The aim of this paper is to map the pattern of awards for research degree supervision in institutions in Australia and the United Kingdom. In particular, it explores the scope of such awards, their objectives, the criteria for nomination, the evidence required to be submitted, the composition of award panels, the criteria for award, and the rewards and conditions attached to success. Marked differences are found between these features in the two systems, which it is argued stem mainly from the fact that in Australia institution-led awards are the norm, while in the UK student-led awards are predominant. In conclusion, it is suggested that, while institution-led awards seem more likely to be effective in identifying, recognising and rewarding exemplary supervision, students can and should have an important role to play and, hence, that optimally all stakeholders should be involved in the awards process.