Monday, October 12, 2015

Session success formula

Over the last week I sat in six electives, two professional development forums and three main sessions (I did wisely blow off one night) at the conference I attended.

But, as I weighed up which sessions I'd attend, and the criteria I use in determining the difference between input which is "meh" and time well spent, I came up with the following...

Prior Platform: If a speaker has a presence that I'm aware of, like a blog, then I'll be more inclined to attend their session. 

Credibility: I'll be more likely to attend your session of you have a proven track record of applying, in numerous settings, what you're telling me.

Promotion: If the author has recently released a book which I have read then I'll be cautious. Nothing is more disappointing than spending an hour-or-so hearing the exact same input from someone which I've just read.

Contextualisation: I'll be far more likely to rave about your session, particularly if you're North American, if you make the effort to translate it to an Australian setting. 

Familiarisation: Do they know their stuff well enough that they don't need to be tethered to their notes and are capable in engaging helpfully with questions and pushback?

Expertise: Do I get to the end of the session, even if it wasn't completely revolutionary input, with a feeling that I couldn't have presented the session myself?

Biblical: Do I see, from the scriptures, where they get their stuff from and, importantly, how they arrived at that point?

No comments: