CANNES — Members of the PR Lions jury reflected on their experience and the winning work at the annual PRovoke Media roundtable in Cannes.

The morning after the awards ceremony – which saw ad agency FCB win the Grand Prix for its campaign for its ‘Lucky Yatra’ campaign for Indian Railways – several of this year’s awarding jurors sat down to talk about their mammoth judging session, having whittled down 1,531 entries and a shortlist of 97 to one Grand Prix, eight further Golds, 14 Silvers and 21 Bronze awards.

The awarding jury for the PR Lions this year was led by president Tom Beckman, Weber Shandwick’s global chief creative officer. Immediately after finishing three long and intense days of judging, in advance of the results being revealed, Beckman spoke to PRovoke Media saying he had “taken the job seriously” and the metal reflected a wide range of earned media work that deserved to win. He also said after several rounds of voting that the decision on the Grand Prix winner was unanimous.

Beckman’s jury members were: Archana Jain, CEO of Havas Red’s PR Pundit in India; MSL US chief executive Diana Littman; Diego Bertagni, executive creative director for the Americas at Burson; Joel Chacha Wambura, director of Portland Communications’ Africa hub in Kenya; Kelly Grindle, managing director of Special PR in New Zealand; Khaled AlShehhi, executive director of marketing and communication for the UAE Government Media Office; Krista Webster, president and CEO of Veritas Communications in Canada and its influencer and digital agency Meat & Produce; Ricardo Silvestre, CEO and founder of Black Influence in Brazil; and Yuki Koda, chief consultant at PR Consulting Dentsu in Japan.

The jury’s journey began with a briefing in mid-April to begin judging at home, with all 15 shortlisting and 10 awarding jury members being assigned specific categories and accorded a month to review around 300 entries each. In round two, advance of Cannes Lions, each of the jury members reviewed and scored a long list of 225 entries and made notes for discussion on site.

During the three-day long intense judging process at the PR Lions Jury Room at the Palais, the awarding jury worked in reverse order to identify what would continue to remain on the shortlist before moving to identify the Gold, Silver, Bronze and Grand Prix winners.

The Jury Experience

On the experience of being on the awarding jury, Littman told PRovoke Media: “It was fascinating, inspiring and interesting. I had been a shortlist jury member in the past and this was a completely different experience: sitting in a room that’s protected from the outside world with people from all over the world, really digging into the creative world for days. We had lots of laughs, the room was full of energy. To be able to come together and dissect and evaluate creativity at its core – both in terms of purity of ideas and how ideas take flight and live in the world – is a very unusual thing to do with truly no outside distraction.

Littman said a core element of the process had been deep analysis of the cultural context for each piece of shortlisted work: “We had a very diverse set of work that we ultimately ushered forward as a team. The beauty of how Lions sets these juries up is people coming from different places, experiences and spaces, so the room doesn’t move in a block and you end up with a collection of different work. We spent as much time as we could immersing ourselves in the culture of the work and where it came from.”

Grindle, MD of Special PR in New Zealand, described the process as “the best professional experience of my career and reaffirmed why I love PR in the first place. The first day was about 15 hours of judging, yet it somehow passed in a flash, because I was so engrossed in what we were doing. I guess it makes me a PR geek.”

At Havas Red’s PR Pundit in India, Jain said she would “do it again in a heartbeat.” While it was a lot of work, it has been an exhilarating journey. I have come back from France inspired by all of the great work, by the sessions and speakers and by my fellow judges. It was for me a workshop on what constitutes good work and what is great.”

The UAE Government Media Office’s AlShehhi said the experience was “intense, inspiring, and a true global masterclass.” He said: “We were 10 jurors from 10 different cultures and the only shared language in the room was what Tom described as ‘broken English’. But that was our strength. It meant diversity wasn’t just represented; it shaped every conversation. We debated each entry with respect and curiosity, and every win had to resonate universally, not just regionally. That’s what made the process rigorous and fair; the winning work is approved by the world.”

