Do you hear the thunder coming over the mountain?
You know, the roar of uncertainty and the rumble of disruptive innovation marching towards the association and event world.
What roar you ask? Or perhaps you say, “It’s just not true,” as you listen with deaf ears. Well, consider the following.
Umair Haque, Director of the Havas Media Lab, has an interesting post, The New (New) Mediaconomy, on Harvard Business Publishing recently.
He talks about the clash of traditional media and the Internet and says that asking, “Can media survive the www?” is the wrong question.
Haque compares today’s media to soda pop and wine. He says, “… there are two kinds of goods: wine and soda. Soda is low quality communication: thin information, low-quality information, and just plain disinformation. Wine is high-quality communication: analysis, debate, and knowledge.”
He proceeds to label most blogs as cola: pedestrian, prosaic, humdrum and uninspired. The problem, as he defines it, is that traditional media has done nothing but rehash the same cola, instead of providing higher-quality, thought-provoking, multi-layered fine wines. You see, people are willing to pay more for fine wines with multiple textures, a variety of notes, degrees of intensity and an assortment of tactile sensations from tannin to prickle. Most people aren’t willing to pay much to digest cheap traditional sugary colas.
What are your providing to your customers, members and event attendees: cheap cola or fine wine?
For me, this sounds a lot like today’s associations and conferences.
Many associations have focused on their annual conference, meetings and education as their largest source of non-dues revenue. Association leaders and conference organizers have spent long hours producing status quo programs, services and content to attract members and event attendees. These leaders display an entitlement syndrome that paying-dues members are also expected to pay to attend conference and to receive content. Traditional thinking is that the association is underwriting the costs to provide members with that content and therefore the member should at a minimum pay for those costs. (Event organizers, can you say, “Plus, plus, plus?” For non-event organizers, think of labor, service charges, local taxes and rent added to the delivery fees.)
These associations have relied on making the same money from meeting attendees that they’ve always made and have been happy with less than stellar attendee conference evaluations. A 70% conference smile rate from registrants is perfectly acceptable to them and a good reason to provide the same experience and quality at the next event. The last thing these leaders were interested in was creating authentic value for a member or attendee.
Year after year, these conference organizers have repeated the same conference format, securing the same industry speakers (who are typically now writing their own blogs and sharing content online and through their own webinars), with little thought given to upgrading the attendee’s experience, changing the traditional conference format or providing fresh, fine-wine type content. The content is often generic, bland and can be found on your local mobile phone, free by visiting the speakers’ website or blog.
Some speakers change their presentations regularly yet are they offering attendees an opportunity to analyze and debate that content with them, and with each other? Or is the content just bottle-fed to attendees, a drip at a time, as attendees sit passively in large ballrooms, in a zombie-like states thinking, “This tastes all too familiar like yesterday’s cheap cola? Fizzy, sacchariny sweet, cotton-candy fluff.” Some are even remembering the old Wendy’s commercial, “Where’s the beef?” Some turn to using social media to describe their distaste for the meal being offered.
However, some of those attendees and members are beginning to see associations and conference organizers as yesterday’s monopolists of the only content and experience providers available at that time. These organizations and 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).
Haque challenges readers to think about it from the opposing view as well. The reason organizations are having trouble making money is because they’ve spent so long producing ordinary, dull, insipid weak cola as well as an undefined cheap experience to go with it too.
Haque ends with this, “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.”
Think about it? When was the last time you returned from an annual conference, a three day event or 90-minute webinar where you were drunk with new knowledge, high on the adrenalin of healthy debate and discussion, and wanting to purchase more of that organization’s fine wine.
Association leaders, board members and conference organizers, are you producing bland sugary-sweet cola, or crafting and cultivating fine wines?
So, what say you? Let’s hear your thoughts, questions or comments.
I have to say that I just attended a CMP Summit with MSAE and it was an exceptional conference. They served some great wine. One of the best components was the open space concept!
Jeff, awesome post and call to action…for all of us involved in meetings! One thing that really bugs me is the old “call for papers”. I’m receiving them now for our industry conferences that aren’t occurring for another 6 – 11 months. With the pace that things are changing, it’s got to be pretty hard to know what is relevant today for an event that isn’t going to happen for 6+ months. The world is changing much more quickly.
Many associations feel a need to stick to this archaic process vs. putting the best minds around a certain track and proactively recruiting the facilitators and presenters that will help engage attendees as you describe. It’s definitely time to shake things up and go out and cherry pick the best you can find vs. having them apply.
Dave Lutz – @velchain
@Brianna – So good to see MSAE leading the way with good content (fine wine!)
@Velchain – Amen brother! We speak the same language.
Here’s the challenge many meeting professionals face: often our audience’s want specific industry content yet the pool of talented good industry presenters is limited. So we (I’m included in this we!) face a constant struggle. I try to give industry want-to-be presenters training and education on how to improve their presentations. As you know that often takes years though to perfect.
Also, I agree that the “call for proposals” can create outdated content. I’ve always believed in creating a mix of intentionally hand-chosen topics and presenters along with some presentations from the call. It’s a tightrope walk for sure.
[...] Jeff Hurt wrote a very thorough post about conference and membership revenue models — more specifically, how they have to adapt for the next generation. Jeff writes, Association [...]
Powerfully put, Jeff.
I’d add that the reason many have been able to get away with the bare minimum for so long is that there was a very basic need that they DID meet, if not as effectively as they could: members wanted to connect with each other personally. As long as the conventions provided a common roof to mingle under, people would come back, if occasionally grudgingly.
Now, with the hyperconnectivity that the Internet offers, this value isn’t such a unique offering any more, and that bare minimum value isn’t enough. Thus, the push to start creating a broader spectrum of value: genuine education, longer-term relationship building, etc.
Jeff, great post. You’re bringing out very important points, one of which is what kind of value are we really providing to our membership? Viewing membership as a cycle – moving from ‘Awareness’ to ‘Joining’ to ‘Engagement’ to ‘Renewal,’ trade shows play an important part with developing awareness and increasing engagement. We’ve found that if you get a member to simply engage in at least 2 activities after they’ve joined, you almost double the likelyhood that they’ll renew. But if we’re offering below par – SAME O SAME O – conferences, eventually members will simply not see a reason to engage in the conference and this brings into question the reason to remain being a member. We’ve got to stop thinking in silos and begin to appreciate the gestalt of our bundled services.
@Erik – Very well put and thanks for adding to the conversation. I so agree that we’ve got to rethink the silos and find ways to allow our members to contribute. Isn’t that what many members want, a way to contribute and further the profession or the industry? Status quo has to go!
@Jordan – And with great conference communities like Pathable and the others, now people have a way to be hyperconnected around the conference and the content. I’m a firm believer that attendees want to engage with the speaker, each other and the content. That requires thinking differently when planning the conference or member experience. Authentic, relevant and product experiences are what we want. Thanks for stopping by Jordan!
Extremely astute wake-up call. As a former journalist and now full-time speaker i feel like I’ve been speaking into the wind on this and am gratified to see this post.
Over a year ago i wrote, relatedly about how the right social media geek + meeting planner could steal an association’s members by offering more value – for all stakeholders involved
http://sayitbetter.typepad.com/say_it_better/2007/10/how-an-online-s.html
Am impressed, as well, by the quality of the comments. Kudos all
WRT your comment about media being the canary in the mine – I love this quote by Clay Shirky
“The hallmark of revolution is that the goals of the revolutionaries cannot be contained by the institutional structure of the society they live in. As a result, either the revolutionaries are put down, or some of those institutions are transmogrified, replaced, or simply destroyed. We are plainly witnessing a restructuring of the music and newspaper businesses, but their suffering isn’t unique, it’s prophetic.” –Clay Shirky
Great post.
Your use of the cola/wine analogy is ironic in that the online Learning group we founded five years ago, eLATED, considered similar issues. After looking at other suitable groups which we could model ourselves, it was decided to conceive ourselves as an alternative ‘Uncola’ of training organizations, to facilitate more regular informal learning that often occurs between seminars at conferences. While it was originally borne out of a need to address a technical eLearning issue, it has evolved into an bimonthly, no-charge (vendor-sponsored) physical network of learning professionals, where attendees have the opportunity to learn about leading edge topics from a trusted community.
I wholeheartedly agree ‘that attendees want to engage with the speaker, each other and the content’, which is why our events are two-part: a formal presentation of only an hour by the sponsoring vendor, followed by an ‘eLIXIR’, where attendees can discuss the topic and other matters at the end of the day over a drink provided by the sponsor. Some of the recent matters discussions surrounding the economy has been sobering, despite our meetings being held at a downtown Toronto restaurant
.
The issues noted with “call for proposals” is a cogent point. Our members have only the expectation of a regularly scheduled event, within the framework of eLearning & Social Media. They know that sponsor and specific topic will only be confirmed and announced a few weeks before each event, but expect that the final product will be fresh, low-cost and relevant to their interests.
Our model isn’t perfect, but we constantly strive to adapt and innovate, while keeping an open ear out to the needs of our community.
(Twitter ID: @elatedca )
Well you sure sparked conversation – intelligent comments and that is impressive
Hi Jeff – great post. I love good wine!
I think the “disruptive innovation” that social media has presented us with is causing us to revisit an age-old problem in the not-for-profit world: How do associations and what they offer (conferences, programs, services) evolve from the cola stage to the wine stage?
In my experience, the difference between ‘good’ associations and ‘great’ ones has been the level of the organization’s ability to get their members excited enough about what is happening to roll up their sleeves and actively work at helping the association achieve its full potential.
‘Engagement’ may be an overused term, but it has and continues to be a huge conundrum for many not-for-profits. Social media holds so much promise as a tool to help associations achieve this elusive key to greatness as it levels the playing field and gives everyone a chance to play a role in creating something amazing.
Absolutly on the ball, with regards to the responses on Call for Abstracts brochure, we here at Kenes International had already identified this “weak link” in the communication chain and formed a working group to address this very issue. We formulated a news structure of both content and distribition menthid to answer many of the concerns. Happy to share with like minded individuals my thoughts
http://twitter.com/bobnesbitt
http://www.kenes.com
@Kare
Excellent point and your article was so prophetic. Thanks for sharing that link and adding to the conversation. Seems you were several years ahead of your time. I’m just now seeing some of those organizations you mentioned in your 2007 post begin to welcome big social media names to their keynote stages. These are interesting times indeed.
@Mark
Love that quote by Clay Shirky. He has some great insight. Thanks for adding it to the dialogue.
@elatedca
Thanks for commenting. Fantastic idea to provide Uncola to your attendees. I think your model of the speaker presenting, followed by attendee discussion is one more event organizers should consider. It’s worked for me too.
@Carol
You hit it the nail on the head with one word, “engagement.” In today’s socieity, it is about engaging an audience and giving them the opportunity to engage with the content. The concept of engaging with the content is one many event organizers have not yet figured out how to do. I’d add “contribute” to that as well. Association members and event attendees want an opportunity to contribute and feel as if they belong. When organizations can facilitate opportunities to engage their audience and allow them to contribute, they’ve found a winning formula. Thanks for adding to the conversation!
@goldsmith
Oh my god… it’s not about meetings!! Members don’t join association for meetings, education OR networking. Corporations don’t have meetings to just have meetings.
They join to achieve a HIGHER VALUE.
What’s a higher value?
A higher value is the real reason you attended the meeting. “I attended the meeting to increase my company sales and therefore my own income.” “I joined to get a better job in the organization and I’m hoping your meetings going to help me get there.” “If I know this I can start to get home to my wife at a reasonable time.”
Give the attendee this, and they will return time and time again.
Everything else is a Sub Value and when you measure Sub Values… butts in seats, you miss the mark by enough to cause mistakes in decision making.
Here’s the deal. Instead of looking at cola and wine, or evaluating smiley faces and viewers, measure the results they achieved AFTER the meeting.
Did revenue increase? By how much?
Is there less bickering? What’s the proof?
Is customer acquisition improving? Get stats.
Yeah, a lot of work and tough to measure. It’s moving from tactical from strategic.
Just think…if you focused on measuring results what you’ll find, if you dare.
Let’s not confuse motion with progress…or cola and wine. I’m going to get a glass of water, all this drinking is making me thirsty.
PS. Thanks for the interview!
@goldsmith, your comments would make Kirkpatrick proud…Nice!
Bottom line is that if more meetings were able to gather results based feed back 30 – 90 days after to understand changes made as a result of attendance and then again several months later to gauge the business impact (results), all of us meeting profs would be sitting fat and happy.
Fact is, most attendees want tools, tricks and templates. They want the quick fix that’s easy to implement. It’s not till you get to a higher maturity, where they really appreciate the higher level soft skill improvement that sharpens the strategic saw.
Any way, here’s another vendor plug/mention. This is one I have done consulting for, so I am biased. http://www.meetingmetrics.com Meeting Metrics is a survey technology that helps measure meeting effectiveness. It’s got all the ROI and ROE methodology built into it. MPI and PCMA both use Meeting Metrics for their big meetings and if you are a member of either of those associations you get a sweet discount.
Happy assessing!
Dave Lutz – @velchain
[...] recent post by Jeff Hurt suggests a better way, and the comments which follow his thoughts are equally useful to anyone [...]
I agree with every word, but want to add: I’m not sure we’ve identified why many people go to conferences. I want to come back “drunk on new knowledge”, but it seems to me that many others want to meet & hang out face-to-face whilst on an organization-paid outing to (fill in blank on scenic, interesting conference location). I’m also concerned with the organizational mentality of instructing attendees to “bring back the handouts” (which should be online anyway). This, I think, speaks to what people are expecting the conference will be, and inexplicably satisfied with: 3 days of 90-minute presentations, with 15-page takeaway handouts of text-filled PowerPoint slide captures. Ah, it makes my head hurt.
@Jane
Yes, I so agree with you. I go to conferences for two things, primarily to meet with people in my social networks and to learn “cutting, edge new things.” I don’t want to spend 3 days in 90-minute presentations either without time to digest the topics with my colleages. I want some adult-white space where I can discuss, climb into to and debate those sessions with my peers onsiget. I’m with you on this one!
A little late to this comment — had drafted a response which got lost when my Internet connection went away. One of the perils of living on the road.
Relevant Background: After serving as education director for a national trade association for several years, I left to pursue a lifetime dream with my husband, and travel the continent full-time in an RV.
Because I’m a learning junkie, and especially tied to association elearning, I continue to stay connected as much as I can to blogs like this one.
I’ve learned a lot out here about social learning because it is the only way I’m now connected to the many professional organizations I’m a member of.
I haven’t attended live events because of cost and travel complications. I attend far fewer Webinars because of uneven Internet connections.
Which Brings Me to My Point: The Web is exactly what its name implies — a way of staying connected and “stuck” (in this case, a good thing) within a particular network.
If anything, I’m more in touch with colleagues than ever before — I read more blogs, comment more often, add entries to my own blog more frequently, exchange more e-mails, and have more professional connections at a closer level than ever before. I’m on top of the newest information and elearning developments because I have more time to read the literature and stay current with trends.
All without attending a live event.
Will I keep my memberships in ASTD, ASAE, and other organizations? That remains to be seen. But I can tell you I’m evaluating each membership every day, based on this key question:
“Could I have gotten this information/insight/connection/knowledge from any source other than through membership in this association?”
So far, the answer is probably.
@Ellen
Thanks for adding your comments and you provided some great insight. The Web has created a great way for those of us that love learning, to engage in learning without walls. I am also evaluating my memberships every day as well.
@David Goldsmith
David, I apologize for the late comment. Thanks for adding some provocative thoughts to the conversation. I agree that people join an associaton for higher value. So many association employees are used to reading the membership surveys that list networking, education, government relations, etc. as the main reason people join organizations. Yes, there is much more than just meetings and everyone has meetings. I agree with you that it’s about measurment of the value after the meeting, just as Dave Lutz says. The challenge is that few professionals know how or make the tiime to do that type of long-term evaluations. And, few businesses require that type of measurement as well. Great thoughts though as always. Thanks.