Event design Archives : Conferences That Work

Learn how to transform conferences with my meeting design workshop

Monday, December 16th, 2024 by Adrian Segar

If you are serious about improving your conferences, my meeting design workshop can be the game-changer your organization needs. Here’s what happens at a typical one-day workshop.

In a world where passive listening no longer satisfies attendees, traditional lecture-based conferences are ineffective and outdated. Today’s participants crave authentic engagement, meaningful connections, and interactive learning experiences. Are your conferences delivering the engagement, learning, and connection attendees expect? My meeting design workshops equip event professionals with the tools and techniques to create truly participatory and impactful experiences.

I’ve spent years helping organizations transform their events into connection-rich, engaging experiences through my hands-on meeting design workshops. Every workshop is customized to align with the organization’s goals and stakeholders’ wants and needs.

Here’s a peek behind the curtain!

Program for a typical one-day meeting design workshop

“You don’t take a workshop. You are part of one.”
Seth Godin

This one-day workshop offers a hands-on opportunity to learn through direct experience of participatory meeting formats and techniques. Participants will engage in cycles of interactive experiences followed by debriefs, interspersed with short “theory bites” that provide critical background knowledge and concepts. These formats will be introduced in the approximate order they might appear during a typical participatory and connection-rich event.

The following program is designed for a one-day, eight-hour schedule.

Opening

Workshop Introduction, Overview, and Agreements (~20 minutes)
Establishing explicit group agreements ensures a shared understanding of expectations and participant behavior, creating a collaborative foundation for the workshop.

Learning About Who’s in the Room (~60 minutes)
One of the most powerful ways to begin an event is by helping attendees discover key information about each other. This session will explore questions such as:

Who are my peers here? Who understands my work because they do what I do?
What are the nature and sizes of other attendee groups?
Which attendees work across groupings, and how?
Who else here lives or works near me?
How many years of experience are present? Who are the novices and the veterans?
How can we display the degree of consensus on a topic and make visible the distribution of participant opinions?

Using tools like human spectrograms, we will visualize participant data, uncover shared connections, and explore questions suggested by attendees.

Break (~15 minutes)

The Three Questions: Uncovering and Satisfying Participants’ Wants and Needs (~75 minutes)
How can we create a conference that becomes what participants actually want and need? This opening format allows participants to:

Learn fundamentally useful information about each individual present.
Share personal and collective wants and needs for the event.
Uncover the learning resources available within the group.

Insights will inform the design of the afternoon program. The session concludes with a debrief to reflect on the experience.

Lunch and Afternoon Session Determination (~75 minutes)
During lunch, participants will use the Post It! For Programs format to propose session ideas by answering the question: “If you could pick a session to hold at this workshop, using the people and resources around you, what would it be?”

Participants can:

Ask for or offer to lead a session.
Propose internal topics relevant to the organization or request specific formats, such as:
- Ask Adrian Anything: (AMA).
- Fishbowl Sandwich: Facilitating discussions on large group problems.
- The Solution Room: Obtaining confidential peer-supported advice.
- Open Space and World Café: Formats for short participant-driven conferences (Open Space) and dialog in small groups about predetermined questions (World Café).
- Reminders, Sparks, Questions, Puzzles: A short format that allows participants to efficiently engage with and explore presented consent.
- Voting formats: Exploring techniques like hand/stand, Roman, card, table, dot, and anonymous voting.

The outcome will be a tailored afternoon program that meets the group’s wants and needs.

Middle

The customized afternoon program will feature sessions chosen by participants, including opportunities for facilitated discussions, problem-solving, and peer learning. Breaks will be scheduled as needed. (~130 minutes)

Closing

Personal Introspective (~60 minutes)
This two-part session helps participants reflect on their learning and determine actionable changes to implement. This session may be adjusted or omitted if additional time is allocated to the afternoon program.

Break (~5 minutes)

Group Spective (~40 minutes)
A combination of retrospective and prospective feedback, this plenary session allows participants to share insights about the workshop and collectively reflect on its impact. It also fosters a sense of community and provides valuable feedback for future events.

This one-day workshop promises a rich, participatory learning experience that equips attendees with tools and techniques to create engaging and effective conferences that support the connection and learning attendees want and need.

Why choose a participatory meeting design workshop?

Meeting design workshops like these empower event planners and participants to:

Enhance Engagement: Move beyond passive listening by learning how to foster authentic and useful participation.
Build Meaningful Connections: Help attendees uncover relevant shared interests, expertise, and experience, and develop lasting professional relationships.
Maximize Learning: Leverage the expertise and experiences of the group to create valuable, participant-driven sessions that meet their wants and needs.