“Does It Live In The Jungle?” How The President Directed The Jury

In terms of Beckman’s direction for the jury, Littman said he had been a “brilliant and fair” president: “From the very beginning he set a stage for us in terms of what we should be looking for.”

At Burson, Bertagni said: “In a nutshell he said we had to award earned ideas that ‘live in the jungle’ without artificial support, so when you remove the paid components it survives in the wild – that’s the difference. He wanted to make a statement about the new landscape of PR, and it really helps you frame the work in a different way. Tom also talked about real problems and real solutions, not brands and agencies creating fake problems and providing the solution.

“He also had a point of view on the evolution of the festival itself. Back in the day we were giving awards to ‘concept cars’ – things that looked to the future but that weren’t actual business case studies. We wanted to show we were awarding real business ideas. And a last piece of guidance: everyone talks about purpose- led campaigns, but PR doesn’t have to save the world with every campaign. It was about the idea, not the cause.”

Littman added: “There were a few times when we asked if we had seen a particular piece of work out in the wild. It’s a very profound and sticky way to talk about what we do – you can use paid to extend the audience and the long tail of an idea, but some ideas aren’t built for global impact.”

Jain described the president’s role as “a guide and a mentor.” She said Beckman’s earliest words to the jury were: “our job is to be curators; carefully selecting the pieces that not only outshine the rest in terms of strategy, creativity, execution and results, but also represent our time.” She added: “He also asked us to treat the work respectfully and be thoughtful in our evaluation as so much time and resources go into submitting work.”

Grindle said: “Tom was a brilliant jury president who only cared about making the process fair and reflecting the current state of our discipline – without any politics. I learnt a lot from him and envy the rest of the team at Weber who get to draw on his knowledge every day.  We even managed to crack that stern Swedish expression with a couple of smiles across the course of the week, so that was an added bonus.”

AlShehhi described Backman’s leadership as “precise, sharp, and unflinchingly clear about the standards.” He said: “Tom pushed us to distinguish between campaigns built for the jungle and those safe in the zoo. He didn’t just chair the room; he steered it. Like a captain guiding the ship to shore, he led the process with clarity, fairness, and an unwavering standard. He reminded us constantly: not everything that looks good is good enough. And because of that, the work we chose feels earned, not gifted.”

The Metal: How The Jury Decided

On the collection of metal-winning work, Bertagni said: “The shortlisting jury were asked to be generous in the long list, so they weren’t killing the work before it got into the room. We were very committed to trying to remove bias. A golden thread across the Golds and the Grand Prix was the conversation about how we measure the impact of earned, and you can see that true impact in the winning cases: the Grand Prix alone had a 490-1 return on investment and took a big chunk of market share. That’s what divided the shortlist and the metals.”

Jain: “We were collectively looking for whole ideas not merely a big idea. In fact, we discarded a few that had yet to be fully baked. And we were not impressed by a conceptually fresh idea alone. We assessed the business case it presented. We walked away from the jury room happy with our selection as they represented simple yet breakthrough ideas that have challenged conventions, tried to solve problems and created meaningful connections.”

AlShehhi said of the process: “It was built on constructive friction. We challenged the thinking, the strategy, and most importantly the purpose of the work. We weren’t looking for ideas that just talked; we looked for ideas that moved. Moved people, culture, behavior and the industry forward. We were behind real problems with real solutions in the right context. We challenged the idea, yes but also its impact, its relevance, and its honesty. The best work wasn’t just creative; it was necessary. And that became our benchmark.

“We’re proud of what we selected. These were not just strong ideas; they were simple, bold acts that some triggered social behavior changes. Others required real business decisions to bring to life, yet their impact on brand affinity and love is clear. What they all had in common was clarity, creativity, and cultural relevance. This kind of work doesn't just win awards; it sets new benchmarks for the industry.”

Grindle said the process was “exceptionally robust”: “It was positive and collaborative, and we had some excellent debates. It’s key to keep your mind open when you’re in that jury room – there are literally fractions of difference between some of the top contenders, and I changed my opinion on work several times after listening to different perspectives.”

