As I watched Scott Gould, Drew Ellis, Trey Pennington, Daren Forsyth and Maz Nadjm address a capacity crowd at Exeter’s #LikeMinds conference two weeks ago, it occurred to me that not all conferences are created equal. In fact, I realized that conferences tend to fall into two very distinct categories: Conferences that provide real value, and conferences that provide very little value. Before I go on, let it be said that #LikeMinds falls squarely into the first category.
Since I was one of the speakers at #LikeMinds, it’s natural for some of you to assume that I might be… biased, right? Fair enough. I can understand how you might think that. But the truth is that I have spoken at a number of conferences now, and I have no problem telling you that not all of them have fallen into the “valuable” category. In other words, if #LikeMinds were just another conference with little value, I might not necessarily come out and say so, but I also wouldn’t tell you it is something when it really isn’t.
Moving forward, you can feel pretty confident that I am speaking my mind here, and not giving credit where none or little is due.
So back to the topic at hand: The sold-out Like Minds Conference in Exeter, Devon (UK) on October 16th. The line of attendees outside before the doors officially opened, pretty much wrapping around the block. The impressive roster of speakers and panelists spanning two continents. The spectacular venue. The stunning live video stream. The twitter wall. The specific focus of the event. The global vibe. And perhaps most importantly, the £25 admission fee.
Yes, that’s right. Only £25. And £10 for students, as I recall.
Meanwhile, all across the US, social media-themed conferences typically charge what… $200? $500? $650? And for what? Wait… don’t answer that. We’ll get back to that in a sec.
Don’t get me wrong: I have no problem with conferences, social media or otherwise, charging $200 or even $650 to attendees. All I ask is that in return for those types of fees, these events offer at least $200 or $650 in value (respectively). It’s only fair. Heck, if a conference wants to charge $2,000 for admission, as long as it provides equal or greater value, have at it. In truth, the Social media world needs high level conferences of this type, and I would GLADLY spend $2K to attend a social media summit that actually delivered real value.*
No, my beef with rapidly growing number of “social media conferences” is that their $250 or $650 admission fee only buys attendees about $25 worth of value, as opposed to serious conferences (like #LikeMinds) that easily provide $650 worth of value for a mere £25.
Moreover, the fact that pointless social media conferences seem to be popping up everywhere has me scratching my head and wondering when the idiocy will stop. Let me ask you a simple question: Do we really need a social media conferences every week?
Of course we don’t. But with everyone and their brother suddenly looking to rebrand themselves as social media gurus, the demand for a accelerated conference circuit has hit a kind of fever pitch in 2009, with many organizers and speakers feeding on a self-serving loop of crap. Explained in as few words as I can, the former are looking to make a quick buck off the Social Media craze while the latter are so desperate for exposure that they will do just about anything for ten minutes of it.
Watch this video and we’ll continue the discussion in a few minutes:
If the video doesn’t launch for you, go watch it here.
Okay, now that you’re back, let’s continue our little discussion, starting with some typical low-value conference dynamics:
A. The problem with an increasing number of social media conferences: An upside-down value model
As we just discussed, on the one hand, you have the growing army of would-be social media gurus looking to make a name for themselves. This is the crowd furiously sending emails and DMs to conference organizers, begging them for opportunities to speak at their events to get a few conference gigs on their resumes.
On the other hand, conference organizers see in this endless stream of guru wannabes a welcome cash cow: Those confident enough to speak will gladly fill up session after session of their conference schedules for free in exchange for exposure. Enter the “Return on Engagement”, “Tweet your way to success” and “What will we call Social Media in 2010” breakouts. Wonderful. As if the internet weren’t already filled with these kinds of remedial turds posing as legitimate expertise.
The rest, those not speaking, are evidently more than happy to part with $200+ for the opportunity to rub elbows with internet-famous bloggers and perhaps befriend an A-lister or two in the hopes of raising their own profile in the SM world.
Below, some X-Box Live friends help me illustrate a typical high yield, low value conference model: A small number of speakers with valuable content the organizer actually has to pay isn’t enough to offset the large number of speakers with derivative content who will gladly fill content gaps for free. This model minimizes cost, maximizes profit, and guarantees a relatively low conference value for attendees. This is quickly becoming the norm across North America. No wonder most businesses look upon the social media “crowd” as a joke.
When you realize that an event that attracts 400 people at $200 per admission can gross $80,000, it isn’t hard to see why these things are popping up left and right, and for no other reason than to generate revenue. And as long as you, the folks who attend these types of events, are willing to fork out two bills to sit in a series of hotel meeting rooms for the better part of a day to listen to 20-40 minute presentations about how wonderful FaceBook is, how many people use Twitter, or how this company or that organization “engage” with customers using free tools you use in the exact same way and with greater success, these types of pointless events will continue to sprout all over the place. The margins are just too good for people to just stop putting them on out of… professional integrity.
What’s the solution? (Aside from putting on better conferences and events, that is?) A gut check would be a nice start. Stop going to every social media conference on the calendar. Become a little smarter and pickier about your choices. Start by looking at the overall roster of speakers. Then look for an actual point: Does the conference have a topic? A theme? A thread? Or is it just a mash of speakers covering every topic from how to network on LinkedIn to measuring web traffic using Google Analytics? Be smarter. Do your homework. Learn to spot the signs that a conference exists solely to extract money from your wallet.
Acceptable price-point: $0 – $75/day.
Next: A slightly better breed of conference.
B. The balanced Social Media Conference model: Investing in solid content pays off in the long run
In the model below, you have a more balanced approach: The ratio of established speakers (assuming relevant and actionable content) to aspiring speaker is slightly greater. In this scenario, the conference organizer is at least attempting to balance profit and content by mixing the really good stuff with some cheap filler. (Yes, kind of like the average bottle of whiskey on the middle shelf behind the bar.) This balanced, democratized model ensures that attendees will enjoy a much greater quality of content and networking for their money than the first model would have provided:
As mentioned in the previous section, this type of conference should also have a point. This can be demonstrated either by creating an overall theme for the conference (measurement, integration in the enterprise, customer service, best practices, etc.) or several specific tracks within the conference that will allow CMOs, CSMs, ITMs and other attendees with unique needs to go learn specific things as opposed to being forced to sit through a disjointed soup of “worthless FaceBook is great” and “let’s measure ROI in impressions” presentations.
Incidentally, conferences that charge upwards of $300 for presentations lasting less than 45 minutes are a waste of your time. Nothing can be covered in depth in under 30 minutes. If you spot a preponderance of 10-15 minute presentations on the conference schedule, skip it altogether.
So to recap, this type of conference’s three signature features are: a) at least as many respectable speakers as unknown speakers, b) a point/some kind of thematic structure, and c) presentations lasting more than 10-20 minutes apiece.
Acceptable price-point: $0 – $600/day, with $600 pushing towards truly outstanding content.
Next: The very best kind of conference – The summit.
