Q&A with Adrian Segar on Crowdsourcing

Adrian Segar short bio and photograph from the article in the March 2019 issue of Smart Meetings Magazine. Publications: Author of Conferences That Work: Creating Events That People Love and The Power of Participation: Creating Conferences That Deliver Learning, Connection, Engagement, and Action, and Event Crowdsourcing: Creating Meetings People Actually Want and Need. Title: Facilitator at large Degrees: B.A. in Physics from Merton College, Oxford; Ph.D. in elementary particle physics from University College, London.

This (slightly edited) interview by JT Long — a Q&A with Adrian Segar on Crowdsourcing — appeared in the March 2019 issue of Smart Meetings Magazine.

What led to writing the book, Conferences That Work?

I invented the format by accident 26 years ago when there were no expert speakers to invite to a conference on administrative computing issues in small schools. We needed a format that would allow a room of strangers to learn about each other and the issues we were interested in by using the expertise in the room.

I asked people, “If this conference could be amazing for you, what would it be about?” Then I built a program around those topics, with people in the room leading impromptu sessions. Often, the results are unexpected. The sessions are not polished; there is no PowerPoint. Often it is more like a discussion than a presentation, but that is why it is effective. My research shows that asking in advance doesn’t work. At traditional conferences with fixed programs set in advance, at best half of the sessions offered are what attendees want.

That participant-driven conference is still going as a four-day program, with sessions generated over the first half-day.

I discovered that people love the format, and that led to writing the book 10 years ago. I was an amateur in the meeting industry, and that led to some mistakes, but it also gave me a fresh perspective at a time when meeting design wasn’t really a “thing.”

What has been the reaction in the market?

A lot more people are using the peer-conference principles to varying degrees, and I have facilitated conferences for groups, such as PCMA Convening Leaders. Just-in-time learning gives people what they need right now.

This encouraged me to write a second book in 2105, The Power of Participation: Creating Conferences That Deliver Learning, Connection, Engagement, and Action, which contains a comprehensive tool chest of conference and sessions techniques that meeting planners and presenters can use to improve learning, connection, engagement, and outcomes at their events.

Why did you decide it was time to write a third book?

The Little Book of Event Crowdsourcing Secrets is about how to create conferences that turn into what participants actually want and need. People love being heard and having their needs met. Crowdsourcing allows you to do that.

I wanted to expose more people to these valuable formats. I am just one person doing this work, and I wanted to get them out into the world.

Why Conferences Need to Change

Lectures are a terrible way to learn. They are a seductive meeting format because they provide an efficient way of sharing information. However, they are the least effective way of learning anything. Over time, we rapidly forget almost everything we’ve been told. But when we engage with content, we remember more of it more accurately and longer.

Everyone has expertise to share. Instead of limiting content to a few “experts,” peer conferences uncover and tap the thousands of years of experience in the room.

Informal education rules. Today, only about 10 percent of what we need to know involves formal classroom teaching. The other 90 percent is informal—a combination of self-directed learning, experiential learning on the job, and learning at conferences with our peers.

How do you know if a crowdsourced event is successful?

You can feel the energy level. By definition, these sessions are about things people want to talk about, so how can you lose? If you try to predict what people want to talk about six months before, it won’t be accurate.

How can event professionals integrate your techniques into an event?

One way is to set aside a block of time—a couple of hours for example—to do sessions that are crowdsourced during, say, lunch, the day before.

One of the beauties of the sticky notes display is if you put up an issue and a session doesn’t result from it, attendees can connect with the one other person at the conference who really wants to talk about the topic, and that can make the whole conference worthwhile. It is a great way to meet the people who are right for you.

What do people need to watch out for when planning a crowdsourced event?

The biggest mistake is making it a conference track instead of committing across a time block. Most people have not experienced these formats and they might not choose it, even if they would enjoy it if given a chance. Then the conference organizer concludes people are not interested. Pick a period of time for the crowdsourced sessions and have nothing else scheduled. Then meeting stakeholders generally keep crowdsourced sessions in the program and extend them over time.