Every workshop is customized to align with your organization’s goals and the wants and needs of your audience.

By learning how to design participation-rich conferences, you’ll not only meet the expectations to learn and connect of today’s attendees but also elevate the impact and value of your events for all your stakeholders.

Ready to transform your events?

If this outline inspires you, let’s connect! I’d love to discuss how a participatory meeting design workshop can help you reimagine your events and deliver exceptional value to your stakeholders. Contact me today to explore how we can work together to create engaging, effective, and memorable conferences.

Tags: workshop| Posted in Event design, Event professionals | No Comments »

On not knowing at conferences

Monday, December 9th, 2024 by Adrian Segar

To evaluate an event, conveners focus on knowing key conference metrics. Our analytic minds seek numbers to quantify the experiences of event stakeholders. Metrics such as ticket sales, KPIs, social media mentions, booth visits, and net promoter scores create a picture of event outcomes, satisfaction levels, and areas for improvement.

But is there value in not knowing at conferences?

A poem about knowing

Mary Oliver‘s poem Snowy Night beautifully explores the tension between knowing and not knowing. She describes a snowy evening when she heard an owl:

“I couldn’t tell
which one it was –
the barred or the great-horned
ship of the air –
it was that distant.”

Instead of chasing certainty, Oliver chooses to embrace the mystery:

“But, anyway,
aren’t there moments
that are better than knowing something…”

Hearing this poem the other day reminded me of a similar tension at conferences—between the need for data and the value of embracing the intangible.

Metrics and their limits

As Oliver writes,

“I suppose
if this were someone else’s story
they would have insisted on knowing
whatever is knowable – would have hurried
over the fields
to name it – the owl, I mean.”

Metrics provide a finite “map” of what happened at a conference. They transform rich human experiences into statistics—valuable, yes, but inherently incomplete. Metrics don’t capture the intangible: the awe, learning, and life-changing connections a good conference can inspire.

As Alfred Korzybski noted, “A map is not the territory.” Metrics are useful tools, but they don’t replace the fullness of the experiences they represent.

Mary Oliver’s poem celebrates the value of wonder and being present over the need to uncover all the “knowable” facts. She writes:

“I love this world,
but not for its answers.”

Let’s keep her perspective in mind when we evaluate a conference.

Otherwise, as Alan Watts warned, we risk becoming “people eating menus instead of dinners“.

In conferences, as in life, there is value in both knowing and not knowing. By balancing data with the immeasurable, we can create richer, more meaningful events.

Tags: events, knowing, metrics, wonder| Posted in Event design | No Comments »

Small is the new big—for meetings!

Monday, November 11th, 2024 by Adrian Segar

11 years ago, I pointed out that most meetings are small meetings. It seems the meeting industry is finally catching on to this reality and its benefits. Yes, small is the new big!

From eSpeakers‘ report on IMEX America 2024:

“Small is the new big. Smaller meetings, known by industry experts as micro events, continue strong growth. Simpler internal team meetings, VIP events, and client advisory boards will be among the most common types of meetings as we go forward. These are smaller (< 100 attendees) meetings, often held offsite. That doesn’t mean they don’t need all the things that larger meetings need, including speakers.”
—Dave Reed, Joe Heaps and Roxy Synder, eSpeakers‘ report on IMEX America 2024

Why is this happening?

During the early COVID years, online meetings became the norm, while in-person gatherings dropped dramatically. Smaller online meetings revealed that broadcast-style webinars were often disengaging, while interactive online meetings helped attendees make peer connections and stay engaged.

As in-person events now return to pre-2020 levels, attendees increasingly value connecting and learning with peers, as Freeman reported in its Q1 2024 Trends Report:

“When it comes to networking, attendees are less interested in discovering new career opportunities and obtaining/providing mentoring. Instead, they view networking as the most valuable when they can exchange ideas with peers, meet new people, and speak with industry experts who may otherwise be out of reach.”
—Freeman Trends Report Q1 2024, Winter 2024 Freeman Syndicated Survey of Event Attendees.