C. The pinnacle of Social Media conference models: The best practices-style Summit
In this model, the organizer’s priority is obvious: Assembling the best minds on any given topic in the same place at the same time. The quality of the presentations, panels and discussions should be high as every speaker has been hand-picked for the quality of their content and delivery. This type of conference/summit is the rare gem that actually puts you in the same room as the world’s brightest minds and true expert. Bring a notebook or two, because you will probably be going back to the office with hundreds of pages of notes, all of which worth pure gold. If one of them pops up in your neck of the woods and you have an opportunity to attend, clear your calendar and get your ticket. No matter what this event charges, you will get your money’s worth by attending and learning as much as you can.
Unfortunately, many of these types of event are either by invitation only or put on for membership-only organizations, so make sure you are properly connected at all times. If you aren’t cool enough to receive an invitation, at least know someone who can help you secure one on the DL.
Acceptable price-point: $500 – $5,000/day depending on the level of the summit. Some focus on CEOs while others cater to VP-level execs. The price can vary greatly from one to the other. On average, shoot for $1,000 to $1,500./day (Considering that most of the presenters charge upwards of $2,000 per day, you’re getting a bargain even at the very highest end of that spectrum.)
Why you will now only see me at conferences with a legitimate reason for being:
Why am I telling you all this? Two reasons:
The first is to give you a heads-up: Before you start spending your summer vacation money on a half dozen worthless social media conferences over the course of the next 6 months, be aware that you could easily be throwing your money away on a bunch of hot air. Do your homework. Don’t just attend social media conferences because they’re there. Research the speakers, the topics, and more importantly, ask yourselves this simple question: What will I learn there that I couldn’t learn for free or on my own by spending a little quiet time with our friend Google? Stop paying unscrupulous conference organizers to put on crap events. Please.
The second is to let you know that effective immediately, I will not be participating in any conference that provides little or no value to attendees (you guys), and this for three pretty simple reasons:
- I don’t need the imaginary validation some people believe comes from becoming a staple of the US social media conference circuit. It’s a self-perpetuating ego trip. Nothing more. It’s completely meaningless and stupid.
- There comes a point where spending more time speaking than actually doing becomes counterproductive… and frankly, a little suspect. Anyone who has time to speak at 40+ conferences per year doesn’t have a real business. They’re a professional speaker, not a professional doer. No thanks. That isn’t who I am.
- There is absolutely no good reason whatsoever why I should ever lend my good name to the type of event that isn’t truly serious about helping businesses from around the world better understand, develop, integrate, manage and measure social media. That’s what I do. That’s what I am passionate about. If speaking at an event doesn’t serve that function, then it is a waste of my time and yours. Why should I lend my name to an event like that?
In short (and in case you hadn’t figured it out) I am serious about what I do, which these days basically consists in helping as many businesses as possible not only recover from this recession but emerge from it in better shape than they entered it. What it does not consist in is trying to become Mr. hot sh*t Social Media guru by showing up at every odd conference I can smooth-talk my way into. So aligning myself to every tom, dick and harry who puts on a horse and pony social media conference makes no sense at all in my world. I hope you guys won’t hold that against me.
And to be clear, if some of you want to try and become the next big thing on the Social Media conference circuit, I won’t hold it against you. I’m sure there’s money to be made there in the next couple of years, and the masses need good advice and insights into how social media can help them improve their lives. But if you don’t take that role seriously, if you aren’t responsible with the trust the public puts in you and your relative expertise, don’t be surprised if you pop up on the wrong end of my bullsh*t radar.
Conference organizers, you have your work cut out for you. If you want to create relevant events that will endure for years to come, I’ll be happy to help. By all means, let’s talk. But if you’re in this game to make a quick buck, don’t even bother sending me an email. I want nothing to do with what you stand for, and we’ll all see you on your way down.
In closing…
Both the #Likeminds team and the audience/participants reminded me that conferences with a purpose are as wonderful and valuable as conferences without one are a waste of time and an insult to our collective intelligence. When the most valuable information to come out of a marquee social media conference seems to be that “social media “will probably be called “new media” next year, it doesn’t take a genius to figure out that we’ve lost our way as a professional community. We can do better. We should do better. We have to do better.
After having attended three social media conferences while in the UK and a funeral while in France (yes, we’ll talk more about that as well), I came to the realization that the level of discourse about Social Media in the US needs a serious kick to the arse, and fast. This isn’t a game. This isn’t a fad. While the Twitternets were busy RT’ing an article that a distracted Fast Company blogger wrote about all the cool parties he went to in Vegas for BlogWorld as if it were gold, while pundits discussed the finer nuances of whether or not “Social Media” should change its name to “New Media” in 2010, our European counterparts were busy asking hard questions about how to actually plug social technologies and processes into the enterprise. How to sell it to their bosses. How to actually measure it properly. How to budget and plan for it. How to train their staff to use it. How to create a working social media management structure within their organizations. How to adapt their management cultures to the new realities of a perpetually networked and socially-empowered world. In other words, how to move forward from here.
Yep, while the US social media conference circuit was busy navel-gazing and playing rock star to its own eager fishbowl, real businesses with real problems were asking real questions, out there in the real world, where companies make and lose real money, where jobs are either created or lost, and where the world of business either adopts new ideas or moves on without giving it a second thought. Not next year, not in six months but right now. This week. Today.
In light of this, I hope everyone had a blast partying like rock stars in Vegas. Where’s the next party? Los Angeles? New York? Miami?
We can do better. We’re going to do better. And yeah, we’re going to start right now.
To be continued…
* Such a global best-practices summit is currently in the works. Details soon.
Brand Building and Online Marketing Blog 
Olivier,
Another commendable, thoughtful and prescient analysis of the torpor infusing our social media community. Like you, I’ve become frustrated with the number of social media acolytes whose primary function appears to be trumpeting the importance of social media as the next great marketing channel.
We get it, already.
Want to know what’s tough? What really consumes our time and effort? Making social media efforts work. Day in, day out, engaging staff, management and clients in social media (or is that new media?) channels.
Believe me, I know how to give a kick-ass presentation that will have C-level executives salivating over the prospect of implementing their own social media initiatives. I can power through a captivating Keynote presentation that convinces them that delay is potentially ruinous.
Then, however, I have to execute a real life campaign. Design a researched strategy that makes sense for their organization and integrates with their existing marketing efforts. Design guidelines and policies to protect the organization. Introduce the campaign internally. Train employees. Train some more. Then train some more. Generate compelling content, then try to recruit internal talent to contribute their own. Market and promote the company blog, Twitter contacts, fan pages, YouTube channels and any other selected channels to targeted prospects and an existing client base. Then do it every single day. All the while tracking SM activity and tying that activity back to authentic and measurable business activity. The revenue generating kind.
Now, can you help me with that? Or is the best you can offer a 45 minute presentation on the 6 Best Facebook Fan Page Tips?