You have to create a safe environment for people to share. It can feel risky to talk about a challenge at work. That is why you need to agree to rules at the beginning so that people feel comfortable. Otherwise, you won’t get the juicy stuff.

Event Design is how it works

A black-and-white image of Apple's Steve Jobs with the caption: "Design is not just what it looks and feels like. Design is how it works."“Design is how it works” is the favorite thing Apple software engineer Ken Kocienda heard Steve Jobs say.

Here’s Steve:

“Most people make the mistake of thinking design is what it [a product] looks like. People think it’s this veneer—that the designers are headed this box and told, “Make it look good!” That’s not what we think design is. It’s not just what it looks like and feels like. Design is how it works.
—Steve Jobs, The Guts of a New Machine, 2003 New York Times interview

If only we applied Steve’s insight to event design.

Good event design is not just about look and feel. It’s not just about novel venues, decor, food and beverage, and productionDressing up standard conference process with razzle-dazzle glitz isn’t good event design either.

Good event design is about how a conference works.

This implies that good event design requires thinking about issues like:

You always have a choice. Keep on dressing up the same-old same-old in different clothes. Or think about designing what happens at your events.

Because event design is how it works.

HT to Ken Kocienda for sharing the Steve quote in his excellent book: Inside Apple’s design process during the golden age of Steve Jobs [Page 187]

How to design for powerful connection and learning at large meetings

 

connection and learning at large meetings: a photograph of a large conference session with participants meeting around round tables. Arrowed notations "learning" are scattered throughout the room.How can we design for powerful connection and learning at large meetings?

Although you’d never guess it from reading meeting industry trade journals, most meetings are small meetings, and this is a good thing if you want effective and relevant connection and learning to take place.

Large meetings stroke owners’ and leaders’ egos, and can supply impressive spectacle. They are appropriate places to launch campaigns and mass announcements and can be very profitable. However, they are poor vehicles for creating the useful participant learning, connection, and outcomes that well-designed small conferences can deliver.

So if you are (un)fortunate enough to be the owner or designer of a large meeting, what can you do to maximize participant value?

You need to satisfy four core requirements for optimum learning and connection:

  1. Provide sessions focused on content that participants care about.
  2. Design for small sessions and/or have participants work together in small groups.
  3. Use interactive formats.
  4. Include closing sessions that consolidate learning, build community, and explore the group’s future.

Let’s take a look at each of these requirements in more detail.

Content that participants care about

Traditional large conferences use the “kitchen sink” {aka “spray and pray”} approach of stuffing sessions on every potentially interesting topic into the program. Slightly more sophisticated conferences attempt to determine in advance the topics that attendees say they want.

Unfortunately, years of research by yours truly has shown that when conference sessions are chosen in advance, the majority of them are not what attendees want and need {here’s an example}. It’s like John Wanamaker describing advertising: “Half the money I spend on advertising is wasted; the trouble is I don’t know which half.”

There’s no way to know in advance which sessions you’ve prescheduled will meet participants’ wants and needs.

To be sure of scheduling sessions about content that participants actually care about, you’ll need to uncover and satisfy their actual wants and needs at the event. Luckily, doing this isn’t rocket science — I’ve been crowdsourcing programs in many different ways for 33 years.

Want to learn more?  My 2009 book Conferences That Work describes one way to create an entirely crowdsourced multi-day conference. Here’s another way to do it for a one-day conference. If you have only a few hours Open Space is useful (though, in my opinion, overrated). Finally, check out my latest book Event Crowdsourcing which covers everything I’ve learned about crowdsourcing programs at meetings.

Small sessions and/or small group work

One of the reasons why small conferences with a well-defined niche audience work well is that participants don’t have to waste time meeting people with whom they have little in common. Large meetings attempt to create the same environment by scheduling multiple conference tracks and concurrent breakout sessions. Often, however, the resulting sessions are still too large for people to easily make useful connections and/or learn from each other.