Graphic showing attendees preferred types of networkingSpeaking with experts 81% Meeting new contacts generally 68% Peer-to peer exchange 64% Creating unique experiences with people I know 54% Discovering new commercial or research partners 52% Creatingunique experiences with Discovering new commercial or research partners people I don’t know 44% Obtaining/ providing mentoring 35% Discovering new career opportunities 33% — *Winter 2024 Freeman Syndicated Survey of Event Attendees. Copyright Freeman 2024*

Freeman’s research underscores that:

“Attendees want to connect with peers over shared challenges and specific topics
Just like with keynotes, content is critical when it comes to networking. Attendees want to bond with peers over shared professional challenges and topics. They aren’t as keen to speed-date over hors d’oeuvres or meet with an on-site ambassador at a phone charging station. These types of networking elements can be useful ancillaries – but they’re not sufficient on their own. Event attendees would be better served if organizers devoted more time to valued forms of networking and reduced their efforts on less-desired elements.”
—Freeman Trends Report Q1 2024, Winter 2024 Freeman Syndicated Survey of Event Attendees.

Attendees want to connect with peers over shared challenges and specific topicsJust like with keynotes, content is critical when it comes to networking. Attendees want to bond with peers over shared professional challenges and topics. They aren't as keen to speed-date over hors d'oeuvres or meet with an on-site ambassador at a phone charging station. These types of networking elements can be useful ancillaries - but they're not sufficient on their own. Event attendees would be better served if organizers devoted more time to valued forms of networking and reduced their efforts on less-desired elements. — *Winter 2024 Freeman Syndicated Survey of Event Attendees. Copyright Freeman 2024*

Creating the valuable networking and connection that attendees seek is far easy at small meetings—when designed right! I’ve been designing and facilitating such meetings for over three decades, and both participants and organizers love them. These events foster a loyal community with high retention rates.

Large meetings can also support effective networking, but it’s far more challenging. As attendee expectations shift, more clients are contracting me to boost connection at large events, where existing tech solutions like brain dates and speed networking often fall short.

Meanwhile, small, well-designed events continue to thrive and grow in popularity. Small truly is the new big.

Next steps

Convinced that small is the way forward? Here’s how you should proceed:

Starting a new conference? Start small, with 50 – 150 participants. With the right design, you’ll create an event they’ll want to return to, year after year. You can then grow the event over time.

Struggling with a small conference? Your event design might need an update—I can help!

Running a large conference but receiving feedback about ineffective networking and connection? You’re not alone. I’m hearing from an increasing number of clients with this problem. Re-designing an existing event is challenging but achievable. The key lies in focusing on identifying, supporting, and connecting existing sectors and groups within the event. A small but impactful design shift early on can make a big difference. Contact me if you’d like to explore how this approach could transform your event.

Tags: connection, meetings, networking, small meetings| Posted in Connection, Event design | No Comments »

Freeman’s Trends Report Q4 2024 is a must-read

Monday, October 21st, 2024 by Adrian Segar

I’ve not always agreed with Freeman’s Reports, but, if you’re in the meeting industry, Freeman’s Trends Report Q4 2024 is a must-read.

“We’ve calibrated our research and confirmed our hypothesis: many organizers are operating on outdated definitions of attendee and exhibitor value. The good news? We’re here to help you speak the same language as your stakeholders and overcome the obstacles that prevent progress.

This report is your playbook for embracing shifts, equipping you with the insights and strategies to make change now.”
Fall 2024 Freeman Syndicated Survey of Event Organizers. Copyright Freeman 2024

Why you should read this Freeman report

Read this report to discover if you’re doing what’s needed to improve your events for your attendees.

The biggest takeaway? Only a quarter of event organizers are constantly evolving their event designs. Freeman calls them the Innovators and describes how their approach differs from their Conventionalist peers.

“Although most organizers report that they consider market trends and audience needs when developing their most important events, only 27% of organizers report that dramatic audience-centric changes occur from one event to the next.”

Why this matters

Freeman’s Innovators create events that align closely with the true needs of attendees, while Conventionalists often stick to outdated models. The result? Innovator-led events are far more likely to delight attendees—and ultimately, all stakeholders.

As Freeman puts it:

“It makes sense that organizers are more focused on attendee-related outcomes than exhibitor/sponsor outcomes. After all, if your attendees don’t get value from your event, then your event partners won’t get value either.”

Freeman’s conclusions come from comparing the event attendee intent and behavior data from their Q1 2024 Trends Report with this report’s survey data of event organizers.

Here are three examples of how the Innovators set themselves apart:

1. Learning at events

There’s a significant gap between what organizers and attendees think are important factors affecting learning at events:

65% of organizers believe classroom lectures are top learning methods, while only 31% of attendees agree.
Organizers underestimate the importance of hands-on interactions or participatory activations (31%) compared to 56% of attendees who prioritize them.
Informal meetings with SMEs are rated important by 24% of organizers, but 48% of attendees find them crucial.

Innovators are better equipped to meet these important attendee learning modalities than their Conventionalist counterparts.