“Now, can you help me with that? Or is the best you can offer a 45 minute presentation on the 6 Best Facebook Fan Page Tips?”
Wait… was that a rhetorical question? 😀
Very well put.
You hear that? That’s me…giving you a standing O. Kudos.
I was wondering what that sound was. 😉
Olivier – I always enjoy your posts. Well thought out and never afraid to say the unpopular thing. If the types of tweets people “issue” from conferences is any indication then it appears most conferences are just perpetuating the echo chamber.
However, and maybe this is something you’ll cover in a future post, but I think there’s some inherent value in the networking component of conferences. Quantifying that is a little tricky, and probably doesn’t have an immediate impact, but I think there is a lot of value in those networking opportunities. Does it rise to the level of $650 for a day? Don’t know, and it probably depends on the person.
Also, again maybe this will be in a future installment, but could you provide some names of conferences you think are worth the ROI 🙂
Thanks, again, Olivier.
I hear ya on the networking thing. For the most part, a simple tweetup or two will suffice. There are better ways to network than hanging out between sessions at a crap conference… like hanging out between sessions at a relevant conference. 😉
Olivier – we talked a bit about this while you were on your trip and glad to see it here now.
You make good points about how we can better spend our $ and choose the conferences that we get the most out of. What I’ve been chewing on since reading this post is your suggestions of what the makeup of speakers could/should look like, to get the most bang for your buck.
I understand your point in method (C) where the cream of the crop are coming together to talk shop on what’s important in SM. But what I’m struggling with is that many who attend a slew of conferences throughout the year look for the big names and ‘rockstars’. Those speakers are the ones who make them attend – more than the content alone. Is it a guarantee that the content will be as powerful as these speakers’ names? Not entirely sure about that. What it does guarantee is getting that event sold out.
My personal choice would be (B) – or a variation of it. You have a mix of both lesser known speakers and those that make the rounds. What I’m more curious to know, as you noted, is what the content itself is – but also, where the lesser known speakers’ backgrounds are. I’m more intrigued by internal champions within companies who are in the trenches, doing the gritty work, and are looking to communicate strategies and deeper-thoughts within SM & business with attendees.
I say to have this mix because we’re stepping outside of our comfort zone and getting away from the same events where we network with the same people/speakers. Granted, networking is a very integral part of conferences, it is something that (from what I’ve heard a lot of, at least) supersedes the content of an actual event. I’ll be the first one to say that networking is a big part of why I go to conferences, but to put less precedence on the content is a bit silly – especially if we want to continue to take SM to these next levels of thinking and implementation.
Outside of what makes a good conference or pointless conference, we’ve got to be willing to step outside of our comfort zones to what we’ve been accustomed to in the SM conference circuit and look for that ‘next level’.
K, I think I’ve exhausted my thoughts (scattered or not) for now, on a pretty long comment – tit for tat 😉
Sonny,
I think this at least partially goes back to Mack Collier’s suggestion about dropping the whole “Social Media Rockstar” label and focusing on people that can provide real value with great content in a conference format, whether well-known or not. I also agree with both you and Chuck that networking is an important part of any event. Sometimes this ends up being of more value than the content itself. Of course, if organizers take some of Olivier’s advice then this equation could change, for the better.
Olivier: Thanks again for a well thought out, valuable post.
I heard that! And thanks 😉
Right. I think (B) will suit most people’s needs, especially if the content (regardless of whether the speakers are established or not) goes through some kind of basic quality control. Putting on an event is about a lot more than just booking a hotel, inviting some social media people to speak and building a website to sell tickets.
In the end, for me, it’s all about content. The star power of certain A-listers on the circuit fades about 0.3 seconds after finishing their first pointless presentation. The novelty of meeting a well-known blogger is VERY short-lived.
So yeah, regardless of the type of conference: content, content, content and content. Conferences have to have a point. A purpose. A raison d’etre that I can grasp.
😉
Oliver,
Gem of a post !
The situation actually becomes worse in un-conferences (barcamps etc.) where everything is driven by users. One cannot introduce quality control in such sessions and typically participants are allocated half-hour for their talk.
It is only the beginners who are trapped by the style of presenters ! You’d find a lot of sessions which are missing on the core content but the speaker uses his sharp engagement skills to entice the audience.
Olivier – welcome back. We on the PR side of the communication equation are still searching for the magic formula on social media. Marketing/advertising and traditional media relations have established track records as regards impact on business, which makes it pretty easy to staff a conference slate (or should…)
But for many of us, return on social media investment on the reputation management side is still largely unknown. We see some correlations between admired companies, for example, and social media use, but much of the internal perspectives are proprietary — it’s a lot easier to get a consultant to speak for free than to get someone from inside the enterprise to share their wares.
It’s possible that social media is better suited to marketing metrics and outcomes than PR metrics — there still are too many people who don’t care a whit about an organization’s use of social media apart from customer service, sales, or other direct activities.
Finally, there also is a dearth of academic research, in part owing to the difficulty of getting data out of organizations and into the hands of researchers. This holds back the PR profession, as developing a consistent theory of social media use tested by strong research would elevate those tactics.
Good thoughts, thanks !
Right. Well don’t worry about revenue-related ROI when it comes to PR, at least at first.
First things first: Online reputation management. Right off the bat, you have three elements to work with here:
A) Monitoring
B) Alerting
C) Responding
Each of these three elements is a service that PR firms, along with the associated reporting, can easily monetize.
This creates at its very core two distinct value props: 1) serving as the eyes and ears of the client on the web, including all social media channels, (market intelligence in real time) and 2) Real-time crisis watch and crisis response.
These types of services are still vastly untapped and absolutely worth their weight in gold when done properly.
And then there’s the whole cost-savings bit (doing more with less) – or at least the profit-friendly opportunity cost, but that’s a whole other topic. 😉
Olivier,
Bravo.
We need this kind of talking, because to be honest, we (the conference organisers) have been hoodwinked into building celebrity events about quantity and not change incubators that are about quality.
It took a lot of hard work and resistance to make Like Minds what it was (and what it will be) – as so many people wanted to pitch in with their ideas for making money and not imparting value. It takes guts to hold that type of event at the risk of financial lost.
We must give voice to up and coming speakers – the real practitioners – not the ‘social media speakers’ who actually have no case studies for what they do.
Roll on part 2
Exactly. Though I still think you should charge more than 25 quid for your event. You’re giving everyone else who wants to put on a conference a complex. 😀
Gotcha – yes, the monitor-alert-respond model works well, in fact, I’m working through just that in plan development for a current client.
And, beyond the crisis aspect, the overall presence/absence of the organization in this realm (where the stakeholders of tomorrow are interacting now) does have demonstrable value, though likely not expressed in the same terms as other value propositions that focus more on revenue.
The measurement angle is looking at the inputs to reputation and isolating (or otherwise quantifying) the relative value each input has to the overall perception of value of the organization. I believe that focusing too sharply on current stakeholders at the expense of the emerging publics is a mistake, though telling that to budget-conscious, recession-afflicted potential clients is a tough sell.
