Entry statusNew product entry is not currently available.
How It Works
More evidence for a higher claim
Good Taste Awards does not send every product immediately to the largest panel. Assessment begins with eight valid independent responses. More people are added only when the locked evidence keeps the product on the pathway toward higher recognition.
This makes the method proportionate. Every valid product receives a disciplined first assessment and comment. The claims of Two and Three Stars receive progressively broader evidence.
| Decision stage | Cumulative valid responses | Consumer-side minimum | Professional minimum |
|---|---|---|---|
| Initial | 8 | 5 | 2 |
| First progressed | 12 | 7 | 3 |
| Extended | 16 | 9 | 4 |
| Final | 24 | 13 | 6 |
The counts are cumulative. A product reaching the final stage has twenty-four valid responses across its controlled pathway, not four unrelated panels whose outcomes are selected after the fact.
Eight valid responses form the initial decision point. The panel must satisfy the consumer-side majority and professional minimum. Responses are captured independently and locked before discussion.
At this point, the predefined rules determine whether the product has no star candidate, a One-Star candidate or support for further assessment. One Star is a final level of recognition, not a provisional step toward a higher award.
Candidate and progression rules are defined before any product is assessed. A panel is not expanded because an entrant is important, a professional hopes for a different result or the initial response feels commercially inconvenient.
Only valid locked responses enter the candidate calculation. An invalid response is addressed through the replacement or reassessment controls, not quietly deleted because it changes the outcome.
A product that remains a higher-star candidate receives additional relevant assessors without disclosing the prior candidate. The first progressed stage reaches twelve valid responses. Where the pathway requires further evidence or an authorized extension condition applies, the extended stage reaches sixteen.
The Target Population and product identity remain stable. A later stage is not allowed to recruit a more favourable audience or present a different batch merely to improve the candidate.
The final stage reaches twenty-four valid responses, including at least thirteen consumer-side assessors and at least six professionals. This is the evidence pathway for the highest star consideration.
Three Stars is not awarded because a small initial group used exceptional adjectives. It requires the candidate, composition, confirmation and authorization conditions of the full pathway.
As the panel grows, the consumer-side minimum grows. Professionals never become the majority. Every person still records one equally weighted Overall Liking response.
The rising professional minimum ensures that the wider pathway also contains enough relevant competence for explanation and bounded confirmation. It does not create a professional veto over authentic consumer-side liking.
After the controlled candidate is calculated, assigned professional assessors record individual dispositions. They may:
They may not promote above the candidate, negotiate assessor responses or substitute their own preferred outcome. Where confirmation lacks the required disposition, independent professional review addresses the state without inventing another liking panel.
Once a lower star has been confirmed, adding assessors solely to test a higher level does not remove that confirmed recognition. This preservation rule allows a product to face a more demanding pathway without turning valid lower recognition into a gamble.
Removal remains possible where a material validity ground is established, such as an invalid assessment, product-identity failure, non-comparable batch or material procedure failure. Preservation protects valid evidence; it does not protect an invalid process.
Twenty-four is the maximum controlled panel in the ordinary star pathway, not a population sample. The result does not estimate how many people in a market would buy or prefer the product.
The strength of the pathway comes from relevant assignment, blind presentation, independent responses, controlled composition and predefined decisions—not from claiming population representation.
The same assessed-product definition follows the product through progression. A different recipe, flavour, batch identity where comparability is not established, or materially different preparation cannot be inserted into the later stage.
The public result therefore remains specific: this product received this star through this authorized pathway.