2. Experiential factors

Next, compare the differences in perception of top experiential factors.
Attendees highly value hands-on interactions and immersive experiences (64%) compared to 46% of organizers. This mismatch suggests that many organizers are missing opportunities to deliver what attendees find most engaging.

3. Resource allocations versus attendee needs

Finally, let’s review where organizers allocate resources, compared to attendees’ event priorities.
Both organizers and attendees rank exhibits as the top priority. But attendees place networking second, while organizers rank it fifth—behind keynotes/general sessions, education sessions, and special events. This misalignment can mean missed opportunities for valuable attendee connections.

Event organizers, are you listening?

Sadly, three-quarters of you are not.

The barrier to becoming an Innovator

I don’t want to be too hard on the majority (56%) of event organizers who want to evolve their meeting designs but continue to hold static events. According to Freeman, nearly half of event organizers don’t feel empowered to make changes:

So, we must ask: Why do most event programs remain the same when market trends and attendees continue to change?”

“Nearly half of event organizers do not feel empowered to evolve their event.
We’ve uncovered a troubling new gap. Although most event organizers want to evolve their program, only some feel empowered to do so.
The data suggests that many event organizers aren’t just faced with attendee and exhibitor misalignments, but misalignments with leadership that limit or prevent event evolution.”

This is a polite way of saying that leadership is often afraid of creating connection at events because they see it as losing control. Even though such control is a myth.

Freeman found that a majority of Innovators felt “extremely empowered” to evolve their event programs and reported greater satisfaction with their event evolution. Interestingly, 49% of Innovators have a single person or a small team dedicated to networking-related activities.

Wait, there’s more!

I’ve only reported some of the conclusions in the report, which is full of useful little tidbits, like this one:

“Innovators plan to focus more on elevating the attendee experience (40%) than increasing the number of attendees (38%). Perhaps because Innovators understand that by enhancing the experience, they’ll attract high-quality attendees.”

So read the whole thing!

Two minor quibbles

1. Generational models: Freeman uses the popular Generation XYZ framework to explain changes in attendee needs. I’ve written about the limitations of the slotting of people into Boomer/Gen X/Millennial/Gen Z categories as it mistakes new behavior for shifts in human nature rather than a change in opportunity. Much of the “difference” between “generations” is caused by a change in that generation’s environment or circumstances. In my experience, attendees have always responded favorably to events with the priorities that Freeman suggests, event designs I’ve been championing for decades. It’s just that these days they are more in tune with what younger generations find normal.

2. The language of connection: The words we use for meetings matter. Reports like Freeman’s often use the term “networking,” but what attendees truly seek is meaningful connections. Let’s talk about creating and supporting connection, rather than just “networking”.

Conclusion

Freeman’s Trends Report Q4 2024 is a must-read. Ten years ago, Innovators were rare, but today they make up a quarter of event organizers. This is a promising trend, but there’s still a long way to go. I hope our industry embraces these insights and continues evolving in a positive direction.

Tags: Event design, event leadership, Freeman, leadership, trends| Posted in Event design | No Comments »

How the Responsibilities of Conferences Mirror Those of Media Platforms

Monday, September 16th, 2024 by Adrian Segar

Rereading a 2012 post by Jeff Jarvis, I was struck by the parallels between his take on news organizations’ responsibilities to their platforms and the responsibilities of conferences. Here’s the post in full:

Let’s compare Jeff’s points about media platforms’ responsibilities with my views on the responsibilities of conferences.

Users come first

“A platform without users is nothing. That is why [it] was wrong for Twitter to put a sponsor ahead of users. That is why Twitter is right to fight efforts to hand over data about users to government. That’s why newspapers built church/state walls to try to protect their integrity against accusations of sponsor influence. That is why Yahoo was wrong to hand over an email user to Chinese authorities; who in China would ever use it again? Screw your users, screw yourself.”
—Jeff Jarvis

At conferences, the “users” are primarily participants. For decades, I’ve championed responsible conference designs that prioritize participants. This approach benefits everyone—participants, sponsors, and organizers—because when attendees’ wants and needs are met, their satisfaction positively impacts all other event stakeholders.

A platform is defined by its users

“In other words: Hand over control to your users. Give them power. Design in flexibility. That’s not easy for companies to do.”
—Jeff Jarvis

Similarly, participant-driven and participation-rich conferences are defined by the participants themselves. They decide the topics and issues to focus on. Participants also learn about their peers in useful ways, enabling them to choose who to connect with from whom to learn.

