I value conferences, I’ve run some and attended many. I want to discuss some things that I think work most of the time, and other things that risk failure. Anything can work but I’ll concentrate on the probability that each component will be a success.
You’ll laugh but PowerPoint presentations have a high probability of success. When someone is invited to give a talk with PowerPoint slides, they have to prepare! They prepare data and they prepare structure, a beginning, middle and end. They often share their presentation with colleagues beforehand and the input improves the talk. The audience, which will probably contain visual learners, and people whose first language is not English, may benefit from words on the slides, and pictures on the slides often add colour and sometimes humour. Talks up to 40 minutes in duration are best.
Classical orations can be good but they are riskier. It depends on the quality of both the speaker and the topic. It is harder for people in the audience to take away key messages from orations than from PowerPoint presentations. In an oration you can’t photograph the key data slides, or refer to the slide deck if it is sent round afterwards. Sometimes the speech is published but you have to search through to find the key bits. When someone of stature stands up and gives a spoken address it can be great, but relatively few people can really hold the audience and ensure their messages are remembered. Orations are a risk.
Interviews can work. At best they can be like a Socratic dialogue. But there is risk. Some interviewers have charisma and charm, but not enough subject knowledge to ask and follow up key questions. Others are good on the theory but can be downbeat and plodding, and the lack of energy puts everyone to sleep. Success relies on getting both the right guest and the right interviewer. The probability of success is falling now.
The most risky option is ‘the panel’. I’m going to say it. I don’t like panels. I seldom take much away from panels. Sometimes I jot down a few soundbites. Sometimes there is banter and a few laughs. But in general panels are superficial. The moderator typically works hard to include everyone equally, which means that no single narrative thread emerges. In fact, points and counter points (which are seldom equal in potency) emerge and the audience is left wondering. Panels have become popular as ‘infotainment’ because they satisfy an imperative about ‘numbers’. You can put a lot of big names up in lights, and you can include many perspectives. But in terms of depth and analysis, panels seldom deliver. If some panel members are online and some in the room the risk of success falls further.
Now let’s think about questions. Some sessions end without questions, but that often feels anti-climactic. I like a few questions from the floor and there are different ways of managing them.
Having one or two roving microphones can work, or microphones positioned around a hall. It can add atmosphere and inclusivity to the event. Having a good moderator is important but I think having spoken questions from the audience is the best approach.
The next best thing is to use one of those programs – I’ve used Slido – that allow the audience to post questions and vote them up or down, with the questions displayed on the screen. This can work because everyone sort of gets involved and pays attention when a question gets voted up. Everyone is thinking about it, so when the speaker answers it, the hall will be all ears.
The worst approach is to use a conference app where only the chair sees anonymous questions or where relatively few people in the audience have actually downloaded and engaged with the app. Now the probability of success is vanishingly low. Most of the audience just tune out.
Finally, one of the most important aspects of conferences is the out-of-session down time. This should be carefully scheduled and there should be food and drink. I’m not an anthropologist but I believe sharing food and drink builds relationships.
One other tip is to have venues that are cramped. This forces people to sit next to strangers. Sometimes I’ve had two empty seats next to me (why is that?) and two strangers have sat down gratefully grabbing the last seats. In this way I have met new people and formed new links. Sometimes assigned seating is a good idea because it also throws strangers together. In self-allocated seating, too often people just sit with others they already know, and people who are new to the community can feel excluded.
Time is valuable and conferences cost money. I try to choose the conferences I go to carefully and I try to learn and get the most out of them. Most are very good, but I worry about the proliferation of panels and though I may be a lone voice, I have to admit that I still love a good PowerPoint lecture!
Professor Merlin Crossley is DVC (Academic Quality) at UNSW