Unless you use interactive formats (see below), not much useful learning can happen in an hour with a hundred attendees.

One simple approach to reduce the size of large sessions is to run them simultaneously in several rooms. Or you can repeat them at different times. Distribute interested participants between multiple sessions, either by preallocation (for simultaneous sessions) or personal choice. I use this approach to run The Three Questions as an opening plenary at large conferences.

Small sessions, with thirty or fewer participants, should be the goal. Such sizes invite less formal formats where it’s easier for participants to ask questions, influence what is covered and discussed, and contribute their expertise and experience to the learning environment.

Finally, large sessions can work effectively if they have a significant small group work component. For example, some of the session formats I design and facilitate — for example, The Solution Room, RSQP, and The Personal Introspective — scale to work with any number of participants because most of the important work is done in small groups.

Remember, small is beautiful!

Interactive formats

Designing genuinely useful sessions for large groups is challenging work and typically requires incorporating small group work as described above. However, I have had great success facilitating highly interactive discussions of “hot topics” with hundreds of people. By interactive, I don’t mean that five people monopolize the entire discussion. Typically about forty people are “up on stage” at some point, most of whom had no inkling beforehand that they had something useful to contribute.

I call the format I’ve developed the Fishbowl Sandwich, and you’ll find full details on how to design and prepare such a session in Event Crowdsourcing.

Closing sessions

Most meetings squander the experiences they create. How? By failing to provide structured time to consolidate and reflect on individual and group learning and explore consequent future change. You can improve all meetings by including closing sessions that:

  • Help participants consolidate what they’ve learned during the conference and determine the next steps; and
  • Provide an opportunity for participants to reflect on the event, build community, and uncover new opportunities for future activities together.

Luckily, formats that satisfy these important needs — The Personal Introspective and Group Spective — can be run for meetings of any size.

Include them!

Final thoughts

Designing for connection and learning at large meetings by incorporating sessions like the ones I’ve outlined above? Bear in mind that interactive sessions typically require more time than traditional lecture-style presentations. Active learning is messy and risky, and creating an effective and safe learning environment takes more time than simply listening to or viewing speaker content.

About to schedule crowdsourcing, interactive formats, and closing sessions? Investigate the amount of time they’ll need, so you don’t sabotage them by cramming them into a timeslot that can’t do them justice. The links above are good resources. Investigate them, apply their principles, and make your large conferences better!

How to create amazing conference programs that don’t waste attendee time

How to create amazing conference programsDo your conference programs include pre-scheduled sessions you belatedly discover were of little interest or value to most attendees? If so, you’re wasting significant stakeholder and attendee time and money — your conference is simply not as good as it could be.

Now imagine you could learn how to routinely create conference programs that reliably include the sessions attendees actually want and need. Imagine you could create amazing conference programs that don’t waste attendee time. How much value would that add to your event; for your attendees, your sponsors, and your bottom line?

If you’re serving up a program that’s 100% pre-determined, if you’re not crowdsourcing part or all of your conference program at the meeting, I guarantee you are not creating the best possible conference program.

In fact, my research has shown that at least 50% of the sessions you’re offering are not what attendees actually want.

It doesn’t have to be this way!

I’ve put everything I’ve learned from 33 years of participant-driven conference program design experience into my new book Event Crowdsourcing: Creating Meetings People Actually Want and Need which covers all you need to know and do to successfully integrate effective real-time program crowdsourcing into your events and sessions.

Event Crowdsourcing will teach you how to create conference programs that are what your attendees actually want and need.

Every single time.

You’ll learn that to build the perfect program, every successful conference requires the following components:

  • Discovering in real-time attendee needs, wants, and resources.
  • Uncovering the most important topics and issues to include by:
    — efficiently obtaining suggestions and offers.
    — cleaning up potential topics.
    — selecting the most highly rated topics.
  • Determining the right sessions to hold.
  • Scheduling sessions to create an optimum conference program.
  • Designing sessions that meet attendees’ needs and wants.