Cheers for now.
Good post Olivier, we’re pretty much on the same page. Like you, I will only speak at events that stress teaching and learning. If the attendees can’t be sent home with a plan of action for how they will move forward with their social media efforts, then I won’t be a part of that event. This is a BIG reason why I am in no hurry to speak at SXSW again. I spoke there last year, was on a fabulous panel with Mario Sundar, Kami Huyse and Lionel Menchaca, but on the whole, SXSW is NOT where a company that wants to get up to speed on social media should be spending the time and money.
Now, before I got into my rant about speakers, I’ll add something that attendees should look for. Lots and lots of networking time. Not just with the speakers, but with each other. Look for interactive sessions, or open mic sessions. The more time attendees have to interact with speakers and each other, the better. That’s where the REAL value of the event comes in. It’s great that sessions are live-streamed, but that’s not where the value is, the value is in the hallways and during dinner. If the speakers at an event leave the stage and run to the airport, that’s a HUGE red flag.
As for conference organizers, the WORST thing you can do for your event, and the attendees, is pick the speakers FIRST, then the topics. If you say ‘OMG we have GOT to get Joe Rockstar to speak!’ then you’re screwed. You pick the topics that your attendees need to be taught about, THEN pick the speakers for that topic.
Second, you have GOT to paid your speakers. Even if you just cover travel, this is a must. Let’s say you don’t pay your speakers. That means they are out $1,000-2,000 just to get to the event. So that means they walk in the front door knowing they are a coupla thou in the hole. And how do you think they will make up that money? By trying to PUSH THEIR SERVICES on the attendees. Nice! And their presentation? Do you really think there’s much incentive for them to spend hours on making a kick-ass custom deck? The only customizing they will probably do is to add a couple more slides about THEMSELVES and how you can WORK WITH THEM.
Nice. Conference organizers, you get around this by PAYING your speakers. Don’t give them the ‘well no we can’ t pay you, but you’ll have access to HUNDREDS OF POTENTIAL CLIENTS!’ line. That’s BS. Those ‘potential clients’ are serial conference attendees, and are going to take copious notes and run home and try to do this stuff for themselves.
And as you said, there are WAY too many social media conferences. Case in point: A couple of months ago Social South was in Birmingham. Wonderful event, admission was $200, and should have been several times that. But the NIGHT before SoSo at the EXACT SAME VENUE, there was a FREE social media seminar where ‘experts will teach you all you need to know about using LinkedIn and Twitter to make $$$!’ And you better believe since this was a ‘free’ event, that attendees were subjected to a ‘free’ commercial by these ‘social media experts’ on how they should HIRE THEM.
The social media conference circuit is quite frankly bloated, and broken. Hopefully organizers will pay attention to this post.
Mack
As an organiser, I agree with all you’re saying a part from one point.
You say: “Second, you have GOT to paid your speakers. Even if you just cover travel, this is a must. Let’s say you don’t pay your speakers. That means they are out $1,000-2,000 just to get to the event”
At Like Minds, we paid all our speakers expenses, but did not pay them to speak. Thing is, Trey, Daren, Olivier and Maz all had the insight to see what a platform Like Minds was for imparting value. Now I don’t know if any of them missed out on “$1,000-2,000”, but they are pretty big doers in the industry (not talkers who don’t do)
Because they had the foresight, we are all enjoying the fruits of our labour. But I get the feeling not all social media speakers would have said foresight, and would rather charge an arm and a leg for an organiser to have them speak.
We charged £25, had 200 there, 600 watch online, and our hashtag is still kicking ass over 2 weeks after the event – because these guys had the foresight.
We need other ‘social media rockstars’ to follow suit and back the conferences that have potential but have not yet any budget. Otherwise, every organiser will continue to charge hundreds, pay their rockstar speakers thousands, and fly in the face of everything these rockstars say social media is supposed to be.
The way we cut through hypocrisy is making these conferences accessible to the ones who need it, and actually being social for a change, and doing offline what we all say we should do online
For me, speaking at #LikeMinds was important enough to wave my speaker fee. I believed in it and I believe in you. I look at it as an investment in the future of the conference series and what I think it will become.
That said, #LikeMinds is one of the rare exceptions. I don’t intend to make a habit of flying to conferences just to be comped. At least not until I am confident that I can afford to make pro-bono appearances where and when I think they will matter the most.
😉
“At Like Minds, we paid all our speakers expenses, but did not pay them to speak.”
Scott, I’m cool with that. From my experience, most speakers (even many of the ‘rockstars’), will waive speaking fees, they just don’t want to have to PAY to speak at an event. If it’s a good event, the speakers will usually understand the value of being associated with it, and meeting/networking with people there. So good on you for covering your speakers’ travel.
“the WORST thing you can do for your event, and the attendees, is pick the speakers FIRST, then the topics.”
Bingo. You just scored some major points with me, Mack. (Not that you needed to or anything, but still). Absolutely.
You know what? Screw it. I’m posting your comment as a follow-up post. It’s that good.
Cheers.
Thanks Olivier! 😉
One of the things I wanted to point out from your comment that I think is very important is networking time. I was able to go to Mesh in 2008 as part of my work at Edelman.
In between every amazing session (content was out of this world), there was a 30 minute break. Enough time to go to the bathroom, fill your water bottle and have a full conversation before going to the next session.
I made better connections at mesh than I have at any conference before or after and I think 90% of that was the long breaks.
The funny thing is, Olivier, that I was just thinking I was starting to see the same people (speakers and attendees) over and over again at UK conferences. Maybe I’m over-exposing myself, or maybe they are. Or maybe we are risking saturation in the UK.
That’s just because Trey and I were doing the rounds. Has it gotten better since we left? 😀
Granted, the UK is much smaller than the US, so that’s to be expected.
What UK conference organizers should probably focus on is creating conferences that cover specific topics. Regardless of whether or not some of the speakers tend to be start looking familiar, at least by keeping the conferences focused, they can keep them from becoming derivative and stale.
It’s also likely that UK conferences may need to start drawing speakers from other countries. Not just the US like #LikeMinds, but from all over Europe as well. I’m sure I can find French, Belgian, Swiss, Dutch and Spanish speakers who will bring a different perspective to the conversation.
Saturation is definitely a threat though. I hear you loud and clear. 😉
Right on
#likeminds, for instance, is about bringing new speakers – both to the region, and the to the ‘circuit’, as it were.
I def have an aim to derail socialmediarockstarism
There are tons of people actually DOING it, who have little profile, but tons to say.
Well, it was hard to swing a cat in the UK without hitting a social media guru from Greenville, SC for awhile there. 🙂
I couldn’t agree more with this post. I don’t wish to hear the same old thing over and over again. Speakers from other parts of the world is a good idea – as long as it isn’t the same thing but in a funny accent 😀
Hi Olivier,
I really dig this post and its undercurrent. There are a few tricky bits about this, however.
The event model as it exists now is fundamentally flawed, not just because of the speaker roster or content model (though those leave a lot to be desired sometimes). Event organizers are paying for things like overkill venues, meals, and AV requirements, when sometimes what would serve better are decent internet connections, coffee, and water. The focus is sometimes too heavily on the trappings of the event rather than the meat of it. And then sponsors are called upon to defray the overhead, an overly-ambitious multi-track roster is built with little focus, and there isn’t enough time to absorb and further the information put forth at the conference.
Paying for attendance is KEY to building value in an event, in my view, because it’s a bit of a gatekeeper. It doesn’t have to be a ton of money, but it has to be enough that you feel invested in the outcome, and committed to contributing to the event.
Speakers, too, have a responsibility to quit with the talking head routine. There’s a place for an inspirational, conceptual, motivating keynote. But in content driven tracks, there ought to be less dog-and-pony-fancy-slideshow nonsense, and more discussion and tackling of the REAL issues the attendees are facing in their business. Too much teaching goes on at at a conceptual level about what we speakers think the audience needs to know, instead of actually building the content in real time, while they’re there, based in real scenarios.
Teaching at a conference through speaking has immense value if done well. But we’re letting the speakers slide, too, not just the organizers. I can count on one hand the number of talks I’ve seen lately that have compelled me to take tangible action in my business, and I AM one of the “doers”. It’s my job. And whenever I speak, I am driven from that perspective.
The last point: the social media hype has us waaay too focused on the tactics and tools, and not nearly enough in the broader business implications. A conference built putting tools in the forefront is leading with the wrong message to start with.
The good events will filter themselves out, honestly. The bandwagon events won’t be sustainable, either from a financial model or a content one. And this social media fishbowl of ours is going to start getting really boring and crowded if we’re only ever talking to each other.
Amber
Agreed. I’d kill for decent wi-fi access at a social media-related conference. Why is that so difficult? 😀
“[an] overly-ambitious multi-track roster is built with little focus, and there isn’t enough time to absorb and further the information put forth at the conference.” Amen.
The talking head routine can be taken care of, I think, if event organizers give their speakers some direction. In the case of #LikeMinds, I was specifically selected for the ROI bit, and asked to deliver content relating to ROI. Same with Gas Pedal’s upcoming Supergeniuses of Social Media. I believe that if conferences take ownership of the content they want to put together, we can avoid talking head syndrome altogether. To Mack’s point a little earlier: “the WORST thing you can do for your event, and the attendees, is pick the speakers FIRST, then the topics.”
Lastly, “a conference built putting tools in the forefront is leading with the wrong message to start with” is spot on. Facebook isn’t a strategy. Neither is Twitter. Nuff said.
Thanks for the comment, Amber. 🙂
Ah yes, but this assumes a fundamental understanding from the conference organizers about what their attendees need. Practically and truly. I think that one gets missed a lot because the organizers are in the making-money-with-events business, not the teach-people-to-do-their-jobs-better business.
Well… I don’t assume it, but I do expect it. If a conference organizer misses something that simple, they probably aren’t qualified to put on a conference yet. At least not one that deals with Social Media.
As for the “organizers are in the making-money-with-events business, not the teach-people-to-do-their-jobs-better business,” thing, sadly, that’s the root of at least 80% of the crap conferences right there. Yep.
🙂
Amber,
I’m sure you recognise that the irony in the “organizers are in the making-money-with-events business, not the teach-people-to-do-their-jobs-better business,” statement is that these conferences are in and for an “industry” whose central tenant (one of, at least) is based on being helpful.
It’s this sort of bandwagon jumping, misguided goldrush mentality that threatens to sour the social media movement – and before I’ve gotten rich off of it. 😉
Hey Oliver,
I just wanted to say thank you. Your posts are always timely to decisions I’m making in my own business, helping me gut check why I do things, and usually helping provide some simple guidance that keeps me from a serious misstep.
Excellent insight, as usual.
Regards,
Keith
You’re very welcome, Keith. 🙂
It’s a really good discussion to have not just for social media. Branding and marketing conferences, international communications conferences come to mind, too.
I’ve attended my fair share and I can tell this community here – I like it how you all came in and discussed it from different angles – that the multiple tracks and rushing to decide on what will be good from the program doesn’t cut it for me.
Learning the same way I eat and am social, I take my time to enjoy the experience, absorb the context and connect with all present. Fewer speakers and some sessions to warm up with a topic and have a real discussion would result in a less dis-connected and more useful experience – both for the participant and the speaker. At least for me. I’m Italian, I’m amazed I can tweet!
This goes back to the creation of “thick” value, as Umair Haque puts it. There’s no bigger compliment I can receive than hearing about the progress my readers are making with their work towards achieving their goals because they tried something I suggested.
As for speaking at events, every time I met amazing practitioners/attendees. In this last year I’ve had the chance to do a bit more of it joining where I was invited. I would have loved to participate in Social South, for example… The other interesting part is that in a couple of situations, the keynote I was initially approached to do went to a male, in one case from Academia. Just saying…
As a practitioner in my day job I resonate with what John was saying in the first comment. It’s hard work and the reward is often more of it – that’s also where the joy is. I’ll be presenting at BlogWell Atlanta next week about how our internal plan was developed and socialized through the organization – it’s the story I have for the moment, and am glad to share it because I believe that B2B companies can benefit the most from integrating social media in the way they think and do business.
Off to writing my post now. Thank you for the warm up conversation.
Olivier,
Three Games and a Blog…I’m ignoring one Monday Night Football game, World Series Game 5, and a college football game because your blog has captured my attention. As a ‘newbie’ to social media (who has been confused by some of what I’ve been learning/reading about) this is an especially interesting read. Glad I found your post. (via Twitter, BTW)
Thanks,
Lori
Twitter has been a nice connector for me. Thank you, Twitter. 🙂
Always a pleasure to hear from you, Lori. Someday, you’ll have to explain to me how you manage to watch 3 games at the same time. It’s all I can do to keep my focus on just one futbol game at a time. 😀
Well said once again Olivier, but the conference organizers aren’t going to go for it. If they actually teach something useful the attendees will go home with actionable knowledge and not need to sign up for the next one, or the next one.
It is indeed time we give real businesses real information they can use instead of vague ideas and scintillating PowerPoints. It’s those damn PPTs to the CXO’s that make the real implementation nigh impossible.
There are several layers of knowledge about social media.
Conceptual
Pie in the Sky
Functional
The last one is just not as much fun and it’s harder to sell so most just don’t even try.
I see your point, but I kind of have to disagree. A conference that provides value (in the form of actionable knowledge, networking, idea generation, product demos, etc.) will bring people back again and again and again. Heck, you could probably turn an annual conference into a quarterly one if you modeled it properly.
