Ahead of some or all of us finding out results very soon, I wanted to address something that I saw in past doctoral SSHRC threads. A lot of past applicants have been concerned or surprised because they had X number of publications, conferences, or they ranked a certain way in their department and they expected to do better/worse because of it, etc.
My perspective on this is different, because I'm applying to SSHRC in support of my Doctor of Musical Arts degree in music performance. Because this (partially) falls under the SSHRC criteria for research-creation, my publications, for example, include important performances. Since I output my research largely as performances, my publications list is therefore very long - but of course the nature of those is different than a published article. Who can say whether I will be advantaged or disadvantaged by that?
What I am hoping to get across in sharing this is that we are a very diverse range of people and scholars applying to essentially one type of award. Inevitably it will be difficult for the committees to compare people bringing radically different things to the table. I am sure that from our perspective as applicants, adjudication injustices will take place.
I am reminding myself every day that SSHRC is not a measure of objective success. The money is nice, as is the recognition, but it doesn't validate or invalidate what you're doing - it just records that in a particular set of circumstances, at a particular moment in time, things went your way. If it doesn't go your way, something else will. Actually, as has been pointed out in this thread, a bunch of things already have gone your way just to get here, and that's already pretty great. Stay strong, friends.
