Blog

"I realized this morning that your event content is the only event-related 'stuff' I still read. I think that's because it's not about events, but about the coming together of people to exchange ideas and learn from one another and that's valuable information for anyone." — Traci Browne

Welcome to the Conferences That Work blog!

You're in the right place for the latest posts on conference design, facilitation, peer conferences, associations, consulting, and stories like being trapped in an elevator with a Novel Prize winner.

Or sign up for a subscription to my blog posts or RSS feed so you never miss another post.

The advantages of supporting connection during meeting sessions

supporting connection: photograph of four people at a dinner table toasting each other with glasses of wine. Image attribution: recode.netIn 2011 I ran a two-and-a-half-hour participative techniques workshop on the last afternoon of a four-day conference. After we ended, a participating supplier came up to me. He told me that he had made many more useful connections in that one workshop than during the 3 days preceding it. Supporting connection at the workshop gave him more value than the rest of the event.

Hunger for connection

I believe that the great majority of people hunger for connection with others. Without it, our lives suffer. Indeed, Robert Putnam, in Bowling Alone, his sobering opus on social change in America, states that about half the observed decline in life satisfaction among adult Americans over the last 50 years “is associated with declines in social capital: lower marriage rates and decreasing connectedness to friends and community.” And the sociologist James House tells us that “the magnitude of risk associated with social isolation is comparable with that of cigarette smoking and other major biomedical and psychosocial risk factors.”

And yet, when we hold a conference in our culture—an occasion when we bring together people with a common interest in a subject—we give low priority to the potential for connection with our fellow conferees. Broadcast-style sessions predominate. There is little or no opportunity for attendees to connect. This is so even though we have an ideal requisite for directly enjoying each other’s company—sharing a common interest!

The need for connection

Supporting connection with others is becoming increasingly important. We are moving to a world where people’s knowledge and expertise are a function of the networks—both face-to-face and online—they possess rather than the contents of their heads. If, in our work lives we are spending more time learning socially than being trained in the classroom, our meetings must provide the same relative opportunities.

Traditional conferences leave connection time for breaks, meals, and socials. This is why so many people report that hallway conversations during breaks are the best parts of such meetings. When sessions fail to meet our connection needs, we connect outside the official schedule. The broadcast design of most meeting sessions relegates connection with peers to an afterthought, as something you’re supposed to do on your own. And this is not easy. Even if you somehow know exactly the new people and old friends you want to meet, arranging to do so is hard enough without also competing with loud dance music, fixed meal seating, and lunchtime entertainment or talks. And if you expect to readily meet the most interesting people (to you) at such events by chance from a crowd of hundreds or even thousands, then you have not been to many conferences.

Provide opportunities for participants to connect

We must reverse our consistent demotion of connection to second-class status for meetings to effectively support the social learning that’s now essential to perform our jobs well. We need to provide opportunities for participants to connect and share in the sessions themselves. This doesn’t mean turning sessions into speed-dating or adding irritating “icebreakers.” Instead, it means taking advantage of:

  • Improvements in learning that result from actively engaging with others around content rather than listening to it or watching it.
  • The rich and extensive knowledge and experience of participants in the room.
  • Increased opportunities to meet like-minded peers via discussion of session content, ideas, and questions.

Active learning increases the quantity, quality, accuracy, and retention of knowledge. Active learning and connection are inextricably entangled; you can’t learn from your peers without simultaneously learning about them. Making connections is a powerful and important motivation for attending events. So, providing appropriate opportunities to connect during sessions is attractive, smoothing the way for the active learning that follows.

Supporting connection

Connecting with peers during a session allows participants to access expertise and experience beyond what an expert at the front of the room can provide. Using participative techniques that uncover and develop useful connections to those with relevant knowledge, participants can discover and take full advantage of the collective wisdom in the room.

Image attribution: recode.net

Do you review event evaluations like a Chinese censor?

event evaluations: black and white photograph of a standing Chinese official pointing to the screen of a computer used by a seated civilian. Photo attribution: Flickr user charleshopefascinating piece of research published in Science concludes that the Chinese government allows people to say whatever they like about the state, its leaders, or their policies—except for posts with collective action potential, which are far more likely to be censored. This reminds me of the meetings industry’s common response to event evaluations.

