Conferences ask a lot of passivity from their audiences – audiences made up of people who are normally quite active. The traditional model involves sitting in a seat for 2 or 3 days, occasionally allowed to ask questions, but basically only invited out of the seat for meal and bathroom breaks. Any networking that’s done happens at the bar afterward, or perhaps at one of the lunches, if people are feeling communicative.
By contrast, the first time I attended the Renaissance Weekend in Hilton Head I was astounded to learn the extent to which I would be involved in sitting on panels, running seminars, leading questions, and generally taking quite an active part. It was a liberating, energizing experience, and I started to wonder, why aren’t all conferences like this?
The Renaissance model requires a good deal of pre-conference planning on the part of the folks running the event, as well as input from the attendees. That cooperation is not simple to get from busy folks, but it is well-rewarded in the richness of the offerings, the level of participation it encourages from participants, and the loyalty it generates from one year to the next.
Another kind of conference model takes this even further: the peer conference. This model has been championed by Adrian Segar for over 20 years, and I chatted with him recently to find out how peer conferences work and what the benefits are to attendees.
Segar, who has a PhD in Physics, has run a solar manufacturing business, and consulted in IT for many years, pioneered the concept after observing that same kind of passivity in academic conferences he attended over the years. He noted that typically he’d find one or two people that he’d really connect with, but was left with the nagging feeling that there were more interesting people at the conference than that, and he was missing out.
How does a Segar peer conference work? They involve 25 to 60 people, ideally, but can handle as many as 100. They are open (unlike the Renaissance Weekend, which is invitation only) and private (meaning that, like the Renaissance Weekend, the proceedings are not published or open to the press). They are convened by someone like Segar. But after that, they’re up to the attendees.
A peer conference begins with a round table during which everyone involved answers 3 questions:
1. How did I get here?
2. What do I want to happen here?
3. What expertise do I have to share on this subject?
Then a small group of conveners organizes the conference around the answers. Everyone can sign up for the sessions offered, and the meeting is underway. Segar reports that the networking is powerful and easy because everyone has been introduced to everyone else and know something about their interests. And often peer conferences lead to action, because Segar closes by asking people, during a ‘groupspective,’ what they would like to see happen as a result of the meeting of minds. The group commitment that results is usually very durable and leads to powerful initiatives.
One of the longest-standing peer conferences that Segar started is known as edACCESS, a conference on IT for small colleges and schools, which has been running successfully for nearly 20 years. Segar has just published a book on peer conferences, Conferences that Work, and I recommend his thinking highly as a necessary part of the future of conferences.
Traditionally shaped conferences can encourage attendee participation in many ways before during and after the actual event, but even more participatory are audience-driven conferences like Renaissance Weekend and Segar’s peer conferences. The collective power of a group of people with aligned interests can be amazing – why leave the audience passive in its chairs when you can draw upon their combined knowledge, experience and wisdom?
I loathe conferences. Too much sitting, not enough moving around and talking to people. Prefer the networking portion of such things.