Angela's quote hit home. Way back in 2004, within a single month, I received 5 different requests to keynote 5 different conferences, all wanting me to talk about "Ending Poverty." In declining each and every one of them, I shared my reason with them all: 

"I will gladly work with you if instead of a normal 'conference,' you all get together with each other's groups, and we facilitate a multi-group dialogue aimed at actually doing the work to end poverty. We could actually get to work DOING IT rather than having 5 different conferences with 5 different keynotes and breakouts, all TALKING ABOUT doing something but taking no action?"

In most cases I received polite "thanks but no thanks" but one (whom I knew well) confessed, "That sounds so good. Unfortunately, our conference is our principle fundraiser for the year."

I say this not to blame the organizations who rely on that revenue. I say it to highlight that the system organizations work within is part of a culture that considerably devalues community benefit work - still sees it as ancillary to and a 2nd class citizen to the "important" work of the for-profit world.  And that as a result, organizations who absolutely want to do amazing work are put in the position of having to make these absurd choices, simply to survive to do that work.

It will be interesting to see what happens in this year-or-two when Nathaniel's astute observation comes to pass, not only for lack of interest but for lack of $$ for attendees to attend. Perhaps we can take this opportunity to do more than just change the inner workings of each of these conferences individually - to do more than just move away from the keynote / plenary / breakout model and towards some of the innovative models Nathaniel describes.

Perhaps this is the time we can seize the opportunity to work across organizations, to convene for purposes that are productive - using that collective force and intellect to create some real change.

Hildy

I've read this post a few times and I'm still not exactly sure what you are recommending, other than change and less hierarchy.  I will agree to both of those, and suggest a solution.

Given the suggested topic of this blog, I'm surprised to see not a single use of the word social in this post, which I believe to be especially relevant to this discussion.

You have suggested that the traditional model needs to be reworked, and many of us would agree.  This is not surprising, as society's needs are continuously changing, and thanks to the explosion of social media, people are now more eager to express themselves in these situations.  They have a voice and want to use it to make a contribution.

This indeed points to a need for business professionals to engage in new ways, as opposed to passively watching a keynote presentation.  It may suggest an interactive keynote, or more likely an interactive keynote session, where in fact there is not a keynoter at all - the session is the keynote.  This would still require a professional to facilitate this session.

Professional speakers dedicate themselves to solving problems for their audiences.  As with any other profession, when they do what they do well, everyone wants an encore.  When they show up unprepared and otherwise add little value to their audiences, then indeed, everyone will feel cheated.  To have attendee orchestrated workshops as you suggest could work, but I don't think its a reliable model, especially when you consider the dyamics of human interaction.  Egos get in the way, as just one potential problem.  Anyone who has sat on a committee knows this.

There has to be leadership.  That leadership is provided by a trained professional who has invested hundreds of hours of preparation to fulfilling the needs of the audience.  Many people can speak, but to do it well requires a level of skill and commitment like any other profession.

People will always come together to solve business problems.  We can accomplish this at conferences, symposiums, summits, or retreats.  It doesn't matter what we call them, but it is important that we have them, and that we bring in professionals to lead, guide,and manage the dicusssion if we expect to achieve pragmatic results.

Nathaniel:

I have a confession. I'm one of those event professionals that plan conferences and education endeavors.

With that being said, I believe that conference providers are now facing disruptive innovation: online free content, quality unconferences with low registration fees and the ability for people to create their own online tribes (community). I'm a big proponent that people want to engage with each other "and" with the content, not sit passively in chairs in large ballrooms listening to a keynote presenter. Event professionals must find new ways of creating hybrid events with both face-to-face and virtual elements, create more horizontal, collaborative peer-to-peer sessions for face-to-face events and upgrade the face-to-face experience with stellar content.

Umair Haque wrote on a Harvard Business Review post recently regarding the Internet and traditional media, "Media's just the canary in the mine. Over the next decade, every industry will undergo a similar transition from locked down and closed to blown wide open."

This will happen to traditional conferences and organizations that rely on conferences as one of their largest revenue sources whether we like it or not.

Nathaniel:

In short, "Yes," in response to both of your questions. Both sides of that equation are putting pressure on conference organizers. Until the pressure to change and do things differently is greater than the pressure to be status quo, I doubt you'll see much change.

The challenge is that as Hildy and others pointed out, many organizations, especially nonprofits, depend upon their annual conference and education events as the largest source of non-dues revenue. Attendees, like yourself, have a lot of conference choices today and are expecting a better experience as well as outstanding content when they decide to pay for a face-to-face (or virtual) experience. That means conference organziers are facing competition, many for the first time.

As for event professionals, there is a contingency of conference organizers that only know how to handle the logistics of a conference and don't think about it from a strategic perspective. Those organizers will stumble, probably not try new models and face further declines in attendance and thus revenue.  

Ultimately, I think we will begin to see some associations file bankruptcy, some merge with others, some disappear and some rise to the occasion as they continue to face the new economy and an educated audience. 

Nathaniel,

Thanks for a great article (as usual).  A few years ago I went to a brilliantly-done conference on innovation that was unlike any conference I've ever been to.  It was held by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis called Exploring Innovation (http://stlouisfed.org/community/innovation/).  Sure, it had keynotes and breakout sessions, but they incorporated a lot of features that encouraged interaction and impact beyond the conference:

- The room where keynotes were held had a section for snacks - drinks, popcorn, frozen custard, far more than a water pitcher and cookies.  While there was plenty of respect for the speaker, it removed some of the hierarchy and also encouraged movement (which was a clever way to keep attendees' attention through the post-lunch slump).