What do stakeholders do with event evaluations?

I often wonder whether organizers actually read event evaluations. And, if they read them, do they act upon them? Given the same old event designs I see repeated year after year, my experience is that most changes stemming from attendee feedback concentrate on logistical improvements or cosmetic restyling: changes that rarely get to core dissatisfactions experienced by many attendees.

This is why the bar is so low for event expectations. The majority of attendees assume that an event can’t be much better than what they routinely experience. Ask attendees what they consider to be a worthwhile meeting. You’ll frequently hear that they’re satisfied if they “learn one useful thing or meet one useful person a day”. You may think that’s acceptable. I know we can do much better.

Use event evaluations to improve future meetings

Can we significantly improve our events through attendee feedback? Yes. Done right, event evaluations provide an incredible opportunity to build community around our events. Yet, invariably, we squander this opportunity. Evaluations—either in the form of paper smile sheets or online surveys—get kidnapped, disappearing into the hands of the event organizers, never to see the light of day again.

When we routinely solicit comments about our meetings’ value and then ignore feedback that could fundamentally improve our events we are acting like Chinese censors. The minority of attendees who have experienced the value of participant-driven and participation-rich meeting designs—who know the value of small group work with peers and public evaluation during the event—expect something better from your meetings. If you don’t give it to them, they will stay away or go elsewhere.

A warning. They won’t be a minority forever.

Photo attribution: Flickr user charleshope

Promise engagement at your meetings, not perfection

engagement perfection: A photograph of a man & woman happily dancing. Photo attribution: Flickr user dancingwithwords
What’s more important at a meeting: engagement or perfection?

To dance with customers in an act of co-creation: This is part of 37Signals’ secret. From their book to their blog to their clearly stated point of view about platforms and the way they do business, they invite customers to debug with them in an ongoing dialogue about finding a platonic ideal of utility software. They don’t promise perfect, they promise engagement.”
—Seth Godin, What is customer service for?

Sometimes you go to a meeting where not screwing anything up seems to be more important than anything else. Such meetings often execute impeccably—and yet something is missing.

That something is engagement. When you’re obsessed with not making a mistake, how can you respond in the moment to the unexpected? To the guy who brings bagpipes to your event? If the Dalai Lama turns up unexpectedly? When attendees are helpless with laughter at the unintended consequences of a perfect storm of technical problems?

Engagement is the heart and soul of a meeting. Cold perfection is admirable but inhuman. When you are open to the unexpected, and dance with it rather than fight or deny it, you open your event to the possibility of participant engagement around human imperfections and marvelous opportunities that are always present when people meet.

Engagement or perfection? Don’t promise perfect, promise engagement.

Photo attribution: Flickr user dancingwithwords

Everyone I know who is changing the world…

changing the world: A tinted photograph of a cardboard sign that reads: "I ALWAYS WONDERED WHY SOMEBODY DID'NT DO SOMETHING ABOUT THAT, THEN I REALIZED I AM SOMEBODY"Who is changing the world?

Sasha Dichter writes about “modern, techno-optimistic” solutions to important problems, as characterized by the quick-fix phrase “I’ve just heard about a great new ______ that will solve the ______ problem!”

Worth reading. Especially the article’s conclusion:

“Indeed, everyone I know who is changing the world is in the long-haul business.”
—Sasha Dichter, The Long Haul

Image attribution: Unknown—if it’s yours, let me know!

Meetings in Day Million

Meetings in Day Million: An illustration of a recling woman from Frederik Pohl's short story "Day Million"

“On this day I want to tell you about, which will be about a thousand years from now, there were a boy, a girl and a love story…”

From my earliest days as a reader, I have loved science fiction. I think this is because good science fiction is the literature of ideas, as Pamela Sargent described it. It’s a fascinating place where the consequences of making different assumptions about the world can be explored and expanded on in myriad ways creatively tied to our human experience.