On the Grand Prix winner, she added: “Lucky Yatra is a real solution, to a real problem, which delivered incredible commercial results. I think that selection might have surprised some in the industry as the work had flown under the radar, but if you dig into the case study, it is a worthy winner for Grand Prix – in fact, it was unanimous for the entire jury.”

On PR Agencies Not Winning PR Lions…

In contrast to last year, when Golin was the first PR firm to win the Grand Prix for ideation, PR agencies did not feature heavily on the list of PR Lions winners this year, apart from Edelman. Littman pointed out that one of the defining features of the Cannes Lions judging process was that all case studies were anonymised, so until they have cast their final votes, the jury don’t know who the lead agencies on the winning campaigns are.

“Our job as a jury is all about the work. We’re not evaluating entries from the perspective of what entry did the work. You also have to look at the whole of the parts in Cannes – PR agencies are submitting and winning in other categories too, so you have to look at that before making a full judgement of how PR agencies did in the Lions. There are also still only a small number of submissions from PR agencies, so the pool we are operating with is small. We just need to keep pushing ourselves. Last year was a major coup, but this year PR agencies are metalling across categories.”

Bertagni expanded on this, saying: “Burson won in Direct and Film three years ago, and the same piece didn’t win in PR. We’re also winning in Social and Inflkuencer Lions. And while awards are a thing, look at who the creative industry is trusting with those awards:  Tom is a global chief creative officer in a PR agency, Judy John has been leading the Titanium Lions. PR is trusted – we are the North Stars of creativity, the guiding light here is PR people.”

As a creative who has crossed from adland to PR, he added: “I come from the dark side, from Ogilvy Buenos Aires, DDB in Canada and in-house at Anheuser-Busch. PR has really started being interesting in creative over the past eight years, while a lot of ad agencies have a hundred years of creativity, so there’s a gap in experience. With the talent now in the PR industry, we can really bring strong teams with strong creative ideas and with PR machinery and muscle we can make those ideas massive.”

AlShehhi I understand the sentiment but my message to PR agencies is this: don’t focus on the absence of metals. Focus on the presence of opportunity. We saw a lot of work from PR agencies that had the right cause, but lacked the creative leap or earned-first mindset that Cannes demands. The bar is higher now and that’s a good thing. The door is still wide open for PR-led ideas, but they have to move culture, not just support communications. This is a call to elevate, not retreat.

Jain said: “While we would have like to see more work represented from PR agencies, it goes without saying that none of us in the jury were representing our agencies. We were seeking out the best that there was being the best version of our professional self. I think if more PR practitioners attended Cannes, they will see the quality of work that is being recognised here and benchmark to share award-winning work in the future.”

Grindle said: “We need to get over this ‘advertising vs PR’ divide.  It doesn’t matter where the idea comes from, as long as it’s a good idea.  Although many of the ideas might have originated in an advertising agency, there were plenty of PR agencies involved in execution.  If we want to see more world-class ideas originate from PR agencies, we need to continue investing in strategy and creative development – we work at a much faster speed than advertising, and we often shortcut that part of the process, which is the most important.”

From her perspective as a PR agency creative leader in Japan, Dentsu’s Koda also pointed out that the focus on earned creativity in some markets still had plenty room to grow: “PR agencies in Japan don’t really have the creative aspect yet, it’s still media relations led work. Winning medals here at Cannes requires a more creative-led approach and more creative talent in agencies.”

Koda said her main takeaway from the process was that “Our market in Japan is unique, and not in a good way. We need to have more courage to plan and execute ideas, to listen to more target audiences, stakeholders and voices so we don’t follow the most conservative way. Our jury room was incredibly diverse and it’s changed my perspective on myself as a PR person.”

Summing up the experience, Littman said: “It was one of the best experiences, I was blown away by how much I enjoyed it. I loved our room of jurors – it creates an unending bond, debating together. It was so interesting hearing everyone’s perspectives, coming together around a piece of work and getting into deep discussion and sorting through the details of what the work was really about, what’s happening in this market and with this brand. We were very engaged and open.

“Tom said at the start that the point of being in the room together was to change our minds from what we thought at the start – and everyone’s mind got changed in many different ways.”