Platforms collaborate

“Platforms have APIs. They reveal the keys to the kingdom so others can work with them and atop them. Are they open-source? Not necessarily. Though making its underlying platform open is what made WordPress such a success.”
—Jeff Jarvis

In the same way, the processes of participant-driven conferences are open. My books and writing share these processes freely, allowing conference organizers to adapt them to their needs. Often, I adopt new ideas and share them with the broader meeting design community, fostering collaboration and growth.

Platforms need principles

“All this can, of course, be summed up in a single, simple principle: Don’t be evil. That’s why Google has that principle: because it’s good business; because if it is evil, its users — we — can call it out quickly and loudly and desert it.”
—Jeff Jarvis

In my first book, Conferences That Work, I define the primary goal of the conferences I design:

“The primary goal of a peer conference is to create the best possible conference for each individual attendee.”
—Chapter 5, Conferences That Work

All the principles and tools I’ve developed stem from this goal. For instance, I focus on creating safe conference environments, uncovering participants wants and needs, providing structure and support for connection and learning, and maximizing opportunities for reflection and facilitating change.

In contrast, conventional conferences often lack clear guiding principles, as they’re based on outdated broadcast models that cater to whatever principles the event owners prioritize.

A good platform is transparent

Black boxes breed distrust.
—Jeff Jarvis

Similarly, peer conference designs are transparent. There are no hidden agendas, and the program is chosen by the participants. The only surprises are those created by the participants themselves.

A good platform enables portability

Knowing I can take my stuff and leave reduces the risk of staying.
—Jeff Jarvis

The peer conference process is portable to virtually any topic or community. There is no “secret sauce”. Typically, I design and facilitate one peer conference for a client to address their event issues. Afterward, clients rarely need my help again unless their requirements change.

A good platform is reliable

Oh, that.
—Jeff Jarvis

In the 1990s, I began designing and facilitating peer conferences on topics I knew little about. After a decade, I realized that the processes I had developed worked reliably across a broad range of communities. While the tools I use depend on my clients’ specific wants and needs, I’m now confident I can provide a conference that reliably satisfies all stakeholders.

The responsibilities of conferences

I’ve previously written about the parallels between the evolution and missions of journalism and events. It’s not surprising, then, that there are also strong parallels between the responsibilities of conferences and those of journalism platforms.

Image attribution: The graphic includes an image by asier_relampagoestudio on Freepik

Tags: journalism, media, peer conferences, platforms| Posted in Event design | No Comments »

How to use human spectrograms to improve in-house events

Monday, September 2nd, 2024 by Adrian Segar

One of the most valuable tools I use liberally at the start of peer conferences is a variety of human spectrograms, also known as body voting. There’s no quicker and more entertaining way to publicly uncover vital information about who’s in the room. [For a full description of the why, when, how, and tremendous range of this tool, check out Chapter 33 of my book: The Power of Participation.] While I frequently use certain spectrograms, such as experience lines and spectrogram maps, I always tailor them to the specific wants and needs of the participants.

For example, in 2020, I worked with several hundred cardiologists and used two-dimensional body voting to reveal the group’s mix of professional roles (clinical, research, and education) and research types (population, clinical, basic). This allowed the cardiologists to quickly connect with peers who shared similar professional backgrounds. Later, we ran a one-dimensional human spectrogram to explore opinions about the question: “What is the best heart-healthy diet? Plant-based versus omnivore?”. (Fun fact: cardiologists disagree!) We then set up a debate on the topic.

While I primarily work with peer groups, like association members or communities of practice, when the client is a single organization, human spectrograms can be used in a different way.

Using human spectrograms at in-house events

Most organizations have an organizational chart that defines roles and formal relationships:

“The organization chart is a diagram showing graphically the relation of one official to another, or others, of a company. It is also used to show the relation of one department to another, or others, or of one function of an organization to another, or others. This chart is valuable in that it enables one to visualize a complete organization, by means of the picture it presents.”
—Organizational chart, Wikipedia

At the start of an in-house event, a human spectrogram can be a powerful way to reveal the formal structure of the organization. There are a few exceptions:

Large meetings (e.g., 500+ people).
Organizations with flat structures.
Small organizations where participants already know everyone.

Otherwise, an organizational chart human spectrogram provides several immediate benefits:

Allows participants to “put a face” to colleagues they may not have met, or have had little contact with.
Makes visible the size and scope of different departments inside the organization.
Uncovers the “shape” of the organization, such as the depth of hierarchies and the relative distribution of leaders, middle management, and other employees.

To facilitate the organizational chart human spectrogram, define a physical dimension in the room: “Leadership by this wall, subordinates towards the opposite wall.” You can then guide participants to form the spectrogram either top-down (leadership first) or bottom-up. The former is usually more efficient, while the latter allows for a more relaxed pace as people find their place and become aware of other participants.