- There was a separate room open throughout the conference for creative thinking.  It had brain teasers and puzzles and was an environment where attendees could discuss sessions, connect with presenters, and get refreshments throughout the day.

- They distributed an attendee list with contact information at registration.  This facilitated targeted networking and continued collaboration beyond the conference.

- They hired a visual notetaker who drew notes (!) for each keynote, which were displayed during the conference and uploaded to the site post-conference.  This was fantastic for visual learners (like myself) and was yet another tactic they used to encourage creativity constantly. Additionally, those notes live on as a resource online.

Each of these non-traditional conference pieces gave a definite value-add to attendees.  Perhaps if conference planners focus on benefits instead of features, more conference organizers/hosts would be willing to give it a try in the interest of making their conference more successful and useful. Especially in a time when people may need to be more selective in what conferences they attend, who wouldn't want theirs to be a "must attend"?

Nathaniel, I got a kick out of the title of your piece – as somebody that has earned my living developing and producing conferences, I guess I’m one reader who does care.  But then you write about an “unconference” with a registration fee of five grand.  That makes me an instant convert!  I am in the business of moving minds in positive directions, primarily employing face-to-face media.  Any innovation that makes communication more effective is a good thing, in my view especially if there is a way to make it work economically.  You say that the Opportunity Collaboration “kicked ass.” 

Currently advertised rates for this event about eradicating poverty are: $3250.00 before December 31, 2009,$3750.00 before March 31, 2010,$4250.00 before June 30, 2010

What is the business model of the event?  How many people actually pay?  What are the characteristics of the exchange that make it so valuable?  I think there are a lot of us in the conference business who want to create more effective events and could learn from your observations.  There is nothing sacred about the forms (plenary/breakout, PowerPoint in a dark room, etc.).  However, there will always be a place for face-to-face interaction whether it takes place in conferences or unconferences.   Roger Wilson  www.conferencedepartment.com

Great post,and timely.

 I went to a "high end" bridal show one evening this week,as a possible place to advertise my new business.  I was hyper-ventilating in no time!

I spent the rest of the week thinking through a new model that was needed.  Thousands of "highend" brides lined up around the block.  30-40 "high end" vendors schvitzing in small rooms trying to close the 4-6 deals it will take to cover the $6000.00 price to exhibit to these consumers. All the while, women in big wedding dresses squeeze through the crowd-one was even covered in photos as one poor photographer tried to get noticed. There Has to be a better way to talk to brides.

I later was on a call talking about all the conferences being held on social media where we all feel they have run out of things to say and teach.

we do care-but we are all working so hard on our businesses to re-invent. 

The ones making money at conferences and bridal shows are the ones that put them on.... so invite me to the one you create! Im in, but can i get a discount on the $5000.00? :)

Elizabeth: Thanks for your post.  Trade/consumer shows have to deliver value to the exhibitors or they die.  I don't have personal experience with consumer shows (yet) but your description sounds scary!  A lot of shows will be under increasing pressure to really deliver as more alternatives develop.  Competition will strengthen events.  New alternatives will force changes but events will always be the essential social media.  Roger Wilson  www.conferencedepartment.com

As someone who also makes a living helping conference and tradeshow organizers more successful, I hope the hypothesis that 'The Conference is Dead' is true is wrong! I think it is, although many of the comments above are right on the money.

For the conference organizer of the future, they have to both be part of the industry and find that running conferences makes business sense(makes profit)- while not having so many moving parts that it becomes difficult to manage. This is now harder than ever.

I see 50% of the events around two years ago will be gone 2 years from now similar to what Jeff mentioned, so there is indeed pressure to be better and more valuable.

What is my prescription for making things easier?

1) Stop having anything without a solid core audience in resort locations that take time and money to attend. As best as you can, bring the event to your audience(New York, Chicago, SF, etc):

2) Do some basic market research to find out what social media applications, pain points and format preferences and pricepoints your target audience wants;

3) Spend on quality content but make sure you give this quality audience time to meet each other;

4) Assuming you do the above, making money shouldn't be a problem, as you should easily(!) attract paying sponsors who want to interact with the attendees.

5) Make sure that you create buy-sell interaction which is valuable to both.

Sounds easy, but it is harder than ever!

Nathaniel - I'd be interested in your comments to my post of 11-3 in regards to the business model of the  event about eradicating poverty at 3 grand plus a pop that you enjoyed so much - for starters were you a paying customer, comp, speaker - what was you vantage point?

Roger Wilson

Nathaniel,

Thanks for the warm welcome. I am toying with a conference based model for a client with 50% networking as part of the agenda- with structured networkin and 'unconference' like agenda sessions, in addition to birds of a feather luncheons.

Also closely looking at matching technology solutions which depend on a high rate of adoption that my audiences may not have.

Pre-event social media programs also rank highly on ways of connecting audiences. Anyone else have any good ideas?

W.

I could list a bunch of suggestions, but I think I'll reference this event coup blog post: http://www.eventcoup.com/its-time-to-flip-the-events-model-upside-down If you are responsible for your conference program, please read it. These alternatives are the future, however, they are not the near future.

Many meeting & event planners are not given strategic authority over their meetings, only logistic responsibilities. I was awakened to the concept of meeting architecture at the World Education Congress which is hosted every year by Meeting Professionals International. May I recommend that anyone responsible for the strategic planning of your meetings and events get some continuing education on these topics? The meetings industry is pushing planners to get involved with the strategic goals & objectives of their organizations, but this isn't always realistic. The mis-perception is that the meeting planner is responsible for the content and format, but often it is someone else or a committee of stakeholders that make these decisions.