You’ll learn how to select the best techniques to crowdsource all or part of any event. Whether it’s a one-day meeting with thirty participants or a four-day conference with thousands.

You’ll learn, detailed step by step, how to apply these techniques to successfully crowdsource your event.

Event Crowdsourcing: Creating Meetings People Actually Want and Need is now available! Buy it here!

Digital tools aren’t always the right choice for events

Sometimes, the right choice for events is analog tools, as shown in this photograph of conference attendees posting and reviewing topics for sessions written on sticky notes.

Digital tools aren’t always the right choice for events. Every day, I receive a barrage of pitches for event technologies. Each one markets digital tools, like apps for marketing, registration, venue booking, staffing, sponsorship, engagement, etc. Newcomers to the meeting industry who experience this onslaught could be forgiven for believing that digital software and hardware technologies are the only tools available and worth considering for meeting improvement.

Well…no.

The reason that digital tool marketing fills event professionals’ mailboxes and feeds is simply that there’s money to make by selling these technologies. Much more money than from tools like the participation techniques covered in my book The Power of Participation, which require either no “technology” at all or inexpensive tools like paper, Sharpies®, and Post-it® notes.

Yes, digital event technology has had a big positive impact on events. For example, no one (except the companies that printed them) regrets the demise of the massive printed conference guides that attendees had to drag around, most attendees appreciate the quantity and timeliness of information available on their mobile devices from well-designed event apps, and voting apps and throwable microphones allow greater interaction between presenters and audiences.

Nevertheless, in my experience, the human process tools I’ve been using and improving for the last twenty-five years provide more benefits (and, obviously, at lower cost) than current digital tools.

Let me illustrate with a current story taken from one of my earlier careers.

A massive difference

Before accidentally entering the meeting industry, I spent twenty-three years as an independent information technology consultant. During this period, I was an active member of the global software development community. My friends included some of the leading practitioners of this challenging art.
Large software projects involve teams of programmers who work together to develop complex systems where a single error can have far-reaching consequences. Everyone makes mistakes, and one of the hardest tasks when developing software in teams is to implement a design process that provides the required system functionality while minimizing flaws. Because the system implementation is constantly changing during development, continual software testing is an essential component of the whole process.

As you might expect, software developers are leading-edge creators of software tools. Developers routinely use and constantly improve sophisticated code repositories, automated testing suites, and complex project management tools.

And yet, it turns out, some of the most important tools are not digital. Here’s an illustrative tweet from Mathew Cropper, an Irish software developer, and a follow-up response from Canadian consultant Dave Sabine.

“Last week we moved from a purely digital backlog to using a physical wall. The quality of conversation improved massively. It’s like talking with a different group of people.”
Mathew Cropper tweet

“If a team hasn’t yet tried a big, visible, physical wall of roadmaps/backlog/tasks… then any discussion about digital tools is like buying new tennis shoes in order to quit smoking.”
David Sabine tweet

The most sophisticated digital tools that money can buy are no match for a wall full of sticky notes!

Successful process for software development and meetings

There are many reasons why a wall of sticky notes is a useful and powerful tool for successful team software development and effective conference program crowdsourcing and engagement. Both human process environments thrive because a sticky note wall provides:

  • One place to easily capture every piece of information that any individual thinks is relevant;
  • A public display of information that many people can easily view simultaneously for as long as needed;
  • Simple public manipulation options, such as note clustering, inclusion/exclusion, ranking, and public modification;
  • Somewhere for appropriate people to document and discuss progress, and develop and implement process; and
  • A natural focus for easy, spontaneous conversation, communication, and creativity.

