Search Engine Land Awards: 2026 judge tips
Since 2015, the Search Engine Land Awards have recognized outstanding marketers in search and performance marketing each year. In the industry, the honor is widely regarded as one of the highest distinctions in search. For teams planning a 2026 submission, Search Engine Land is sharing direct insights from several jury members for the first time, with concrete guidance on what sets applications apart and which mistakes often cost points.
There is no fixed formula for winning. Yet after thousands of submitted cases, judges know what separates exceptional entries from merely solid work. Strong applications do not only deliver metrics; they tell a coherent story. They provide context, demonstrate strategic thinking, and make clear why the project mattered for the business or client.
What judges prioritize in applications
Amy Hebdon, founder of Paid Search Magic, expects a clear arc: goal, action, and measurable outcome must align. A supporting deck should make the achievement visible at a glance. Brad Geddes of Adalysis warns against the phrase "we applied best practices." Instead, applicants should explain the process that led to the results, including creative problem solving and individual tactics.
Jo Juliana Turnbull of Holafly uses the SAY model: Situation, Action, and Yield. Applicants should precisely describe the starting point, the measures taken, and the result within the reviewed period. Melissa Mackey of Compound Growth Marketing requires a clearly named challenge, a traceable strategy behind the tactics, and an explanation of how the work affected campaigns or channels.
People, trust, and qualitative signals
Danita Smith of Adanis Design emphasizes that AI is rapidly changing search, but successful entries should not lead with analytics alone. She looks for stories in which genuine trust with people was built, including qualitative moments such as quotes, aha experiences, or noticeable shifts in brand perception. Ameet Khabra of Hop Skip Media adds: numbers open the door, but the story stays in memory. Judges want to understand why a problem was difficult, what was tried, and what finally worked.
Data, evidence, and measurable impact
Barry Schwartz, editor at Search Engine Land, demands evidence: charts, analytics, and screenshots. Navah Hopkins of Microsoft names two traits of award-winning entries: the reasoning behind the approach and "receipts," meaning data that supports claims. Applicants who cannot share budgets, revenue, or core KPIs start at a disadvantage. Celeste Gonzalez of Lastmile Retail wants conversion numbers, ROI, and monetary effects. Anu Adegbola also expects readability: technical depth matters, but a well-structured, pleasant entry increases the chance of support.
| Element | Judge expectation | Typical mistake |
|---|---|---|
| Storytelling | Problem, strategy, result linked | Metrics without context |
| Tactics | Concrete process and decisions | Generic best-practice phrases |
| Evidence | Charts, screenshots, before/after | Claims without data |
| Innovation | New approach plus proven impact | Standard measures without differentiation |
Innovation in SEO, SEM, and AI-driven search
Adam Tanguay of Jordan Digital Marketing looks for unexpected approaches backed by undeniable numbers. Matt Devinney of Tinuiti wants strategies that challenge SEM norms, for example through thoughtful structures across brand, non-brand, Performance Max, and upper-funnel tactics. Olya Ianovskaia of MycoMinds SEO expects SEO projects that break new ground and document every step with data.
Joseph Kerschbaum of DEPT connects innovation with measurable business outcomes: award-worthy applications show where SEM is heading, whether through novel AI use, audience approaches, or cross-channel integration, while also documenting ROI. Those who cite trends without proving impact remain below jury expectations.
Why storytelling beats metrics alone
Jury members consistently emphasize that performance tables alone rarely convince. What matters is the link between business goal, strategic decision, and proven impact. Applicants who only cite percentage uplifts without explaining the starting point and levers used leave judges guessing whether success was sustainable or accidental. For paid search and SEO cases spanning multiple channels, a clear timeline helps: which hypothesis came first, which tests followed, and which insights drove the next optimization.
Readability also plays an underrated role. Juries review many entries in a short time. Paragraphs with clear headings, a short intro per section, and visual evidence make evaluation easier. Teams that explain complex technical measures clearly have an edge over cases that stack jargon without context. This is especially true in categories with strict word limits: every sentence should deliver context, tactics, or results.
Practical checklist for the 2026 submission
The advice translates into recurring patterns. Applicants should first define the business problem and KPIs, then explain measures chronologically, and finally visualize before/after data. A short slide deck helps juries assess complex cases quickly. Category rules and word limits must be followed strictly; deviations often lead to early elimination in practice.
- Use SAY or goal-action-result structure in the main text.
- Describe tactics concretely instead of naming best practices in general terms.
- Attach charts, screenshots, and KPI trends as evidence.
- Present innovation and measurable business impact together.
- Ensure readability and clear structure for high submission volumes.
The early-bird phase for the 2026 Search Engine Land Awards ends on July 10. Teams that submit their cases by then benefit from reduced fees and give judges more time to recognize the substance behind the numbers.