One evening in 1966, Frederik Pohl wrote Day Million: a classic science fiction short story that starts with the sentence above, and paints—in two thousand words—an ordinary yet unbelievable day in the future.

Take three minutes to read the story here.

The story ends with one of the most perfect final paragraphs I’ve ever read:

“Balls, you say, it looks crazy to me. And you—with your aftershave lotion and your little red car, pushing papers across a desk all day and chasing tail all night—tell me, just how the hell do you think you would look to Tiglath-Pileser, say, or Attila the Hun?”

Pohl demonstrates in Day Million how our very notion of “normal” can morph over time into something almost unrecognizable. What’s noteworthy is that it’s not the technology of the future that seems foreign, but its inhabitants’ attitudes about their routine lives.

And this brings us, finally, to meetings. Like the readers of Pohl’s story, we stay stuck in our beliefs about what should happen in a “normal” meeting. We cannot imagine how they could be different, in the same way as an Elizabethan merchant would be dumbfounded by the idea of buying almost anything we wanted from a box in our room and having it delivered over thousands of miles in a couple of days. When we look at the past we have no problem seeing how our perspective has changed dramatically. We frequently wonder why no one then thought to do what seems obvious today.

And yet we can barely start to conceive how our future will be different.

But it will be different.

That’s worth remembering when someone in the meetings profession proposes something crazy. Multi-day meetings with no preplanned agenda. People constructing during the event sessions that work for them. Conference sessions designed so that attendees interact with each other.

Crazy stuff like that.

Illustration by Jack Gaughan

How to convert a traditional conference into a connection-rich conference

When people are asked why they go to meetings, the top two reasons they consistently give are to learn and to connect with others. Both reasons are rated of similar importance (although there’s recent evidence that connection is becoming more important than learning.) So why don’t we strive to create a connection-rich conference?

Why do we structure traditional conferences like this?
Conference connection.001
Conference lectures only focus on learning (that is, of course, assuming people are learning from the lecture, which is by no means certain.) No connection between attendees occurs during a lecture. Connection at a traditional conference is, therefore, supposed to happen somehow outside the sessions, in the breaks and socials. Unfortunately, breaks and socials aren’t great ways to connect with people at conferences.

So traditional conferences are heavy on lecture-style learning and light on the connection that attendees desire!

Luckily, there’s a simple way to redress the balance between connection and learning at meetings.a graphic of a connection-rich conference that incorporates learning and connection in each session

Replace lectures with participation-rich sessions!

Doing this greatly improves the meeting because:

  • Attendees have opportunities to connect during the conference sessions, redressing the balance between connection and learning.
  • Session participants learn socially from each other, drawing on the hundreds of years of experience and expertise in the room, rather than relying on the knowledge of a single expert.

How do you create participation-rich sessions that foster connection? That’s what my book The Power of Participation is all about! The book:

  • Explains why the health and survival of any conference increasingly require that we integrate participation into meeting sessions;
  • Provides comprehensive practical information on how to create an event environment where connection thrives; and
  • Supplies an extensive organized collection of powerful participation techniques you can use to construct meetings that attendees will love and return to over and over again.

A connection-rich conference

When I began organizing meetings in the early 1980’s, I filled my programs with expert speakers. It wasn’t until 1992 that I unexpectedly discovered the power of incorporating participation to create a connection-rich conference. It took ten years for me to realize that this fundamental change improved the experience at every kind of meeting and for every meeting audience with whom I worked. My book includes everything I currently know about making this improvement possible for you.

Ground rules at the Lost Levels unconference

A brightly-colored ground rules wall poster at the lost levels conference. It says: "FRIENDLY REMINDERS MAKE SPACE FOR OTHERS. WATCH OUT FOR BLOCKING VIEWS BE AN ACTIVE LISTENER ALSO YOU ARE AMAZING!"Ground rules? We don’t need ’em!

Yes, you do!

“Game makers find inspiration at Lost Levels, an intimate and involving gathering where anything seems possible”
Laura Hudson, The radical games event where the next speaker is you

The Lost Levels four-hour gaming unconference incorporates these agreements:

  • Make space for others!
  • Watch out for blocking views
  • Be an active listener
  • (and indirectly) Be amazing!