It’s hard for current digital tools to provide any of these benefits as simply and well. Let’s compare for each of the points above:

  • Information capture: Wall capture requires writing with pens on sticky notes. Digital tools require access to a digital device for each attendee, plus the interface knowledge necessary to use it.
  • Public display: Wall requires a flat surface for notes. Digital tools require a BIG (expensive) screen.
  • Public manipulation options: At the wall, simply pick up a note and move it. Digital tools would require a big touch screen plus some form of note-dragging interface. [aka Minority Report wizardry]
  • Documenting and discussing progress & implementing process: Wall layout can easily be repurposed/redesigned whenever needed to accommodate different process tools such as project management or ranking to-dos. Digital tools typically require specific process techniques to be precoded.
  • Focus for conversation, communication, and creativity: Walls provide all the above functionality simply and in ways accessible to any attendee. So they are natural foci for conversation, experimentation, and creativity. The barriers listed above for digital tools make them far less accessible for such purposes.

Given these significant advantages, coupled with much lower costs, it’s a shame that more conference organizers haven’t discovered the value of simple process tools like sticky note walls and are still seduced by the relentless marketing of digital tool suppliers. To discover many other powerful human process tools, see why they can be the right choice for events, and learn how to use them effectively, buy my “tool chest” book The Power of Participation: Creating Conferences That Deliver Learning, Connection, Engagement, and Action.

How to use dot voting to choose the sessions your attendees need and want

A photograph of a smiling conference participant who, with others, is dot voting on session topics written on large sticky notes posted on a wallHow do we build conference programs that attendees actually want and need? Since 1992 I’ve experimented with multiple methods to ensure that every session is relevant and valuable. Here’s what happened when I incorporated dot voting into a recent two-day association peer conference.

For small (40 – 70 participants) one-day conferences I often use the large Post-it™ notes technique described in detail in my post How to crowdsource conference sessions in real-time. Participants simply post desired topics, which are then clustered and used to determine sessions and facilitators/leaders.

What we did

The September 2017 two-day conference had 160 participants, so I decided to add interest dot voting to obtain additional information about the relative popularity of topics. This added a couple of extra steps to the process used in the post above.

We had three one-hour time slots available the following day, and six separate rooms for participants to meet. This allowed us to schedule a maximum of eighteen peer sessions.

After twenty minutes of obtaining topic offers and wants, a small group of volunteers clustered the~150 topics posted, combined them appropriately, and, when needed, rewrote session titles on a fresh Post-it. Participants then returned to dot vote on the cleaned-up topics.

Each participant received three colored dots, which they could assign to the topics however they wanted — including all three to a single topic if desired.

dot voting
Handing out dots for dot voting

In addition, we gave each participant a black fine-point Sharpie. They wrote a number between 1 and 3 on each of their dots to indicate their level of interest in the dotted session.
Here’s a 22-second video excerpt of the dot voting, which was open for 35 minutes during an evening reception.


Finally, the small volunteer group spent about ninety minutes using the peer session selection process described in my book Conferences That Work and associated supplement to create the conference program for the next day.

Observations

  • The entire process went very smoothly.
  • It became clear that there were fifteen topics with significant interest. So we ended up scheduling five simultaneous sessions in each time slot, leaving one room empty. We advertised the empty room as a place for impromptu meetings on other topics.
  • The ninety minutes needed to analyze the voting and create appropriate sessions compares favorably with the time needed for the more detailed process described in Conferences That Work.
  • I had expected that most people would choose “3 — High Interest” for their dots. Although a majority of the dots were indeed 3’s, there were a significant number of 1’s and 2’s. This was helpful for rejecting topics that had a number of dots with mostly “medium” or “low” interest. Without the interest level information, it would have been harder to pick the best topics to schedule.
  • Every one of the scheduled sessions had good attendance. In addition, we scheduled sessions that seemed to be more popular (many dots) in the larger rooms. This worked out well.
  • Although at the time of writing, session evaluations are not yet available, the conference closing Group Spective made it clear that participants were very happy with the program they had created.

Conclusions

I was pleased with how well adding dot voting to Post-it topic selection worked. It’s a simple tool that provides useful information on participants’ session preferences. This approach fits nicely between the most basic crowdsourcing methods, like Post-it topic choice, and the more information-rich approach used for classic Conferences That Work peer conferences.

I expect to use the technique again!

Have you used sticky notes and/or dot voting to crowdsource sessions at your events? Share your experience in the comments below! 