If some employees will be absent, consider providing signs or cards with their names to install appropriately in the spectrogram.

Once the human spectrogram is complete, a good facilitator can leverage it in various ways, depending on the meeting’s goals and objectives. For example, you could:

Explore potential departmental reorganizations.
Uncover communication gaps within the organization.
Reflect on staffing levels.
Obtain feedback on outstanding issues and brainstorm solutions.

Given the variety of possibilities, such work should be carefully planned before the meeting.

Conclusion

I’ve only scratched the surface of how to apply human spectrograms to in-person meetings. Hopefully, you’re convinced that an organizational chart human spectrogram can be an insightful starting point for exploring an organization’s dynamics and addressing key issues.

Have you ever used an organizational chart human spectrogram? Share your experience in the comments below!

Tags: human spectrogram map, human spectrograms, organizational chart| Posted in Event design | No Comments »

The corporatization of belonging

Monday, August 26th, 2024 by Adrian Segar

I recently attended a conference session that made me uneasy, and not in a constructive way. I won’t name names, but the session was centered around a specific program to increase “belonging” in organizations and included statistics such as:

“Only 13% of organizations are ready to actually implement belonging as a practice.”

“47% of our audiences are lonely.”

When the presenter said increasing belonging would be beneficial, I asked: “To whom, the organization or the employees?” The answer, after a pause, was “Both”.

While I hope this is genuinely the case, my doubts persist.

Why I’m suspicious of programs to increase organizational belonging

First of all, what is belonging? Curiously, Wikipedia lacks a direct entry for the term ‘belonging’! Instead, it includes a long article on “belongingness” that provides a nebulous introduction, including a short section on belonging in the workplace (see below).

Lewis Carroll’s famous quip, “When I use a word… it means just what I choose it to mean,” comes to mind here.

I worry that some people are corporatizing “belonging” to make a buck.

Here are four reasons I’m suspicious of the presenter’s program to increase organizational belonging.

1. What does successful belonging look like?

A great technique for looking at ideas from a fresh perspective is reverse brainstorming, aka “Let’s make it suck.”

When I applied this approach to “implementing belonging as a practice”, guess what first came to mind?

The most successful example of belonging is a cult!

This is not the kind of belonging that appeals to most people. Except for cult members.

In addition, a short section of the belongingness Wikipedia article covers belonging in the workplace. It includes this slightly ominous sentence:

“Charismatic leaders influence followers by bringing awareness to the collective unit and strengthening the feeling of belonging, and that enhances employees’ compliance.”

Enhancing compliance via “strengthening the feeling of belonging” is advantageous for an organization led by a charismatic leader. But what’s the benefit for the employees?

2. “Belonging” is a binary concept

“Belonging” is a binary concept. You belong or you don’t.

However, except in extreme situations—like cults—our relationships with peers and organizations are much more nuanced. You can be a member of an organization without feeling you belong to it. At times, you may feel strongly or weakly connected to your peers. Over time, your peer groups change. These days, belonging to an organization, if even possible, is unlikely to consist of forty years of devotion with an engraved watch on retirement.

This is why my ikigai is about facilitating connection, rather than attempting to force belonging.

“Implementing belonging” is trying to force an employee’s time-dependent experiences of connection into a yes/no box.

3. We can improve organizations without programs to increase belonging

The session presenter began talking about how they use stories to implement belonging. I asked whether they were familiar with Appreciative Inquiry, (the original AI 😀) a pioneering approach from the 1980s, and how their method was different.

After another pause, the presenter said they did know of Appreciative Inquiry.

They did not answer my second question.

From the Wikipedia article on Appreciative Inquiry:

“AI revolutionized the field of organization development and was a precursor to the rise of positive organization studies and the strengths based movement in American management.”

“AI advocates collective inquiry into the best of what is, in order to imagine what could be, followed by collective design of a desired future state that is compelling and thus, does not require the use of incentives, coercion or persuasion for planned change to occur.”
—Gervase Bushe, professor of leadership and organization development at the Beedie School of Business

Although I’m not trained in AI, the approach is simple enough that I’ve often used it with clients to build a positive environment before moving into the “problems” they’ve hired me to solve. It strengthens connections between employees and their organization by uncovering and sharing good experiences and expertise that live in the culture of all but the most dysfunctional organizations.

Tip: (A good and inexpensive introduction to the simplicity of Appreciative Inquiry is The Thin Book of Appreciative Inquiry by Sue Annis Hammond.)

