3 Things Companies Say That Guarantee a Stagnant Event

"We don't want this to be the same old event!"

We hear this a lot from clients--especially lately. A lot of companies are returning to events and they want something different and fresh. It's more difficult to justify a large, in-person event--so it can't be the same-ol'-same-ol'.

And yet, companies still fall into the trap of producing stagnant, stale, unengaging events. The following three phrases are red flags that signal business as usual (and not in a good way):
"We've always done it this way."


There's an old anecdote about making a pot roast. Before he makes a pot roast in the oven, John always cuts the meat in half and cooks the two pieces separately. He has his mother over for dinner, and she sees him cutting the roast. She asks him why he cooks it this way. He responds that it was the way that SHE always cooked it. "Oh," his mother replies with a smile, "I only did that because I never had a big enough pan for the whole roast."

We recently asked a client why they scheduled a certain speaker at a certain time in their agenda. There response was: because they had always done it that way. Never mind that it wasn't the most strategic place to put that speaker.

Be wary of the trap of doing things as we've always done them for the sake of comfort or because it's kinda-sorta worked in the past. Unless events are re-imagined, they become traps for mediocrity.

The biggest culprit here tends to be the structure of the agenda. Before consulting on a 3 day event, we can almost lay money down on the proposed agenda: Cocktail hour the first night. First day: Corporate speakers the first morning. Breakouts in the afternoon. Second day: Motivational speaker in the morning. Breakouts or general session info. Team building in the afternoon. Third day: Panel discussion in the morning. Regional breakouts. . . The problem with routines like this is that attendees go into autopilot and their experience is automatically passive instead of active. It then takes work to get them into an interactive, engaged state.

There's nothing wrong with repeating an element or structure from year to year--but it should have a distinct purpose outside of "how it's always done". Thought should be put into constructing every element of the event to make it the most effective experience for the attendees.

"Our president needs 90 minutes to speak... The VP of marketing must present after him..."


There is a certain amount of political sensitivity that creeps into an event. X position speaker should go before Y position speaker. Z speaker needs at least 45 minutes, lest they feel slighted. While we understand the need to be sensitive to corporate culture and politics, arranging event elements based on politics instead of necessary content is doing a disservice to the audience.

From the perspective of the audience--and being in thousands of corporate events--there's nothing that lowers the expectations of an event more than seeing a whole day lineup of corporate speakers...one after another... Sometimes it's best to space these corporate presentations out over the days and in between other content--not only to add variety, but to give the audience a better chance to absorb the messaging.

Sometimes the number of corporate speakers can be reduced. Often times A, B and C department all get to present because D department is speaking and we can't leave out the others. However, sometimes A, B and C departments don't have anything new or relevant to present at that time. It's not respectful of an audience to have a speaker present just for the sake of having an equal presence onstage. If it's exposure that is needed, there are more creative ways to go about this throughout an event.

And finally: If you give a speaker 10 minutes of time, they will talk for 10 minutes (and sometimes go a bit over or under, as non-professional speakers are wont to do). If you give that same speaker with the same content 60 minutes, they will talk for 60 minutes. People will, generally, fill the time that they are given with *something*--whether that information is relevant or not. Ask people about their content first--and then determine their speaking time--instead of the other way around.
"We don't have much time, so we want to get the most out of it..."

This isn't a bad thing in and of itself. The issue here is that "getting the most" out of an event typically means putting as much information as possible into an event. Oftentimes, the opposite of what is intended is what ends up happening. Cramming a lot of information into a little amount of time is a recipe for learning disaster. By having too much content--instead of a key points being remembered, there is a far greater chance that nothing will be remembered. The brain becomes saturated and cannot process new information without first digesting the old information and working with it in some practical way. To use an old metaphor--it's like "drinking from a fire hose".

This is certainly NOT getting the most out of an event.

Does this mean that events cannot be meaningful experiences with effective learning moments? Not at all. The key is to be selective and strategic. Build in time for brain-breaks, interaction and activities. Be very selective; separating what's nice to know from what attendees NEED to know--and only bringing the latter to the event.

What do you do with all that extra content you wanted to cover? The event isn't just the three days everyone is together. Have additional resources before and after the event, continue following up with participants, and give them the ability to discover and work with additional information long after they fly home to keep the momentum of the successful event going.
Comments

Introducing: Kristina Gooding

Important news from Live Spark!

We would like to take a moment to introduce you to our new Vice President of Business Development, Kristina Gooding.

Kristina has a stellar sales, marketing, and meetings & events background. She has over a decade of experience putting words into action in the meeting and convention industry; where she has designed and produced interactive events for a multitude of Fortune 1000 companies.

We are excited to have such a passionate, dedicated person as a part of our team. Kristina has keen insight, an unwavering dedication to customer service and a knack for delivering highly effective events.

Kristina will be a huge asset to our clients and we look forward to having you meet her!
Comments

Audience Response Keypads vs. Smartphone Voting

Many companies make an effort to keep up with the latest technology in their events. This can aid in engagement and make the event seem more technologically relevant to a younger or more tech-savvy audience. Audience response systems are a great way to engage everyone in an audience, involve them in competition, and encourage interaction.

We've been hearing quite a bit about using smartphones as audience response devices lately. Naturally, we're intrigued since we've helped clients produce many whole-audience game shows using audience response systems...and we've also seen smartphone voting systems in use--so we have some thoughts.