Don’t feel you need to use the Lost Levels agreements at your event. You should tailor ground rules (aka agreements or covenants) to fit meeting needs.  But there’s something to be said for incorporating Lost Levels’ agreements into your events.

Image attribution: Laura Hudson, boingboing

Is your conference more like a pharmacy or a bookstore?

is a conference like a pharmacy or a bookstore: Cartoon by Harry Bliss, showing a man at a pharmacy gazing at a notice that says "STAFF PICKS"Staff picks

A traditional conference is like a pharmacy. Content is prescribed, and you pick it up in a session. Hopefully, it will fix what ails you. Have you met anyone interesting in a pharmacy? Did you create one of the drugs sold there? Probably not.

A peer conference is like a friendly bookstore. Browse the shelves looking for what interests you, and satisfies your wants and needs. Relax on a comfy sofa, and check out anything that looks interesting. Fall into conversation with other folks nearby. Yes, you can be guided by those little “staff picks” notices, but perhaps the guy sitting opposite you has some suggestions. And perhaps, one day, you’ll write a book of your own…

Cartoon by Harry Bliss

Produce for a micro conference market

micro conference market: Photograph of a Lego model of a conference hall full of attendees listening to speakers on a stage. Photo attribution: Mini Dreamforce 2010Today, you need to produce for a micro conference market.

Fifty years ago, producers and marketers got smart. They saw the miracle of mass marketing and they adopted it as their own. They amped up mass production and bet on the masses.
The smart creators today are seeing the shift and doing precisely the opposite:
Produce for a micro market.
Market to a micro market.
—Seth Godin, Mass production and mass media

Despite the status associated with big conferences, most meetings are small meetings. Whether by accident or design, in today’s world this is a good thing. The heyday of the large amorphous conference—where plenaries consist of well-known people trying to entertain or inspire you, meeting important people by chance is unlikely, and you’re uninterested in most of the sessions—is past.

Today, the most successful conferences are micro conferences. No time wasted navigating through sprawling venues passing hundreds of people you’ll never meet. No more inspirational lectures that you don’t remember three weeks later. Minimal obligatory glad-handing. Instead, you’re meeting less than a hundred people with a lot in common and a lot to gain by connecting effectively, appropriately, and, ultimately, profitably.

So, produce for a micro conference market. As Seth puts it: “When someone wants to know how big you can make (your audience, your market share, your volume), it might be worth pointing out that it’s better to be important, to be in sync, to be the one that’s hard to be replaced. And the only way to be important is to be relevant, focused and specific.”

Photo attribution: Mini Dreamforce 2010

38 conference participation techniques

conference participation techniques: a black and white photograph of jazz dancers leaping in a dance studio. Photo attribution: Flickr user teo_ladodicivideo

Here’s a glossary of 38 conference participation techniques.

I can guarantee there will be at least a few unfamiliar terms in this glossary, given that I invented some of them myself. This glossary contains brief definitions; see my new book for more information.

Affinity Grouping: This technique allows a group to discover and share ideas that arise at a session or conference and group them into categories, so they can be organized and discussed. Sometimes called “cards on the wall.”

Anonymous Voting: Any voting method that preserves the anonymity of those voting.

Badge It!: Using participant badges to share useful personal information besides the traditional elements like name, company, etc.

Body Voting: See Human Spectrograms.

Card Voting: Provides each participant with an identical set of colored cards that can be used in flexible ways: typically for voting on multiple-choice questions, consensus voting, and guiding discussion.

Case Studies and Simulations: Ways to create a classroom or conference environment where participants can create and explore in a semi-realistic way alternative roles, points of view, puzzles, and positions. Case studies use a story as a jumping-off place for group analysis and discussion, while simulations immerse participants into an experiential situation.

Conference Arc: An approach to design that concentrates on event chronological parts—openers, middles, and endings—and the consequential progressive experience of participants.