4. Let’s add a computer and make money!

The presenter explained that their approach involved recording stories and feeding them into a computer which analyzed the words used and classified the sharer’s type of belonging. They did not go into detail, because the whole process, including opaque computer intermediation, is the secret sauce they’re selling.

Using a computer to quantify “belonging”, in some unknown and likely unscientific way, is a classic example of building an unverified model of a system and then believing in its pronostications. Until this approach has a verifiable scientific basis, from my (50+ years) experience of model building it should be treated with extreme skepticism.

I wouldn’t pay for it.

An alternative

We already have at least one well-established method, Appreciative Inquiry, that uses positive human-mediated processes to meaningfully transform organizations. There may be others I’m unaware of.

Enticing organizations with the promise of quantifying ‘belonging’—a concept that may not lend itself to such reduction—seems, at best, to be overhyped, and at worst, misleading.

Scientology’s “SeaOrg” image attribution: Flickr user anonymous9000 [License]

Tags: belonging, connection| Posted in Connection, Event design | 4 Comments »

Events, Faith Communities, and the Public Square

Monday, August 12th, 2024 by Adrian Segar

Religious meetings are a small, fascinating subset of the meeting industry. I learned about them when I presented at The Religious Conference Management Association annual conference in 2014, and I’ve written about what meeting designers can learn from religious services. However there isn’t much academic research into event management, so I was happy to discover Ruth Dowson and Daniel H. Olsen‘s paper Events, Faith Communities, and the Public Square.

The article explores the evolving role of Christian faith communities in the public sphere, particularly in the context of increasing secularization in Western societies. The authors analyze how religious communities, specifically in the United Kingdom, engage in the public square through various events and activities, contributing to the Eventization of Faith.

2016 photograph of a crowd of around 200 Evanston, Illinois residents and faith community members meeting at Fountain Square. The event was organized to show solidarity with those in the city feeling marginalized after the recent presidential election. Photo attribution: Daniel Tian, Senior Staffer, The Daily Northwestern — Evanston, Illinois leaders and faith community hold post-election unity rally

Key Points

Secularization and Religion’s Role

The article begins by discussing how secularization, particularly in Europe and North America, has led to a diminished public presence of religion. Despite this, global trends and events have intensified the visibility of religion in the public square, especially through the actions of religious communities that engage in public dissent and events.

The Eventization of Faith

The concept of Eventization of Faith is central to the paper. It refers to the process of turning religious activities into events that create a public presence. Such events, sometimes contestational, are seen as a means for faith communities to assert their identity and influence in a secular public space.

“Even in places where religion is believed to be best served as a muted witness in the private realm, Jews, Christians, and Muslims share a long tradition and heritage of political dissent, such as gathering on street corners to express their faith and their views. This political dissent is often guised in the form of events as a method of creating a public presence…”

“…Contributing towards the development of the concept of the Eventization of Faith, this study interprets ‘events’ broadly, through a critical events perspective, acknowledging the contestation of secular spaces for sacred or faith-related purposes, as well as the potential for contestation of sacred spaces used for non-faith events.”
—From the abstract of Events, Christian Faith Communities, and the Public Square, Dowson, Ruth (Rev.) and Olsen, Daniel H. (2023), International Journal of Religious Tourism and Pilgrimage: Vol. 11: Iss. 4, Article 13.

The Venuefication of Sacred and Non-Sacred Space

Venuefication refers to the transformation of both sacred (e.g., churches, and temples) and non-sacred spaces into venues for events that may or may not align with their original purpose The article provides examples of using secular venues for sacred events, and taking over outdoor public spaces and an entire city for religious events. It highlights potential tensions regarding the appropriate use of these spaces, especially when the events held there contrast with the original religious or cultural significance of the site.

Public Space and Contestation

The article also discusses the broader theoretical framework of public space and contestation, highlighting how different communities, including religious ones, vie for influence and representation in public spaces. The authors emphasize that events organized by religious communities are often not just about religious expression but are also a form of political and social contestation.

Conclusion and Future Perspectives

Overall, the article argues that despite the challenges posed by secularization, faith communities continue to find innovative ways to maintain and even expand their presence in the public square through the strategic use of events. This engagement reflects a broader trend where religious groups use public events as a platform for political and social expression.

Tags: eventization, faith, religion, sacred, venuefication, venues| Posted in Event design | No Comments »

Jeopardy Meets Event Innovation: The Fishbowl Sandwich Format

Monday, July 29th, 2024 by Adrian Segar

Ken Jennings: “Welcome to America’s favorite answer and question game, Adrian! The answer is ‘The Fishbowl Sandwich’.”

