting is completed.
2.4.5. Pre-jurors may not communicate with any applicant.
2.4.6. In the first voting round, each pre-juror shall select exactly 65 candidates by simple yes/no-votes.
2.4.7. In the second voting round, each pre-juror shall select exactly 28 candidates by simple yes/no-votes. Abstaining is not permitted. The 24 candidates with the highest share of votes are invited to the competition, and the subsequent 4 candidates shall be listed as reserves.
a) Tied result (24 candidates)
Should there be a tie straddling the qualifying line, a new yes/no-vote will then be undertaken to break the tie. In this vote, only those candidates that are in tie will be voted on. Each pre-juror will only possess the number of yes-votes as the number of candidates that have to be selected. If this again results in a tie, the vote of the chairman of the pre-jury shall be given double weight to break the tie. The process shall be repeated with the remaining candidates in tie until the tie is broken.
b) Tied result (4 reserve candidates)
If any of the 4 reserve candidates are in tie, a new yes/no-vote shall be undertaken amongst the candidates in tie to establish a clear ranking amongst the reserve candidates. In this vote, each pre-juror shall have one yes-vote. If the results are tied, the vote of the chairman of the pre-jury shall carry double weighting.
If there is a tie after this stage, the chairman of the pre-jury shall rank the candidates who are in tie.
2.4.8. During the preliminary rounds, the votes of each juror are visible only to the project manager, one DR-key-employee and the web-developer.
2.4.9. Due diligence on 24 candidates and 4 reserves:
In order to mitigate any reputation risk to the competition, the background of 24 candidates and 4 reserves can be vetted by ‘World Check’ or equivalent and thorough research online. Should there be reason for any concern, DNSO reserves the right to disqualify the applicant in question.
3. THE JURY
3.1. The jury shall consist of 1 chairman, 1 vice-chairman and 9 members and can be composed of the following:
1. The chief conductor of DNSO
2. At least two experienced and active musicians of DNSO, appointed by the board of the orchestra. These two jurors must be different from the jurors in the pre-jury.
3. DNSO as a whole is voting through an app and has the voting power of one jury member.
4. Chief executive of DR Koncerthuset
5. Experienced musicians from world renowned symphony orchestras
6. Artistic directors of non-Danish symphony orchestras
7. Professional conductors
Members of the jury under point 5-7 shall be selected by the orchestra management.
3.2. Potential conflict of interest: Prior to the competition, the jurors (except the DNSO) shall declare any links (personal, professional, etc.) with any of the candidates in writing to the project manager in advance. If the link is deemed to pose a conflict of interest, the juror shall recuse him/herself from voting on these candidates concerned and the votes of the remaining jurors shall be considered as 100%.
3.3. If a member of the jury does not correctly declare such relationships between him/her and a competitor, all votes by this member of the jury shall be deemed null and void.
3.4. Voting
3.4.1. Voting shall be carried out on the basis of clean slate, where results from the pre-jury round shall not be taken into account.
3.4.2. Voting shall be by secret ballot in the presence of the project manager. Throughout the competition, ballots shall be monitored for any bias by the management of the competition.
3.4.3. The Jurors shall vote independently and may not discuss the candidates until after the voting is completed.
3.4.4. Jurors may not communicate with any candidate still active in the competition.
3.4.5. The vote of a Juror shall be valid only if he or she has heard all performances of all rounds.
In the unlikely event that a member of the jury is absent during any part of the auditions, the scoring of those specific candidates, whose performances the juror has not been able to observe will follow the same procedure as described under 3.2.
3.4.6. The ballots must be signed by the Jurors. After each voting the project manager and an appointed attorney shall collect and count the ballots, ensuring that they are duly signed.
3.4.7. Prior to voting after rounds 1-3, each member of the Jury will be issued with a ballot with names of all the candidates performing in the round.
After round 1, each member of the Jury places a “+” beside the names of the 12 candidates whom the Juror deems best qualified. (Taking into consideration point 3.2. and 3.4.5.) The 12 candidates who are ranked the highest will qualify for the second round.
3.4.8. After round 2, each member of the Jury places a “+” beside the names of the 6 candidates whom the Juror deems best qualified. (Taking into consideration point 3.2. and 3.4.5.) The 6 candidates who are ranked the highest will qualify for the third round.
3.4.9. After round 3, each member of the Jury places a “+” beside the names of the 3 candidates who the Juror deems best qualified. The 3 candidates who are ranked the highest will qualify for the final round. (Taking into consideration point 3.2. and 3.4.5.)
3.4.10. If a vote proves inconclusive, the following procedures will be observed:
a) Should two or more candidates receive the same share of qualifying votes, a new yes/no-vote shall be undertaken amongst the candidates with the same share of qualifying votes.
b) In case of a tie, a new ballot will be undertaken among the candidates in tie to determine the outcome.
3.4.11. After the final round, the jury shall decide whether there is a first prize winner amongst the three finalists by yes/no vote. If there is no clear majority for awarding a first prize, point 3.4.12. and 3.4.13 shall only be followed regarding the second and third prize. The first prize shall not be awarded.
3.4.12. A separate vote – with all members of the Jury taking part – is taken for each of the three main prizes. (Taking into consideration point 3.2. and 3.4.5.) The voting begins with the 1st Prize, except if a first prize shall not be awarded (see point 3.4.11).
3.4.13. If the votes given to the finalists result in a tie between two finalists, a vote is taken to decide whether a Prize is to be divided between the two (in which case the subsequent Prize is not awarded, and the sum for the two Prizes is divided equally between the two winners (ex aequo)). If there is not a majority in favor of dividing the Prize, the vote of the chairman of the Jury decides in favor of one of the candidates. Should the chairman of the Jury be absent or unable to vote, the vote of the vice-chairman of the Jury decides in favor of one of the candidates.
3.4.14. If the votes given to the finalists result in a tie amongst three finalists, a vote will be taken to select, finally, the two best qualified. The procedure under 3.4.13. shall then be repeated.
3.4.15. The Audience-Prize is awarded on the basis of voting by the audience without any jury involvement.
3.4.16. After each of the preliminary rounds, the names of the candidates that shall proceed to the next round are made public in the order of performance, without mention of the number of votes obtained.
3.4.17. After the final round, the names of the Prize winners shall be made public without mention of the number of votes obtained.
3.4.18. If a member of the jury is unable to participate in the competition, the project manager can decide to appoint a new member of the jury immediately.
3.4.19. The decision of the Jury is final and cannot be appealed.
OTHER REGULATIONS
Disqualification or withdrawal of the prize:
DR reserves the right to decide to disqualify a candidate during the period from the announcement of the candidates until the prizes are awarded if the candidate is deemed incompatible with the values and the ethics of the competition.
Even after the competition DR reserves the right to withdraw the prize from an award winner, who is deemed incompatible with the values and the ethics of the competition. The prize money and physical prizes, however, will not be withdrawn.