How to crowdsource a conference program in real-time

Here’s a real-life example of how to crowdsource a conference program in real time.

In May 2017 Liz Lathan and Nicole Osibodu invited me to design and facilitate the session crowdsourcing at the first Haute Dokimazo unconference in Austin, Texas. Eighty invited participants from around the U.S. spent a joyful and productive day at the Austin Children’s Museum’s Thinkery where we crowdsourced a program focusing on event portfolio needs and wants of brands and agencies.

Watch this three-minute video for a taste of the event — then read on to learn how we crowdsourced the program.

Pre-crowdsourcing work

Every peer conference has an arc that includes and integrates three elements: a beginning, a middle (the program itself), and an end (reflecting, evaluating, and developing individual and group outcomes & next steps). The beginning is when crowdsourcing takes place. Before crowdsourcing it’s critical that participants get to learn about each other as much as possible in the time available. The best way I know to support initial inter-participant learning and connection is The Three Questions process I devised in 1995 (see my books for full details).

After quickly introducing and having the group commit to six agreements to follow at the event, we had forty-five minutes available for The Three Questions. To ensure each person had time to share, we split the participants into four equal-sized groups. Facilitators, trained the previous evening, led each group.

Once group members had learned about each other, we reconvened to crowdsource the afternoon program.

How we crowdsourced the Haute Dokimazo program

Crowdsourcing took just 25 minutes. Participants used large colored Post-it™ notes to submit session topics. We used pink notes for offers to facilitate or lead a session, and other colors for wants, as explained in the diagram below.
crowdsource a conference program
We read the topics aloud as they came in. Once we had everyone’s responses, the participants left for their morning workshops. Meanwhile, Liz Lathan and I moved the note collection to a quiet space, clustered them…
crowdsource a conference program
…and worked out what we were going to run, who would facilitate or lead each session, and where it would be held.

The resulting sessions

During lunch, we checked that the session leaders we’d chosen were willing and available for the schedule we’d created. Finally, we created a slide of the resulting sessions. We added it to the conference app and projected the afternoon program on a screen during lunch.

This is just one way to crowdsource a conference program in real time. Want a comprehensive resource on creating conference programs that become what your attendees actually want and need? My book Event Crowdsourcing: Creating Meetings People Actually Want and Need contains everything you need to know. Learn more here!

The Secrets Behind Conference Engagement

Secrets Behind Conference Engagement: Screenshot of Adrian Segar being interviewed by Brandt Krueger

So you’re holding a conference. How are you going to get your audience tuned in and engaged?

I shared my thoughts on this topic on a 2017 episode of the weekly #EventIcons interview with good friend and host Brandt Krueger. Our hour together was packed with useful information, so feel free to watch the whole thing (scroll down to view the video) or check out the timeline below for the main themes we discussed.

Enjoy!

3:00 Adrian tells the unlikely story of how he got into the events industry.

8:10 What would Adrian be doing if he wasn’t in the events industry?

9:10 The one driving passion shared by so many event professionals.

10:10 Why event planners and stakeholders should care about engagement.

11:20 Why traditional meetings don’t meet attendee needs very well.

12:10 How building participation into meetings creates engagement that significantly improves learning, connection, and outcomes.

14:20 Why lectures are so ineffective.

15:50 How to work with speakers and attendees who are introverts.

18:50 How to create a safe environment for attendees to share, learn, and connect.

20:15 An explanatory journey through the stages of participant-driven and participation-rich meetings that use the Conferences That Work model.

26:30 The positive aspects of supporting engagement at events, and the neglected need to evaluate events’ long-term impact.

29:10 The value of incorporating white space into events and several ways to do it.

34:50 How to work with speakers to make sessions more participatory.

37:20 How to market participant-driven conferences.

42:30 Three examples of simple participation techniques you can use to improve meetings: body voting, large facilitated fishbowl discussions, and The Solution Room.

50:30 The biggest mistake meeting planners make when attempting to improve participation and engagement.

