Comments on: The Ivory Tower Responds As A Horizontal Uprising Occurs http://jeffhurtblog.com/2009/07/03/the-ivory-tower-responds-as-a-horizontal-uprising-occurs/ Helping improve your annual meetings, conferences & education Wed, 16 May 2012 15:56:39 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Jeff Hurt http://jeffhurtblog.com/2009/07/03/the-ivory-tower-responds-as-a-horizontal-uprising-occurs/comment-page-1/#comment-294 Jeff Hurt Tue, 07 Jul 2009 19:47:57 +0000 http://jeffhurtblog.com/?p=469#comment-294 @Jim Louis Thank you for bringing forward your views and a historical perspective. I stand corrected that this is not the first time there has been public discussion about a disagreement with a change in MPI's policies or directions. You are right that we can all identify with the situation that MPI is facing this year. Some of us are association planners so we completely get it. One of the things I think we've witnessed regarding this topic and subsequent posts is that people want to have a voice. As I said to Mitchell, people are engaging in public dialog and debate about this situation which is very healthy. It is a missed opportunity by MPI to engage with the industry and members alike instead of claiming that they will have a white paper or position paper after its all said and done. Like you said, members can leave and join other associations and it may be at the expense of your proposed white paper. @Jim Louis

Thank you for bringing forward your views and a historical perspective. I stand corrected that this is not the first time there has been public discussion about a disagreement with a change in MPI’s policies or directions.

You are right that we can all identify with the situation that MPI is facing this year. Some of us are association planners so we completely get it.

One of the things I think we’ve witnessed regarding this topic and subsequent posts is that people want to have a voice. As I said to Mitchell, people are engaging in public dialog and debate about this situation which is very healthy. It is a missed opportunity by MPI to engage with the industry and members alike instead of claiming that they will have a white paper or position paper after its all said and done. Like you said, members can leave and join other associations and it may be at the expense of your proposed white paper.

]]> By: Jeff Hurt http://jeffhurtblog.com/2009/07/03/the-ivory-tower-responds-as-a-horizontal-uprising-occurs/comment-page-1/#comment-293 Jeff Hurt Tue, 07 Jul 2009 19:34:02 +0000 http://jeffhurtblog.com/?p=469#comment-293 @Mitchell Thank you for your thoughtful and introspective review of this issue. Your basic three questions are a good place for others to start and readers can quickly see the complexity of this matter. I believe that what you saw on my blog was social media at its best. It gave people a chance to voice their opinion, dialog and debate with each other and engage in community around this issue. Regardless of each person's position, each one had a voice. MPI missed an opportunity to engage its members to discuss and debate this issue before they announced the VAP fee. Had they done that, don’t you think we’d be having a different conversation now? @Mitchell

Thank you for your thoughtful and introspective review of this issue. Your basic three questions are a good place for others to start and readers can quickly see the complexity of this matter.

I believe that what you saw on my blog was social media at its best. It gave people a chance to voice their opinion, dialog and debate with each other and engage in community around this issue. Regardless of each person’s position, each one had a voice. MPI missed an opportunity to engage its members to discuss and debate this issue before they announced the VAP fee. Had they done that, don’t you think we’d be having a different conversation now?