A conference that offers little in terms of value probably won’t be high on the list of priorities for the following year, unless it is HUGE. Just like SM platforms, conferences that scale the fastest become the industry events everyone feels they have to attend. But the value of a 200-attendee $250 conference that presents 90% fluff probably won’t be back a third or fourth year.
I do agree with your last comment though: Functional is hard to sell and not as much fun. And thank goodness for that. Functional is best served by an event that focuses on a training schedule (something like AMA), not a conference. 😉
Olivier, I agree with you on every count of every word written or spoken here as long as your speaking within the social media fishbowl. The second you step out, it’s all hazy in my opinion. I just got back from Blog World as you know and the sessions for me were FAR from mind blowing. Your 101 ROI session went about forty levels deeper than just about anything talked about there. However, what is interesting is the level of knowledge that most of the attendees had. I would say more than 80% of the crowd were newbies. These were people just figuring out how to use these tools.
Last night I did an opening talk for a workshop style twitter class for a friend. All 40-50 of these folks wanted to use social media for business. They have ZERO experience in digital and surely a twitter class would not be all they need, but most of these people had accounts and didn’t even know how to see an @ message. If people saw me tweet about doing an opening talk for a twitter workshop the fishbowl would have laughed me right out of the room. However, I can tell you that these people got real value from the presentation and the workshop. (Done in a computer Lab)
So, all this being said. You are right. I am sick of the pointless social media conferences held every week all across the globe. However, you have to remember we see every one of them and we get offered to speak at a lot of them. (Many of which don’t pay a penny) We have to remember though that people are deriving value and that these are early days. The folks that are doing real work with real clients, and doing extraordinary things in the space are not really revealing their secret sauce and surely are not being open bout sharing data…especially when it’s proprietary to the client.
We are looking at a catch 22 here serving two completely different markets. The newbies and the early adopters. I don’t know what the answer is. For me… I don’t bother going to most conferences because they are of little value beyond the people I meet. I am better off presenting at a non-social media conference about social media to those that need it rather than droning on and on to my cronies about why they need to “engage” ….barf!
Excellent point about addressing two completely different markets. At its most basic, you have beginner vs. advanced. Absolutely.
You could also further divide the two groups into “for personal use” vs. “for professional use.” Agreed.
No question that the evangelizing and intro-level stuff has a tremendous amount of value when speaking before non-SM crowds at non-SM industry events.
My beef however is with SM events. The fishbowl. Treating that circuit as if it were the International Association of Organic Fishmongers or the North American Poodle Stylist Federation. Know what I mean?
When I deliver an SM lecture at an interior Design conference, I’m expected to keep things at a 101 level, and that’s fine. A show like Blogworld, however, should probably consider elevating the level of conversation. I find it troubling that an event of that size and “importance” wouldn’t have anything close to the level of my ROI presentation… which is itself pretty basic.
What happens when I try to show companies how to actually create an internal structure (lateral and vertical) for their SM activities? There currently isn’t a conference that will allow me to do that, even though at every conference I attend, people come up to me and ask for that level of content.
Something needs to change.
Thanks for the comment, Keith. 🙂
Keith has a good point as well. We are in touch with SM on a day to day basis but the % of the population who actually uses it is small.
I got a couple of things out of BlogWorld, but mostly it was a networking event. Looking out of my lil fishbowl I’m stunned there were so many bloggers there who didn’t use social media beyond writing on their blogs and the concepts they heard were new. More than one bloggger said they came home with pages and pages of notes, so they did learn something, but I think it’s time for a tiered system of presentations so everybody gets something.
I swear if I hear about MotrinMoms one more time……
Exactly.
Great post.
As a regular attendee and speaker at these types of events, I’m totally with you. However, you left out my biggest pet peeve.
It’s one thing when people beg for a spot to speak and don’t charge to do this. It’s quite another when these people pay the organizer to speak. In other words, they pay for the right to speak and, thus, the “sponsored talk” was born. Over the years, the “sponsor” tag has been dropped from the agenda and these people are now littered throughout the day in hopes that no attendees will notice that the only reason you’re being forced to hear them is because they’re paying the organizer. Of course, generally, these are the worst talks at conferences since most can’t resist making their talk a commercial instead of something informative.
For all the conferences I’ve been to this year (healthcare focused), they ALL feature this format. I could only wish that I went to conferences where the speakers aren’t paid. That would be a step up from the conferences full of “sponsored talks” that I seem to find myself invited to.
Sponsored talks are just repugnant. I’d forgotten about those. I’m going to go gargle now.
Very much digging this post. I know that I will be back to read all of the comments after my 6 year old is in bed and my inbox is a little more in control… but this topic is one that has been driving me nuts for awhile now. So I’m practically dancing in my chair over here wanting to comment… and I give in. I’m commenting before reading the other comments (something I don’t usually do.)
One thing not addressed here is that so many of the conference organizers are NOT well versed in the subject themselves. The skills that make someone successful in the Social Media arena are *not* necessarily the same skills that make for a successful conference organizer.
I’m with Mack (as quoted in your follow up post) on the fact that the “compensating your speakers” model will provide much better speakers than the “see who you can get to work for you for free” or “sponsors pay-to-play” models. In the first case, you have people who are going in to debt to make money for the organizer. In the second case, you get people who view it as a commercial for their company. Neither is really going to provide you with an experience where the audience feels like they walk away with something.
But budgeting for speakers, getting money from conference sponsors, creating a budget, and then KNOWING who is worth their asking price and who isn’t? That’s challenging. And it’s a challenge most conference organizers are failing.
Someone who knows the industry well enough to know what a good session proposal looks like and whether or not the speaker(s) included are going to be able to deliver useful information is unlikely to be busy putting together conferences. S/he is more likely to be working in the industry or be *submitting* the proposal.
The better conferences I’ve been to of late include a cooperation of someone who gets event planning AND someone who gets our industry and is willing to assist with the programming.
But while there is a surplus of Social Media conferences? There is a dearth of *advanced* Social Media conferences. Most of these “every week, everywhere” conferences are still aimed at the “Social Media novice” or someone who is trying to figure out how to pitch or implement it at his/her workplace. Finding conferences that acknowledge that we aren’t really as new of an industry as people like to think and program an *advanced* track that people who would normally speak at the intro conferences would find appealing.
I note that for the most part, the higher the pricetag is, the more likely it is to be a thinly veiled marketing pitch for the services of the sponsors and/or arrangers.
My reasons for going to conferences (when I’m not speaking) varies. I’m finding that there are many at which the people I want to see and spend time with, share ideas with, and learn from are more likely to be participating in “Lobby Con” if & when they are not speaking. I will be rethinking my participation in those this year. But I will continue to participate in those which deliver quality speakers and content to their attendees.
Stepping down from my own soapbox and looking forward to reading the rest of the conversation above later tonight.