54:30 Where to find all kinds of ideas about meeting design — and Adrian’s next book on crowdsourcing events.

The Secrets Behind Conference Engagement

Recipe for better meetings: less perfection, more risky learning

less perfection more risky learning: London Underground sign that says:3. Follow instructions from staff or emergency services. Do not take any risks
London Underground sign

Less perfection, more risky learning — an experiment

Right after the 2015 PCMA Education Conference Tuesday breakfast, I facilitated an experiment that allowed 675 meeting planners to choose sessions they would like to hold. In 45 minutes, hundreds of suggestions were offered on sticky notes. A small team of volunteers then quickly clustered the topics on a wall, picked a dozen, found leaders, and scheduled them in various locations around the Broward County Convention Center during a 90-minute time slot after lunch the same day. The experiment was a great success; all the sessions were well attended, and, from the feedback I heard, greatly enjoyed and appreciated. Many people approached me afterward and told me how surprised they were that such a simple process could speedily add 50% more excellent sessions to the 21 pre-scheduled sessions.

Our desire for perfection

All of us who plan meetings have an understandable desire for everything to be perfect. We strive mightily to not run out of coffee, comprehensively rehearse the show flow, allow for rush hour traffic between the day and evening venues, devise in advance alternative plans B -> Z, and anticipate a thousand other logistical concerns. And every planner knows that, during every event, some things will not go according to plan. So we pride ourselves on dealing with the unexpected and coming up with creative solutions on the fly. That’s our job, and we (mostly) love doing it—otherwise we’d probably be doing something less stressful, e.g., open-heart surgery.

Aiming for perfection is totally appropriate for the logistical aspects of our meetings. But when applied to other aspects of our meeting designs—little things like, oh, satisfying meeting objectives—we end up with meetings that are invariably safe at the expense of effectiveness.

Here’s what the guy I quote more than anyone else in this blog has to say on the topic of perfection:

Perfect is the ideal defense mechanism, the work of Pressfield’s Resistance, the lizard brain giving you an out. Perfect lets you stall, ask more questions, do more reviews, dumb it down, safe it up and generally avoid doing anything that might fail (or anything important).
—Seth Godin, Abandoning perfection

We took a risk on a less-than-perfect outcome at our PCMA Education Conference crowdsourcing experiment. “What if hardly anyone suggests a topic?” “What if one or more of the participant-chosen sessions turns out to be a dud, or nobody shows up?” “Suppose we underestimate the popularity of a session, and the scheduled space is too small to hold it?” (In fact, due to the limited locations available, we had to hold several sessions in one large room, and there was some auditory overlap that had to be minimized by a quick seating rearrangement. Lesson learned for next time!)

Risky learning

This is a superior kind of learning—risky learning. We try new things with the certainty that we will learn something different. Perhaps we’ll learn something important that we would not have learned via a “safe” process. And we are prepared for the possibility of “failing” in ways that teach us something new and fresh about our process.

I’ve been running crowdsourcing of conference sessions for over twenty years. So I was confident that there would not be a shortage of session topic suggestions. But I had never before run crowdsourcing with 600+ participants. Could I get their input in 45 minutes? Would a small group be able to cluster all the suggestions in another 30 minutes, pick out juicy, popular topics, and then be able to find session leaders & facilitators and schedule all sessions before lunch?

We took a risk trying new things, and I appreciate the conference committee’s support in letting me do so. The end result was a great learning experience for the participants, both in the individual sessions offered and the experience of the process used to create them. And we learned a few things about how to make the process better next time.

How much risk?

So we need less perfection, more risky learning at our meetings. But how much risky learning should we incorporate into our events? There’s no one right answer to this question. Ultimately, you have to decide what level of risk you, your clients, and your participants are willing to accept. A healthy discussion with all stakeholders will help ensure that everyone’s on board with what you decide. But, whatever your situation, don’t aim for perfection, or play it safe.

Build as much risky learning as you can into your events. I think you’ll find the resulting outcomes will surprise and satisfy you.