<DING!>

Adrian: “If you had to pick one unique/creative/innovative session format or strategy you successfully implemented or you’ve witnessed that resulted in better interaction and engagement, what would that be and why?”
—Merijn van Buuren question via LinkedIn, July 17, 2024

Ken Jennings: Right!

And, just like that, I was on to the next round!

We can dream

Here’s how I answered Merijn’s question:

“In 2015, I invented the fishbowl sandwich. It’s a session format where hundreds of people can profitably discuss and learn more about a “hot” topic—typically “hot” because it involves difficult challenges for the participants—and crowdsource creative, unexpected solutions by drawing from the ideas and experiences of the entire audience.

A well-designed and facilitated fishbowl sandwich is the best way I know to uncover, share, and develop solutions in a single session. People are often unaware that they know things that could be of immediate value to other group members. The fishbowl sandwich process finds these individuals and helps them share their knowledge and expertise. It encourages active participation and ensures that multiple perspectives are heard.

As a bonus, you can also use a fishbowl sandwich to offer structured consulting to group members grappling with a specific issue or problem.”

You can learn the what, why, and how to run a Fishbowl Sandwich from my book Event Crowdsourcing: Creating Meetings People Actually Want and Need.

But wait, there’s more!

Having only one tool in your tool chest of conference session designs and formats won’t get you far. No problem! I also wrote The Power of Participation: Creating Conferences That Deliver Learning, Connection, Engagement, and Action, which Julius Solaris called “a mandatory read for the modern event professional”. The book comprehensively covers twenty-seven fundamental session formats that transform traditional conference sessions into a powerful learning and connection experience for your attendees. That’s why Jerry Weinberg described The Power of Participation as “a catalog of tools for designing meetings”.

For each format, the book includes:

A descriptive overview.
When to use the format.
Required resources and pre-planning.
Step-by-step implementation guidance.

Thousands of event professionals have purchased Event Crowdsourcing and The Power of Participation. They’ve beefed up their event design toolkits with the tools to tackle the hardest event design jobs.

Join them today!

Tags: fishbowl, fishbowl sandwich, group process, group work, Power of Participation, problem solving| Posted in Event design | No Comments »

Are You Out There?

Monday, July 22nd, 2024 by Adrian Segar

In 1997, Dar Williams, inspired by listening late at night to New Hampshire and Vermont’s progressive radio station WRSI The River, wrote the song “Are You Out There”. Her beautiful song about audiences and humans’ desire for connection speaks to today’s events industry.

Why? First, listen!

Hoping that Dar will be OK with this, here are the relevant fragments of her song’s lyrics.

[Verse 1]
“…You always play the madmen poets
Vinyl vision grungy bands
You never know who’s still awake
You never know who understands and

[Chorus]
Are you out there, can you hear this?
Jimmy Olson, Johnny Memphis
I was out here listening all the time
And though the static walls surround me
You were out there and you found me
I was out here listening all the time

[Verse 2]
Last night we drank in parking lots
And why do we drink? I guess we do it ’cause
And when I turned your station on
You sounded more familiar than that party was…

[Verse 3]
…So tonight I turned your station on
Just so I’d be understood
Instead another voice said
I was just too late and just no good

[Chorus]
Calling Olson, calling Memphis
I am calling, can you hear this?
I was out here listening all the time
And I will write this down and then
I will not be alone again, yeah
I was out here listening
Oh yeah, I was out here listening
Oh yeah, I am out here listening all the time”
—Lyrics [full lyrics here] courtesy of Genius

“I am out here listening all the time.”

Like Dar Williams, a true fan of obscure (at the time) music, people search for experiences that meet their wants and needs. We yearn for connection and look for opportunities to get it. Events are the most powerful opportunities for connection (and learning). While today’s radio is, with few exceptions, a pure broadcast medium, it’s available to anyone with a radio who wants to turn it on and find an interesting program.

Event professionals must remember that their events’ true fans are “out here”. They are the people who will form the nucleus of your events’ success. These days, we have far more powerful tools than broadcast radio to find true fans. Use them!

“I will not be alone again.”

The young Dar Williams learned through her radio that other people like her “got” the music she loved.

While listening late at night, she realized that she was not alone.

Well-designed events transform audiences into a community.

Community meets a fundamental human need, for connection and belonging. Well-designed events create authentic community through interpersonal experiences at the event rather than attempting to manufacture it through entertainment and novel environments. Such events allow attendees to be truly heard and seen.

Tap into the power your events possess to create genuine community. Participants will become faithful attendees because they will not be alone again.

Tags: audience, community, connection, Dar Williams, radio| Posted in Connection, Event design | 2 Comments »