Consensus voting: Voting techniques that gauge the degree of group consensus on a point of view or course of action.

Continuum Voting: See Human Spectrograms.

Dot Voting: A technique for public semi-anonymous voting where participants are given identical sets of one or more colored paper dots which they stick onto paper voting sheets to indicate preferences.

Fishbowls: Group process that facilitates focused discussion, either by assuring that the conversation at any moment is restricted to a few clearly defined people or by allowing representatives of both sides of a point of view time, in turn, to listen to and question representatives of the opposing viewpoint.

Group Spectives: Closing conference sessions that provide time for attendees to collectively take stock, reflecting on where they started, the path traveled, and the journey yet to come.

Guided Discussions: Guided small discussion groups used regularly during a session to expose different answers, viewpoints, and levels of understanding and create multiple simultaneous rich customized learning environments in the room.

Hand/Stand Voting: In hand voting, participants raise their hands to indicate their answer to a question with two or more possible answers. Stand voting replaces hand raising with standing.

Human Graphs: See Human Spectrograms.

Human Spectrograms: Also known as body voting, continuum voting, and human graphs. A form of public voting that has participants move in the room to a place that represents their answer to a question. Human spectrograms can be categorized as one-dimensional, two-dimensional, or state-change.

One-dimensional Human Spectrograms: Human Spectrograms where participants position themselves along a line in a room to portray their level of agreement/disagreement with a statement or a numeric response (e.g. the number of years they’ve been in their current profession.)

Open Space: Open Space is a simple method for participants to create their own meetings.

Openers: Participation techniques that are especially useful during the early stages of a group’s time together.

Pair Share: Develops and reinforces learning via discussion of a topic or question with a partner during a session.

Participatory Voting: Any form of voting that provides public information about viewpoints in the room and paves the way for further discussion

Personal Introspectives: Two-part closing conference sessions that guide participants through a review of what they have learned and a determination of what they want to consequently change in their lives.

Plus/Delta: A review tool that enables participants to quickly identify what went well at a session or event and what could be improved.

Post It!: A simple technique that employs participant-written sticky notes to uncover topics and issues that a group wants to discuss.

Pro Action Café: Pro Action Café is a blend of World Café and Open Space that facilitates reflection, discussion and consolidation of ideas, and moving to action.

Public Voting: Voting methods that allow a group to see the individuals who have voted and how they voted.

Roman Voting: Roman Voting is a public voting technique for gauging the strength of consensus.

Roundtables: Structured conference openers that employ The Three Questions to 1) define and model an active, interactive, and safe conference environment; 2) provide a structured forum for attendees to meet and learn about each others’ affiliations, interests, experience, and expertise and 3) uncover the topics that people want to discuss and share.

Seat Swap: Seat Swap increases conversational partners at seated meals by having diners switch seats at appointed times.

Semi-anonymous voting: Voting techniques where others can only determine how individuals vote by watching them closely during the voting process.

Short Form Presentations Pecha Kucha and Ignite: Very short stylized presentations that offer a rapid introduction to a topic, an idea, or an experience and that act as a jumping-off place for stimulated viewers to start learning more via engagement afterward.

Small Group Discussions: Techniques that use small groups to improve learning, connection, interaction, and engagement.

State-change Human Spectrograms: Human Spectrograms where participants move en masse from one point to another to display a change of some quantity (e.g. opinion, geographical location, etc.) over time.

Table Voting: A technique used for polling attendees on their choice from pre-determined answers to a multiple-choice question, and/or for dividing participants into preference groups for further discussions or activities.

The Solution Room: An opening or closing conference session that engages and connects attendees and provides peer-supported advice on their most pressing problems.

The Three Questions: Supports and encourages a group of people to learn about each other, their wishes for the time they are together, and their relevant experience and expertise.

Two-dimensional Human Spectrograms: Human Spectrograms where participants position themselves in a two-dimensional room space to display relative two-dimensional information (e.g. where they live with reference to a projected map.)

World Café: Provides a format for dialogue in small groups around questions that have been determined in advance.

Photo attribution: Flickr user teo_ladodicivideo