Blogs

In the past 2 weeks, I’ve been to the ARMA Int’l Conference AND the AIIM Boot Camp.  Here are my “follow up tasks” from the conferences.  See if any of these sound familiar:

• Check out the Information Governance Reference Model (IGRM) and see if I can use it as a “change initiator” to help garner support for my initiatives
• Search for “Chief Information Governance Official” to see if anyone has that title (FYI – initial search results were negative)
• Explicitly identify “Design Principles” in SharePoint Governance Model
• Build list of SUCCESSES (to go along with list of the “current projects list”) so that at the very least, I am reminded of what has been accomplished
• Halloween Public Relations Opportunity – create “Hall of Horrors” with information governance knowledge contests and prizes and examples of “records horrors”
• Create physical presence for the program in a high traffic area with visuals that show what we are working on and be prepared for resulting “drop in conversations”
• Connect with other Minnesotans I met at the event via LinkedIn
• Check out the Privacy by Design Standard/Guideline/Principle
• Clean up emails
• Take the Organization DNA Profiler survey at: www.booz.com/orgdna
• Start watching the Certified Information Professional Training Videos and prepare to take the test (using the free voucher I got by attending the Boot Camp)
• Do laundry

It seems like every time I go to a conference, I come back with new information that has me wanting to try something new or different at work.  Which is great, because it helps to balance out all the mundane catch up tasks that come with being gone. 

And I am struck EVERY TIME by how much of “what I got out of the conference” comes from those conversations held in the airport shuttle and over meals and in discussions that happen AFTER the education session has ended.

Here is another thing that struck me, maybe because I just got done reading “The Five Dysfunctions of a Team,” where they identify “lack of arguing” as a PROBLEM for teams….the typical conference does not provide a fertile ground for disagreement.  I deliberately inject controversial things during sessions I deliver because I believe the ultimate learning exercise is to engage in real dialogue….not just to have me talk at you.  And by saying something completely “out there” I can usually get some audience response.  But I was in one session where I disagreed wholeheartedly with the speaker (shocking, I know…Monica had a strong opinion about something) and, even though it was a “rapid fire format” I did not get the opportunity to state my case. 

Just think how much better conferences would be if the format allowed for a truly dynamic interchange with the audience?  So that the “speaker” was really just a facilitator and dissenting views were given a hearing.  Of course, the audience will never be as well prepared as the presenter, but that doesn’t mean you should IGNORE THEM.  OK, off that soapbox now.

Here was the other thing that struck me as perplexing….Polling during an education session. I am referring specifically to the process of requesting that attendees text an answer to a survey question multiple times during a session.  What ever happen to the value of just asking people to “Raise your hands if….?” Not only does a show of hands give you an immediate answer, but it gives participants an excuse to stretch, which should not be undervalued.  Sitting in a room watching a bunch of other people type into their mobile devices while you wait for an answer to appear on a screen feels like…..a lecture hall.  It was less annoying when the presenter continued to deliver meaningful content while waiting for the results. 

If session polls were used to actually change the direction of the subsequent material, I could see that as being worthwhile, but, again, why not just ask people to raise their hands/nod their heads?  I mean, if one of my options in an education session poll was “Replace speaker with someone more interesting,” I could see the value.  NOT THAT ANY session I attended at either event wasn’t absolutely fascinating.  I’m remembering OTHER conferences, of course.

What about you?  What makes for a good conference for you?  What are your conference pet peeves?