]]> By: Jim Louis http://jeffhurtblog.com/2009/07/03/the-ivory-tower-responds-as-a-horizontal-uprising-occurs/comment-page-1/#comment-291 Jim Louis Tue, 07 Jul 2009 18:21:13 +0000 http://jeffhurtblog.com/?p=469#comment-291 This is not the first time there has been pubic discussion about a disagreement with a change in MPI's policies. If you go back to last year's launch of One+ magazine there was discussion on their blog function, granted there was not much dialog from MPI about their position on it or answering member's concerns. But I know of at least 7 critical comments about it. There was also discussion about on the Meetings Community google group. Mostly negative. My Company is a Small Business Donor to the MPI Foundation. When I was at WEC08 in Last Vegas, I felt after the opening General Session that MPI took two steps forward and one step back. It seems like MPI has a habit of doing this. Listen, most of us are meeting planners, we plan meetings and understand Profit and Loss Statements. During this economic slow down we understand that MPI is going through some hard times because, my guess, is membership revenue is down, sponsorship revenue is down, registration revenue is down, and misc. sources of revenue is down. The attendance at this year's WEC looks like it will be down at least 35% from last year. So the hotel occupancy will be down and possible attrition will be up. I really do not know of any association that is not facing this. But what we do not see is transparency in the running of MPI. MPI made some major changes in the past few years to increase its membership outside of North America, opening new offices and holding new conferences. They have changed the organization of the VP positions and made major changes to their magazine and website. But as members we really have no idea how the organization is run on a day to day basis. We have no idea what the total cost of any conference was and what the bottom line profit or loss is for the conference. How do we know our money is being spent in an effective manner? We can look at the 2008 Audit report, but I believe there was a change in the bylaws so they do not have to share that with us in 2009. Bruce, if MPI is facing hard times, then let us know! And let us know how bad it is! How can we help if you do not let us know? I also find it strange that the VAP came out after most people who would have come to the conference had booked their travel and registered. It should have been offered at the beginning. It looks more like the attendance numbers did not come in where we wanted them, so how do we get more money to help cover the bottom line? "Let's add VAP." So MPI, let us know what is happing and what the concerns are, you might be surprised by who will be willing to help you and offer effective solutions to your problems. But you can't stay in the ivory tower any longer and rule the members. Members can leave and join other associations. This is not the first time there has been pubic discussion about a disagreement with a change in MPI’s policies. If you go back to last year’s launch of One+ magazine there was discussion on their blog function, granted there was not much dialog from MPI about their position on it or answering member’s concerns. But I know of at least 7 critical comments about it. There was also discussion about on the Meetings Community google group. Mostly negative.

My Company is a Small Business Donor to the MPI Foundation. When I was at WEC08 in Last Vegas, I felt after the opening General Session that MPI took two steps forward and one step back.

It seems like MPI has a habit of doing this.

Listen, most of us are meeting planners, we plan meetings and understand Profit and Loss Statements. During this economic slow down we understand that MPI is going through some hard times because, my guess, is membership revenue is down, sponsorship revenue is down, registration revenue is down, and misc. sources of revenue is down. The attendance at this year’s WEC looks like it will be down at least 35% from last year. So the hotel occupancy will be down and possible attrition will be up. I really do not know of any association that is not facing this.

But what we do not see is transparency in the running of MPI. MPI made some major changes in the past few years to increase its membership outside of North America, opening new offices and holding new conferences. They have changed the organization of the VP positions and made major changes to their magazine and website.

But as members we really have no idea how the organization is run on a day to day basis. We have no idea what the total cost of any conference was and what the bottom line profit or loss is for the conference. How do we know our money is being spent in an effective manner? We can look at the 2008 Audit report, but I believe there was a change in the bylaws so they do not have to share that with us in 2009.

Bruce, if MPI is facing hard times, then let us know! And let us know how bad it is! How can we help if you do not let us know?

I also find it strange that the VAP came out after most people who would have come to the conference had booked their travel and registered. It should have been offered at the beginning. It looks more like the attendance numbers did not come in where we wanted them, so how do we get more money to help cover the bottom line? “Let’s add VAP.”

So MPI, let us know what is happing and what the concerns are, you might be surprised by who will be willing to help you and offer effective solutions to your problems. But you can’t stay in the ivory tower any longer and rule the members. Members can leave and join other associations.

]]> By: Mitchell Beer http://jeffhurtblog.com/2009/07/03/the-ivory-tower-responds-as-a-horizontal-uprising-occurs/comment-page-1/#comment-290 Mitchell Beer Tue, 07 Jul 2009 17:27:12 +0000 http://jeffhurtblog.com/?p=469#comment-290 Jeff, I’ve been reading closely and pondering carefully since discovering the fascinating debate you’ve kicked off here, and we’ve just published a blog post of our own on the topic. The conversation has taken some nifty twists and turns, but I’d like to bring it back to three basic questions: • Should MPI be charging, or charging this particular amount, for its Virtual Access Pass? • Is the Virtual Access Pass a solid, worthy experiment, or a misguided attempt to attach a price tag to online content that should be free? • Is it ever legitimate to charge a fee for online content? (And is there a single, all-purpose response to that question, or does the answer depend on what we mean by content?) The context for this debate is an issue we’ve discussed a lot within our team of content capture specialists, and about which we’ve done a bit of blogging so far. Although the business model for conventional media is gone, there is no solid foundation for the social media on which we have all come to rely so heavily. And I’ll presume to disagree with Seth Godin when he suggests that a gap of that magnitude doesn’t matter: It may be trendy to espouse disruption as an open-ended process, maybe even as an end in itself, but I think it matters a great deal when a medium like YouTube is on track to lose nearly $500 million this year. Unless we think we can adapt seamlessly and suddenly do without free social media that we’ve come to take for granted. There’s a parallel argument for conferences. We continue to hear from associations that are losing 20, 30, or 50% of their onsite attendance this year, along with large chunks of sponsorship funding. We know of some events that are down 70% or more. If conferences aren’t reaching their audiences and association budgets are hemorrhaging, why wouldn’t organizations turn to their online communities for an alternate channel that keeps members engaged, and opens up a new potential revenue stream? Sure, there are times and places when there’s no need or reason to charge for content. But the cost (hence, the price) of that information depends on its form, which should ideally be guided by the purpose it’s intended to serve. The comments you’ve generated on this topic are a great example. A captivating discussion brought together an enthusiastic gang of volunteers, who gave freely of their time to keep the conversation alive. I intend no criticism of that work when I observe that it takes a lot of effort and attentiveness to sort through the raw material: it’s just a reality that comes with the territory. A synthesis of that wide-ranging debate would add value for lurkers and impact for participants, as long as it faithfully and respectfully captured all viewpoints. It would probably draw in a wider audience of more casual readers. But even if you could line up a volunteer writer (or volunteer your own time) with the editorial skills and balanced perspective to produce the summary, the model would not be sustainable across a continuing stream of online debates. At some point, if everyone still expected the content to be free, the writer would have to go out and find a day job. The same applies to the content MPI is offering through its Virtual Access Pass. Home video is free to all if you post it on YouTube (as long as Google is prepared to lose $500 million again next year for our viewing pleasure). Verbatim video on a private site incurs costs for recording, processing, and hosting, which makes it a tad unrealistic to ask an organization like MPI to supply it for free. Arguably, though—with the possible exception of headline speakers like Betsy Myers and Ben Stein—the biggest cost of Web streaming is the time we expect online viewers to devote to the material. Oh, and the opportunity cost organizations incur when those viewers log off after five, 10, or 20 minutes, leaving the best content untouched after realizing that they don’t have two hours to sit through the whole session online. Organizations can mitigate that cost by supplying value-added summaries, but not when they’re expected to deliver all their content online at no cost. None of this is to argue for synthesis or summaries as the right format for all purposes or, necessarily, for any purpose. Just to suggest that we take a step back to purpose and objectives before deciding how to organize and, sometimes, put a price on content. We can demand free content until we run out of breath. But at the end of the day, the blogosphere and a million Twitter tweets won’t give us all the information we need to function in a knowledge-based industry or a democratic society. Even if they do, with only 28 hours in every day and eight days in every week, we’ll run out of time or move on to the next burning issue before we have a chance to sort it all out. That’s not to deny the incredible value and transformative power of social media. But before we argue that all information yearns to be free, we’d best be careful what we wish for. Jeff, I’ve been reading closely and pondering carefully since discovering the fascinating debate you’ve kicked off here, and we’ve just published a blog post of our own on the topic. The conversation has taken some nifty twists and turns, but I’d like to bring it back to three basic questions:
• Should MPI be charging, or charging this particular amount, for its Virtual Access Pass?
• Is the Virtual Access Pass a solid, worthy experiment, or a misguided attempt to attach a price tag to online content that should be free?
• Is it ever legitimate to charge a fee for online content? (And is there a single, all-purpose response to that question, or does the answer depend on what we mean by content?)
The context for this debate is an issue we’ve discussed a lot within our team of content capture specialists, and about which we’ve done a bit of blogging so far.
Although the business model for conventional media is gone, there is no solid foundation for the social media on which we have all come to rely so heavily. And I’ll presume to disagree with Seth Godin when he suggests that a gap of that magnitude doesn’t matter: It may be trendy to espouse disruption as an open-ended process, maybe even as an end in itself, but I think it matters a great deal when a medium like YouTube is on track to lose nearly $500 million this year. Unless we think we can adapt seamlessly and suddenly do without free social media that we’ve come to take for granted.
There’s a parallel argument for conferences. We continue to hear from associations that are losing 20, 30, or 50% of their onsite attendance this year, along with large chunks of sponsorship funding. We know of some events that are down 70% or more. If conferences aren’t reaching their audiences and association budgets are hemorrhaging, why wouldn’t organizations turn to their online communities for an alternate channel that keeps members engaged, and opens up a new potential revenue stream?
Sure, there are times and places when there’s no need or reason to charge for content. But the cost (hence, the price) of that information depends on its form, which should ideally be guided by the purpose it’s intended to serve.
The comments you’ve generated on this topic are a great example. A captivating discussion brought together an enthusiastic gang of volunteers, who gave freely of their time to keep the conversation alive. I intend no criticism of that work when I observe that it takes a lot of effort and attentiveness to sort through the raw material: it’s just a reality that comes with the territory.
A synthesis of that wide-ranging debate would add value for lurkers and impact for participants, as long as it faithfully and respectfully captured all viewpoints. It would probably draw in a wider audience of more casual readers. But even if you could line up a volunteer writer (or volunteer your own time) with the editorial skills and balanced perspective to produce the summary, the model would not be sustainable across a continuing stream of online debates. At some point, if everyone still expected the content to be free, the writer would have to go out and find a day job.
The same applies to the content MPI is offering through its Virtual Access Pass. Home video is free to all if you post it on YouTube (as long as Google is prepared to lose $500 million again next year for our viewing pleasure). Verbatim video on a private site incurs costs for recording, processing, and hosting, which makes it a tad unrealistic to ask an organization like MPI to supply it for free.
Arguably, though—with the possible exception of headline speakers like Betsy Myers and Ben Stein—the biggest cost of Web streaming is the time we expect online viewers to devote to the material. Oh, and the opportunity cost organizations incur when those viewers log off after five, 10, or 20 minutes, leaving the best content untouched after realizing that they don’t have two hours to sit through the whole session online. Organizations can mitigate that cost by supplying value-added summaries, but not when they’re expected to deliver all their content online at no cost.
None of this is to argue for synthesis or summaries as the right format for all purposes or, necessarily, for any purpose. Just to suggest that we take a step back to purpose and objectives before deciding how to organize and, sometimes, put a price on content.
We can demand free content until we run out of breath. But at the end of the day, the blogosphere and a million Twitter tweets won’t give us all the information we need to function in a knowledge-based industry or a democratic society. Even if they do, with only 28 hours in every day and eight days in every week, we’ll run out of time or move on to the next burning issue before we have a chance to sort it all out. That’s not to deny the incredible value and transformative power of social media. But before we argue that all information yearns to be free, we’d best be careful what we wish for.

]]> By: Jeff Hurt http://jeffhurtblog.com/2009/07/03/the-ivory-tower-responds-as-a-horizontal-uprising-occurs/comment-page-1/#comment-282 Jeff Hurt Tue, 07 Jul 2009 03:59:50 +0000 http://jeffhurtblog.com/?p=469#comment-282 @Clintonbon Great additions to this discussion and a nice perspective through a futurist's eyes. Thank you. @Clintonbon
Great additions to this discussion and a nice perspective through a futurist’s eyes. Thank you.

]]> By: Clinton Bonner http://jeffhurtblog.com/2009/07/03/the-ivory-tower-responds-as-a-horizontal-uprising-occurs/comment-page-1/#comment-267 Clinton Bonner Mon, 06 Jul 2009 19:58:01 +0000 http://jeffhurtblog.com/?p=469#comment-267 Dear Jeff, First, it's an honor to be quoted by you, thanks for feeling our conversation was worthy of sharing. I will be as brief as I can be. Content WILL BE FREE. Soon (next few years) our cell phone bills will be greatly reduced or eliminated, replaced by sponsored (ad enriched and demographically focused) commercials and along side (in parallel really) new opportunities to monetize in telecomm. will emerge. Newspapers, we all know what sorry state they are in, will ALL eventually go to a digital, and most likely free format and new monetizing opportunities will sprout up alongside these markets and communities of readers and contributors. Cable will eventually BE FREE as the likes of Canoe-Ventures working with all the major MSO's bring us the newest set top boxes that are social media enriched and interconnectivity ready. The new verticals that will emerge will allow the user to "accept" certain new rules in exchange for absolutely free content, this is coming and coming fairly soon. Content WILL BE FREE ... I do not profess to have all the answers regarding how associations and Meeting Profs will handle this shift. But one idea we can begin wrapping our heads around is that the thousands and thousands you can gather around your free content CAN BE MONETIZED. And don't think traditional advertising either ... In 1984, Dr. Egon Spengler of the Ghostbusters famously uttered the phrase, "Print is Dead". So think beyond traditional web advertising and begin to understand the 2.0 social sale and relationship sale that can be fostered by communities you helped gather, all because your "bonfire", aka your content, was inviting, warm, and oh yeah ... FREE! Associations and those who put out content as part of their offering, have an incredible opportunity to monetize their communities ... there are emerging tools available and platforms they can now plug into, to start to make this transition a reality. If they, whomever THEY are, do this, they can make more money than ever before and do great things with these profits. If they revert, and clutch to their content too tightly, they will be the only ones left interested in reading it anyway. Like it or not Content WILL BE FREE - Those that find innovative ways to capitalize on the crowds their content can gather, will win, those who do not, or worse yet, refuse to try, will eventually lose. Shift the conversation forward from "should" it be free and begin figuring out today how to create new markets around that content. Good Luck! Jeff, great job bringing this to light, and thanks everyone for your stellar contributions. Best, Clinton Bonner @clintonbon Dear Jeff,

First, it’s an honor to be quoted by you, thanks for feeling our conversation was worthy of sharing. I will be as brief as I can be. Content WILL BE FREE. Soon (next few years) our cell phone bills will be greatly reduced or eliminated, replaced by sponsored (ad enriched and demographically focused) commercials and along side (in parallel really) new opportunities to monetize in telecomm. will emerge. Newspapers, we all know what sorry state they are in, will ALL eventually go to a digital, and most likely free format and new monetizing opportunities will sprout up alongside these markets and communities of readers and contributors. Cable will eventually BE FREE as the likes of Canoe-Ventures working with all the major MSO’s bring us the newest set top boxes that are social media enriched and interconnectivity ready. The new verticals that will emerge will allow the user to “accept” certain new rules in exchange for absolutely free content, this is coming and coming fairly soon.

Content WILL BE FREE … I do not profess to have all the answers regarding how associations and Meeting Profs will handle this shift. But one idea we can begin wrapping our heads around is that the thousands and thousands you can gather around your free content CAN BE MONETIZED. And don’t think traditional advertising either … In 1984, Dr. Egon Spengler of the Ghostbusters famously uttered the phrase, “Print is Dead”. So think beyond traditional web advertising and begin to understand the 2.0 social sale and relationship sale that can be fostered by communities you helped gather, all because your “bonfire”, aka your content, was inviting, warm, and oh yeah … FREE!

Associations and those who put out content as part of their offering, have an incredible opportunity to monetize their communities … there are emerging tools available and platforms they can now plug into, to start to make this transition a reality. If they, whomever THEY are, do this, they can make more money than ever before and do great things with these profits. If they revert, and clutch to their content too tightly, they will be the only ones left interested in reading it anyway.

Like it or not Content WILL BE FREE – Those that find innovative ways to capitalize on the crowds their content can gather, will win, those who do not, or worse yet, refuse to try, will eventually lose. Shift the conversation forward from “should” it be free and begin figuring out today how to create new markets around that content. Good Luck!

Jeff, great job bringing this to light, and thanks everyone for your stellar contributions.

Best,

Clinton Bonner
@clintonbon

]]> By: Jeff Hurt http://jeffhurtblog.com/2009/07/03/the-ivory-tower-responds-as-a-horizontal-uprising-occurs/comment-page-1/#comment-235 Jeff Hurt Sun, 05 Jul 2009 12:44:17 +0000 http://jeffhurtblog.com/?p=469#comment-235 @Greg: Thanks for adding to the conversation. You have raised some interesting points. BTW, the Twitter Fountain is still on WEC home page. Click the Twitter button and you'll see it. They've not removed it. I too am concerned about the lack of response from MPI. It shows that organizations either totally embrace the social space or when they create more problems when they don’t. MPI used social Web successfully to broadcast messages and engage with people at conferences. So one would assume that there would be people at MPI monitoring the social space and responding. MPI focused on social media as their OGS at their CLC09 conference for chapter leaders and I served on two panels at that conference about social media strategy for chapters and associations. So they see the value of it. I’ll give them credit for that. It takes a major culture shift. I think MPI Leaders and Board of Directors has not yet learned how to become a "Listening Organization" setting up listening posts throughout the social Web to engage its members and nonmembers. This is critical in the new media arena. It is a holiday weekend, so I hope that come next week, things are different. I will give them the benefit of the doubt for now. @Greg:

Thanks for adding to the conversation. You have raised some interesting points.

BTW, the Twitter Fountain is still on WEC home page. Click the Twitter button and you’ll see it. They’ve not removed it.

I too am concerned about the lack of response from MPI. It shows that organizations either totally embrace the social space or when they create more problems when they don’t. MPI used social Web successfully to broadcast messages and engage with people at conferences. So one would assume that there would be people at MPI monitoring the social space and responding. MPI focused on social media as their OGS at their CLC09 conference for chapter leaders and I served on two panels at that conference about social media strategy for chapters and associations. So they see the value of it. I’ll give them credit for that. It takes a major culture shift.

I think MPI Leaders and Board of Directors has not yet learned how to become a “Listening Organization” setting up listening posts throughout the social Web to engage its members and nonmembers. This is critical in the new media arena.

It is a holiday weekend, so I hope that come next week, things are different. I will give them the benefit of the doubt for now.

]]> By: Greg Ruby http://jeffhurtblog.com/2009/07/03/the-ivory-tower-responds-as-a-horizontal-uprising-occurs/comment-page-1/#comment-231 Greg Ruby Sun, 05 Jul 2009 02:37:50 +0000 http://jeffhurtblog.com/?p=469#comment-231 Jeff, Have been reading your comments and those of the others with great interest, both here and on Twitter. Let me get three things out on the table before I start rambling: (1) My comments are my own and have no connection with my employers or coworkers; (2) Would have loved to attend the upcoming the WEC but can't swing the finances, and (3) am a former MPI member, who dropped my membership after one year due to finances and "cliques" within the local chapter. With that said... I like stuff to be free. My membership dues and my educational opportunities are paid out of my own pocket, so I really appreciated the free content that was streamed out of MeetDifferent in February and the weekly webinars that MPI produced about the Meetings Industry in Crisis, that also promoted the upcoming WEC. You felt that they covered basic material (and in some cases, it was), but I learned something from every one of those programs. I saw an events industry organization that "got" virtual and social media, much more so than the other groups. I even toyed with the idea of reapplying to MPI since I saw value from them (some recent expenses have eliminated these thoughts, however!). The $499 non-member price for the virtual package seems very high to me. I do know that to produce these types of events virtually is much more intensive than a standard webinar. Also, as a non-member, I don't feel that I am entitled to get the entire program for free. If I were a member, I probably would want to have access at something much cheaper than the $299 member price. I agree with Dave Lutz's comments regarding some different options they could have taken. Why not make Ben Stein's Opening General Session free to everyone to promote the WEC and virtual package. Offer ala carte or daily packages - much more cost friendly to individuals and much more likely to generate additional revenues. Why are the recordings only available through October and not maintained indefinitely. Why does a portion of virtual package get donated to the MPI Foundation? Why was the virtual package only offered up less than two weeks prior to the event? What if I cannot attend a 2010 MPI event in person - would the $100 credit roll over to 2011? It will be interesting to see how IAEE and PCMA handle the virtual questions for their upcoming events in December and January, respectively. I am more troubled by the lack of response from MPI on this topic. In fairness, (1) Jeff Busch of MPI has tweeted some comments to you, (2) an MPI employee participated in Thursday's #eventprofs chat on this topic and (3) the MPI CEO posted a blog on the topic. They have removed the TwitterFountain from their website (and to be honest, I would have done the same thing if I were in there shoes). However, they need to respond and not be like an ostrich with its head in the sand. Associations need to adapt to the changing times. I started in the events biz over 25 years ago, working trade shows for groups of coin collectors. Many of those associations were slow to react to the changing times and no longer produce trade shows. Private individuals and companies stepped in and produced better events without the bloated infrastructure. For many of us, if we don't attend the national conferences of the event associations, we are not going to be getting our money's worth for our dues. For example, one organization charges nearly $500 to belong as a Supplier Member and the local chapter meets quarterly. The luncheon fee for Supplier Members is only $20 less than the non-member fee. At some networking events, planner members are free and Suppliers may the same fees as non-members. In this situation, I would be better off saving the dues money and paying the non-member fees - I would be hundreds of dollars ahead. Associations - you need to adapt to the times or you may become irrelevant. Greg @GregRuby Jeff,

Have been reading your comments and those of the others with great interest, both here and on Twitter.

Let me get three things out on the table before I start rambling: (1) My comments are my own and have no connection with my employers or coworkers; (2) Would have loved to attend the upcoming the WEC but can’t swing the finances, and (3) am a former MPI member, who dropped my membership after one year due to finances and “cliques” within the local chapter. With that said…

I like stuff to be free. My membership dues and my educational opportunities are paid out of my own pocket, so I really appreciated the free content that was streamed out of MeetDifferent in February and the weekly webinars that MPI produced about the Meetings Industry in Crisis, that also promoted the upcoming WEC. You felt that they covered basic material (and in some cases, it was), but I learned something from every one of those programs. I saw an events industry organization that “got” virtual and social media, much more so than the other groups. I even toyed with the idea of reapplying to MPI since I saw value from them (some recent expenses have eliminated these thoughts, however!).

The $499 non-member price for the virtual package seems very high to me. I do know that to produce these types of events virtually is much more intensive than a standard webinar. Also, as a non-member, I don’t feel that I am entitled to get the entire program for free. If I were a member, I probably would want to have access at something much cheaper than the $299 member price.

I agree with Dave Lutz’s comments regarding some different options they could have taken. Why not make Ben Stein’s Opening General Session free to everyone to promote the WEC and virtual package. Offer ala carte or daily packages – much more cost friendly to individuals and much more likely to generate additional revenues.

Why are the recordings only available through October and not maintained indefinitely. Why does a portion of virtual package get donated to the MPI Foundation? Why was the virtual package only offered up less than two weeks prior to the event? What if I cannot attend a 2010 MPI event in person – would the $100 credit roll over to 2011?

It will be interesting to see how IAEE and PCMA handle the virtual questions for their upcoming events in December and January, respectively.

I am more troubled by the lack of response from MPI on this topic. In fairness, (1) Jeff Busch of MPI has tweeted some comments to you, (2) an MPI employee participated in Thursday’s #eventprofs chat on this topic and (3) the MPI CEO posted a blog on the topic. They have removed the TwitterFountain from their website (and to be honest, I would have done the same thing if I were in there shoes). However, they need to respond and not be like an ostrich with its head in the sand.

Associations need to adapt to the changing times. I started in the events biz over 25 years ago, working trade shows for groups of coin collectors. Many of those associations were slow to react to the changing times and no longer produce trade shows. Private individuals and companies stepped in and produced better events without the bloated infrastructure.

For many of us, if we don’t attend the national conferences of the event associations, we are not going to be getting our money’s worth for our dues. For example, one organization charges nearly $500 to belong as a Supplier Member and the local chapter meets quarterly. The luncheon fee for Supplier Members is only $20 less than the non-member fee. At some networking events, planner members are free and Suppliers may the same fees as non-members. In this situation, I would be better off saving the dues money and paying the non-member fees – I would be hundreds of dollars ahead.

Associations – you need to adapt to the times or you may become irrelevant.

Greg
@GregRuby

]]> By: Jeff Hurt http://jeffhurtblog.com/2009/07/03/the-ivory-tower-responds-as-a-horizontal-uprising-occurs/comment-page-1/#comment-230 Jeff Hurt Sun, 05 Jul 2009 00:44:01 +0000 http://jeffhurtblog.com/?p=469#comment-230 @Midori (The Green AV Queen!) I remember that BROOOOOOCE!! tweet from #MD09. That's when we first met via Twitter. You gracioulsly engaged in tweets with me about the OGS and other sessions at MeetDifferent. Another amazing serendipitous social space moment! Thank you for engaging me a virtual attendee. I too was a long-time fan of Bruce and my perception of him has fast become tarnished. I was so hoping that MPI executives had turned the corner of ignoring constructive criticism or provocative thoughts. You've written some wonderful words and I hope they read this. I think your comments about MPI being <strong>our</strong> organization need further exploration too. What are the healthy attributes of an organization that encourages and invites it's members to have a voice, a vote and a difference of opinion? @Midori (The Green AV Queen!)

I remember that BROOOOOOCE!! tweet from #MD09. That’s when we first met via Twitter. You gracioulsly engaged in tweets with me about the OGS and other sessions at MeetDifferent. Another amazing serendipitous social space moment! Thank you for engaging me a virtual attendee.

I too was a long-time fan of Bruce and my perception of him has fast become tarnished. I was so hoping that MPI executives had turned the corner of ignoring constructive criticism or provocative thoughts. You’ve written some wonderful words and I hope they read this.

I think your comments about MPI being our organization need further exploration too. What are the healthy attributes of an organization that encourages and invites it’s members to have a voice, a vote and a difference of opinion?

]]> By: Jeff Hurt http://jeffhurtblog.com/2009/07/03/the-ivory-tower-responds-as-a-horizontal-uprising-occurs/comment-page-1/#comment-229 Jeff Hurt Sun, 05 Jul 2009 00:29:19 +0000 http://jeffhurtblog.com/?p=469#comment-229 @Lara Thanks for weighing in and offering your insight. Everyone reading, if you don't know Lara, you should. She's the founder of #eventprofs Twitter chats and a social media strategist and event professional. You can follow her in twitter at @ready2spark and on her blog http://www.ready2spark.com. I whole-heartedly agree that MPI has the opportunity to actively particpate in this dialogue via social Web tools. I was also impressed by MPI's engagement in social media from meetdifferent and CLC09. That's what caused me to renew my membership. I echo what you've written that MPI should use this medium to listen to its constituents and to create collaboration from thought leaders. I think all organizations are struggling with how to adapt these new tools for the benefit of its members. Thanks for offering the next #eventprofs Twitter chat as a way to facilitate this dialogue too. MPI, did you see that? Are you listening? Another great offer for MPI's leadership and its Board of Directors. Thank you Lara. @Lara

Thanks for weighing in and offering your insight.

Everyone reading, if you don’t know Lara, you should. She’s the founder of #eventprofs Twitter chats and a social media strategist and event professional. You can follow her in twitter at @ready2spark and on her blog http://www.ready2spark.com.

I whole-heartedly agree that MPI has the opportunity to actively particpate in this dialogue via social Web tools. I was also impressed by MPI’s engagement in social media from meetdifferent and CLC09. That’s what caused me to renew my membership.

I echo what you’ve written that MPI should use this medium to listen to its constituents and to create collaboration from thought leaders. I think all organizations are struggling with how to adapt these new tools for the benefit of its members.

Thanks for offering the next #eventprofs Twitter chat as a way to facilitate this dialogue too. MPI, did you see that? Are you listening? Another great offer for MPI’s leadership and its Board of Directors.

Thank you Lara.

]]>