Wow. Your comment is almost as long as my post! Rock on! 😀
Easy fix: Have conference organizers create a advisory boards and discuss topics, structure and potential speakers. I completely agree that event planning and management sometimes don’t jive with being an SME. So things get missed. You’re so busy putting on an event that you forget to focus on the basic premise of the event: The content. An advisory board can help take care of that.
Now, how many conference organizers do this?
Wow, so harsh. And so damn spot on.
As one who’s spent the last year on “the circuit” both as an attendee and a speaker, one phrase that keeps jumping to mind is “The Emperor Has No Clothes”. I actually startled myself by saying out loud recently at an event, furtively ducking my head as I realized it did actually pass my lips.
But the person across from me opened their eyes wide and said “EXACTLY!”, and I was relieved to hear I wasn’t the only one missing out on some magical conference mojo.
What I do always take away is an appreciation for the energy of the people in this space, and a renewed determination to apply the tools of the trade better. To learn more, be more, do more.
Also, a strong sense of whom I would ever hire or rec. for a project based on their drinking behavior the night before. Stripes will out.
But yes, I’d be happier not paying for that lesson. Thanks for being a voice of reason.
Right. Well, I’ve found myself agreeing to speak at events and realizing about ten minutes after getting there that I probably shouldn’t have fallen for the organizer’s pitch. Still, I figured I was probably being too picky, that I needed to just focus on my own content and ignore the overall mediocrity of the event as a whole, and just deliver actionable advice to the audience… But then I found myself presenting at a handful of solid conferences and realized I should have listened to my gut instead of rationalizing that I could turn a bad event into a good one just by being there. It doesn’t work that way.
It really became crystal clear to me last month when I superimposed my experience at #LikeMinds with the comments and content I was seeing come out of BlogWorld. That’s when I realized I couldn’t complain about the problem if I continued to be a part of it. So I decided to not only draw a line in the sand and only align myself with solid events support the launch of new events that aimed to counter the proliferation of crap conferences.
If we’re going to be leaders in this field, we have a responsibility to make sure that the events we help “sell” are held to the highest standard. The remedial crap has to go.
By the way, “Stripes will out” is an awesome phrase. I’m stealing it. 😉
Hi Olivier, I’ve never been to your blog before, but I have to say this is a great post and I am thankful to have found it.
I just began attending conferences a little over a year ago, and have become all too aware of the “social media rockstars” you speak of. After becoming more acquainted with this pond of the same people saying the same things, I’ve come to wonder, what is the value in attending these events? The best conferences I’ve been to are smaller, more action-oriented, and less about the parties and more about the education and takeaway. You’ve really spelled it out for me, personally, and moving forward I will apply your advice when deciding on which conferences are worth the $, whether it is mine or the company I’m representing.
Thanks again!
Sarah
Sweet! I’ll try to steer you in the right direction, then. 🙂 Should I start reviewing conferences then? What should be my unit of value, I wonder. Stars are so 1978…
Who me? At a loss for words? Never happens. 🙂 Twitter’s 140 limit vexed me horribly for first year!
I suppose I really should’ve posted in reply, but meant to mention how nice it was to read such a thorough analysis in your post. It’s always good to find those who don’t fear “too lengthy” when the alternative is “not sufficiently addressed”! 😉
Agreed about the need to have “one or more SME’s involved. Sadly, doesn’t really jive with personality type of most good event organizers. They tend to be control freaks if they’re any good at it – so hard for them to turn over the make-or-break content aspect of the show to anyone else.
Unless we get into the oddity that is SXSWi – which sticks by the panel picker despite indication that the model has been outgrown. (this year for interactive, one would’ve had to read/review/vote on 167 submissions per day to read them all during the voting timeframe. Wonder if *anyone* did)
Seriously hating my iPhone right now. That reply goes to your reply 2 above.
This reply (sans disclaimer) is much terser.
Yes. I think there’s a point at which this needs to start happening without the fear that honest criticism will be met with retaliation by the conference organizers who might find their review less than stellar. Problem is, unless some of the higher billing names out there join in with not going just b/c their fee is met? Well… You know.
Olivier,
You are welcome to “Stripes Will Out”, I think it was your England ref. that triggered it. SO, part yours.:)
It’s been a really educational discussion in the comments, and has really crystallized some thoughts around a workshop I’m doing on Friday morning for a very traditional firm. Thank you for that, and for pushing the envelope about DOING things with social media instead of gushing to the other 92% of the business world about why they need a Facebook group. Appreciated.
SatoTravel has provided travel services for the United States military under routine peacetime conditions
Olivier, one might almost say that conferences are a good straw person for the challenge of communication in general. When we are very careful about choosing our “target” public, and when we adapt our messaging and methods in service to the objectives for that public, we get much better outcomes.
Conferences in general exist to make the organizers money, so the dialogue goes, “we need to get as many people in the door as we possibly can, which drives our expense ratios down and increases revenue.” However, if we follow the models represented in many of the 56 other comments on your excellent post, a better dialogue would go: “let’s create a conference that will justify the participation of many people in the exact segment we most would like to reach.”
Many professional association conferences are designed to appeal to as many tiers of experience as exist in membership. However, five tracks, only one of which appeals to the most experienced practitioner, leaves 80% of the content outside that practitioner’s interest.
So, doing separate conferences appealing to different levels of practitioner, but with 1/5 the attendance, would seem to be a solution — but most of the economics won’t support that kind of decision. So, even special interest conferences will still include a variety of programming that appeals to a wide swathe of practitioners. That means that the most experienced are still held captive by everyone else.
It’s not an easy task, in my book. However, more organizations should try to find new voices and hold them accountable for adding value for participants.
Great analysis, Sean. I like the way you think.
That said, I think that we could give attendees the benefit of the doubt when it comes to the quality (and even complexity) of the content. Fine, let’s not bore them with PhD level material, but we can find a way to require speakers to at least have enough respect for their audience that they will prepare innovative, exciting and nutritious meals instead of throwing candy and fast food at them. That is, after all, why they get paid the big bucks, right? 😉
For the price of admission, I doubt that attendance would drop if the level of content and discussion were elevated to at least some median level of sophistication.
Thanks a lot for your well-thought-out comment.
A good dose of cynicism to wake up people. People have dived into the internet and come out the other side, the same for facebook, twitter too etc. and likewise this morass of conferences will have the same reaction on folk. They will become conscious of what is happening for and to them and therefore raise their game. Let’s think positive.
Krishnamurti once gave a talk at the Barbican in London that I attended to see what the man was like. Amusingly he sauntered onto the stage, sat down, looked at the eager faces in the front and the first thing he said was, “what are you doing here again?” !!
That’s hilarious. I love that. Thanks for telling me that story, Tim. 😀
I know this relationship is moving a little fast but… I. LOVE. this. post…. AND the comments! I laughed, I cried, I grimaced at the thought of what we have turned into and I have set some goals to try to be better in the future. Thanks to you Olivier and to all the great comments left as well!
Cheers, Amanda. And I agree: The gold is in the comments. 😉
Olivier didn’t you mean the silver was(is!) in the cloud? Hahaha!
Olivier, replying to comments on your blog could become a new growth industry on its own. Trying to figure out how to get in on the ground floor…
You’re there. 😀
Oliver – This was a great post. I am happy that I spent the time to read the post, watch the video and read the comments. Thanks for putting this together and replying to everyone’s comments.
I used to be an event technology supplier – so I have seen the industry from the inside. Most organizers are selling the following: (A) Hot Topics/Trends (B) “Name Brand” Speakers, (C) Networking/Access to the market. In some cases, they are selling a destination/venue.
The attendee’s personal learning is down on the priority list. We can tell this by the one-speaker-to-many-listeners format that is used. This is an efficient way to share information – but it is a terrible way for people to learn. You remember 20% of what you hear, 30% of what you see and 70% of what you do.
I think that the real upside down model in social media conferences is the format. If Social Media is about listening, sharing, engaging and collaborating – then why are we stuffing people in chairs to listen to gurus?
Shouldn’t attendees be talking, collaborating, sharing and learning from one another as much as the rock stars? Since – most commenters agreed that most rock-star speakers are really the neighborhood garage band – it shouldn’t be too much of a stretch to change the model. Should it?
Thanks again for writing such an awesome post. Look forward to part 2.
– Sam Smith
@samueljsmith
Awesome comment, Samuel. The model you propose is EXACTLY what the kids at #Likeminds and I are trying to develop. Stay tuned. 😉
Samuel is so right with the percentages game at seminars etc. I work in the food industry and I would suggest the seminar programmes that Jeffrey Hyman runs @ http://www.fdin.org.uk/
are some of the best practice events framed to give quality presentations but then to get attendees to work on a road table basis to exchange views. That and then to put the presentations directly up on the web for free within in days of “showtime” for those unable to attend is brilliant.
OK, Olivier, I’ve spent my time with respect to this post reading the comments and making the odd reply of questionable helpfulness and suspect insight.
So, I thought I’d weigh in with my own experience.
Here in London we have something called Measurement Camp. While not a conference, as such, it embodies many of the qualities that are being discussed here.
It is a monthly meeting of people wanting to make practical sense of social media measurement, campaigns, etc. Most of us are involved in social media initiatives day in and day out, either as agencies or within our companies. Some of us have been involved in social media for a long time, others are new to it. All of us realise we can learn a lot from each other.
The format is very informal, open and participatory. The regular “structure” comprises short presentations by 1 or 2 of us on what we’ve done recently regarding measuring real-world social campaigns; followed by small group sessions discussing, again, real-world scenarios volunteered by one of the small group members.
In these small groups we try to provide practical help on the scenarios being discussed, hopefully giving the person whose campaign/problem it is some new way of dealing with it (or at least a sanity check on how they have been approaching it). Following the sessions the groups reconvene in the larger setting and each one gives a short presentation to the rest of us on what was discussed, passing on the learning, seeking more, etc.
I always come away from a Measurement Camp having learned something new. I’ve also met a lot of good people in the UK soc med community that way, some of whom you now know too: Gemma Went, Andrew Gerrard, etc.
In addition to all of that, the story about how it started is an interesting one too. Here it is (from the group wiki site):
In February 2008 at a perfectly-timed Chinwag event entitled ‘Measuring Social Media’ it became clear that despite a packed room of smart digital minds, and a panel of egotistical twerp-experts, the digital community was failing to decently answer the challenge of how to measure or even make sense of the results and impacts of embracing this new-ish world.
In a rare moment of clarity panelist Will McInnes suggested there and then that the community began meeting together in an open, collaborative, ego-free environment to tackle the challenge together, and did so in the spirit and style of the popular geek BarCamp events.
MeasurementCamp was born, and met a month later at the Coach & Horses in Soho.
The movement has made significant progress in building the confidence, awareness, knowledge and approaches available to its supporters, but it hasn’t come up with a magic formula, nor does it expect to.
So, there you go. Not really a conference but some sort of modern hybrid of a conference, crowd-source knowledge group, meetup, and tea party.
Then, there’s the Social Media Cafe meeting. Most people know it as Tuttle. (You may have met it’s founder, Lloyd Davis, at SMiB09 in London. He was dragged onto the final panel last minute by Daren Forsyth.) But Tuttle is a story for a different comment as I’ve gone on for long enough.
Excellent post, Oliver. I’d just be careful not to generalize. I’ve keynoted over 40 conferences this year alone, some for free, some for extremely high speaker fees – while also growing HARO (Help A Report Out) from 5,000 members to over 100,000 members, and from $0 in revenue to over $1.3 million in revenue. So to say that I’m not a doer because I’m a frequent speaker would be an inaccurate description. Other than that, spot on post.
😀
Peter, you’re one in a million, man. The proverbial exception. And I do tip my hat to you in a big way.
Olivier:
I’m late to the party…because I was planning, organizing and implementing one of those conferences you discussed here–just not a social media conference. Yes, I admit it, I’m a meeting & event professional.
As others have mentioned, the point you make is universal to all conferences and events. The meetings & hospitality industry is facing some of the same challenges that the music and media industries face – disruptive innovation. Conference organizers must find ways to provide a remarkable, purple cow, unique experience with stellar content that is relevant and timely to its attendees, or face decreased attendance and a changing marketplace.
Unfortunately, many conference and meeting organizers have a tendency to focus on the logistics, the details of the event instead of focusing on the strategic elements first. They focus on the room layout, the color of tablecloths, the food and beverage to provide and what speakers they can secure. They hold call for proposals and then only secure speakers from that process instead of being intentional with their topic selection. The entire call for proposal process is flawed from the start and if that’s the only method used, the conference organizer will be forced to choose from a typically over-used speaker list.
Instead, the conference organizers should focus on the strategic and education design first with questions like, what’s the goal of the event? What topics and themes should be discussed? [Then find speakers to meet those topics.] How do we provide the best education design possible for those living in a Web 2.0 world? How do we intentionally structure both vertical, one presenter to many and horizontal, networked learning peer-to-peer facilitated sessions? How do we allow the attendee to learn without walls, customize their experience to their own needs while providing cutting-edge, content in a variety of ways? These are the type of questions good conference organizers should ask. And if your conference organizer isn’t asking this type of question, get a new one!
I personally believe that attendees are tired of lukewarm, lackluster conference experiences with the same old content from the same old speakers. Attendees are starting to talk with their money too by not attending these events, regardless of the industry. For example, association conference attendance is down on average of 33% for 2009, nearly one-third less than in previous years. So, attendees keep speaking out loud and clear. Eventually, conference organizers will get it or face extinction.
By the way, if you’re looking for some event professionals that think like I do, just let me know. I can connect you to the cutting edge #eventprofs!
Thanks for your well thought-out comment, Jeff.
And expect an email soon. I do want to chat with you, actually.
Cheers.