From having found myself heavily involved in and around conferences for the last five years, I couldn’t agree more with your observations and good counsel.
Understanding the economics behind the scenes is key. The sponsor dimension is also a big factor, depending on the type of conference and the industry.
I now focus more on creating different experiences from the "one-to-many" presentation format to "many-to-many" facilitated round table conversations.
Much more engaging for everyone. And easier to organise.
Interesting. Apart from the obvious economic downside for organisers (about 1/3 to a 1/2 less seats per sq metre of room space), why do you think attendees don’t tend to prefer it? Too much like “normal work”?
I like it as an equaliser - everyone’s the same height. And the quieter people can contribute a lot more.
I found a duality. Everyone says they wanted small roundtable formats. But in practice, they signed up for events with speakers / traditional conference formats.
Can that be the because the symbolism and show of The Event itself takes over from the quality of participation and conversation…? But you’ve definitely got me thinking. Thank you.
As someone who puts a big emphasis on ensuring client content is visually compelling, I just wanted to share that your visuals are great! The public speaking 'maturity model' you reference is such a good breakdown.
From having found myself heavily involved in and around conferences for the last five years, I couldn’t agree more with your observations and good counsel.
Understanding the economics behind the scenes is key. The sponsor dimension is also a big factor, depending on the type of conference and the industry.
I now focus more on creating different experiences from the "one-to-many" presentation format to "many-to-many" facilitated round table conversations.
Much more engaging for everyone. And easier to organise.
Just somewhat different economics.
I like the roundtable format, but I've always found it a harder sell.
Interesting. Apart from the obvious economic downside for organisers (about 1/3 to a 1/2 less seats per sq metre of room space), why do you think attendees don’t tend to prefer it? Too much like “normal work”?
I like it as an equaliser - everyone’s the same height. And the quieter people can contribute a lot more.
Plus the prep is way easier for all concerned.
I found a duality. Everyone says they wanted small roundtable formats. But in practice, they signed up for events with speakers / traditional conference formats.
Can that be the because the symbolism and show of The Event itself takes over from the quality of participation and conversation…? But you’ve definitely got me thinking. Thank you.
I think it depends a lot on the event. I think roundtables are perceived as lower value even though many people say they prefer them.
As someone who puts a big emphasis on ensuring client content is visually compelling, I just wanted to share that your visuals are great! The public speaking 'maturity model' you reference is such a good breakdown.
Thanks Adam - glad it helps!