We love the idea of an audience response device that the attendee can always have with them, keep with them, and is multi-purpose. That's what we love about the smartphone audience response concept.

However, the smartphone technology still has a few things that need to be worked out:
  • Not everyone has a smartphone yet. Hard to believe, but true! Unless the company is providing the smartphone, it can be hard to reconcile the availability of technology AND make sure that the audience response system is compatible across all platforms.
  • Reception. It can be difficult to get reception in an event room. Sometimes impossible. Though smartphones can often hook on to internal wifi, etc, this may pose security issues of another kind. Therefore, you have a legitimate concern with steady connectivity. If someone's cell signal gives out at a game-winning moment... We'd hate to be the judge on that one!
  • With a smartphone, everything is at hand. Literally. It's easy to get distracted by an incoming text, email, the internet, etc. If you're using this in a large event it encourages people to have their cell phones out (when it can already be difficult to maintain their attention spans).
  • Cheater, cheater. . . having a phone in-hand while voting makes sending a game show answer to a friend just a quick-text away. Not that we'd question the integrity of the audience, but stranger things have been known to happen.
While we think smartphone response systems are a great concept, we think they have a long way to go in terms of practical application at this time. For right now, we'll stick with our good ol', reliable, radio-frequency audience response keypads.
Comments (1)

A "Third Day" Audience

Recently, we were brought in to consult on a very small element of an event. We produced a game show that took place on the first and third day.

The game show itself went over very well--utilizing both a set of contestants and audience-response keypads so everyone could play along.

At the beginning of the third day, however, we noticed a marked change in the audience. The energy was low. They seemed tired. We asked another producer if the "networking" the night before was the culprit, and they responded--nonplussed--"No, it's just a typical third day audience."

Why does a third day audience get a pass on being as engaged as a first day audience? This was a bit of a shock to us--our "typical" events have the audience leaving MORE energized on the third day than on the first. Instead of a high climax on the first day followed by a slow, downhill denouement to the flight home, our events start out with moderate energy and build and build and build.

Why?

Energy in an event indicates that the audience is still primed for learning. Energy doesn't always equate with rah-rah pom-poms (though it certainly can, if the circumstances are right) but it signals active participation on the part of the audience members. You want an audience engaged all the days of your event--quite simply--so that all the days of messaging will be absorbed and taken back into the field.

How?

Making sure that an audience stays energized for an entire event is no small feat. Most events are designed to work against this goal; big opening followed by a keynote followed by presenter after presenter...a day of workshops...some strategy presentations on the final day...etc. Here are just a few broad-brush ways we keep an event from having a "Typical Third Day Audience":
  • Have points of engagement throughout the event; games, discussions, audience interaction.
  • Put the audience on teams and elicit their commitment to active (not passive) participation.
  • (Along previous lines...) Have the audience develop their own goals and ground rules for the event.
  • Incorporate competition through games and activities.
  • Have an emcee whose purpose goes beyond introducing the next speaker; they can prime content, tie messages together, lead reflections and give the audience "brain breaks" in between speakers.
  • Require all presentations to be engaging, brain-based, interactive, pointed and RELEVANT.
  • Control the environment of the room--this may mean having fewer breakouts and more general session.
  • Avoid information overload. You can start to do this by making sure each critical point/outcome is previewed, presented, reviewed (several times), and practiced. This will naturally limit the amount of information you can include, and will also increase chances of "what's important" being remembered.
  • Change the way information is being presented frequently.
We'll cover some of these individual points in greater detail in future blog entries.
Comments (1)

What's On Your Attendees' Agenda?

"They're freaking out because no one has gotten an agenda... this definitely isn't going to be a meeting as usual."

--Our client, about his attendees.

We frequently don't publish a detailed agenda in any of the event materials given to the attendees. If we do, it ends up being no more detailed than a start time and rough break/lunch times (and perhaps a rough end time).

Not having an agenda does several things:

It allows attendees to fully engage. Though it drives "Type-A" personalities a little nuts, not having an agenda allows attendees to give up control (of their time, not their responsibility/accountability), relax, and go with the event. They want to see what's next.

It takes away pre-conceived notions. If an attendee knows that finance is going to present at 11, they have all morning to think about how unengaging that presentation is going to be. (Whether or not it actually IS.) They focus on the content of the moment and it gives the presenters an opportunity to frame the conversation how THEY want.

It prevents ducking out. "Well, it's only marketing, surely I can duck out and take care of XYZ..." If you don't know what's next, you don't know if what you're going to miss might be vitally important. At a previous event, attendees wanted agendas so they could schedule time with their families (some had come along for a post-event vacation) during the general session. Good for the family? Sure. Good for the content? No.

It inhibits clock-watching. Presenters finish early or, more often, run over time. Not having an agenda gets rid of the toe-tapping, "He's 3 minutes-and-counting over his allotted time," "When will she be DONE already," sentiments out in the audience--decreasing impatience and increasing attention. Likewise, if a presenter goes "short", the audience isn't left wondering why they didn't take up their full 40 minutes.

It allows for on-the-fly changes. During the middle of an event, we sometimes need to switch a presenter or change the direction of the content based on what is happening in real time. Without published agendas, we're able to do this seamlessly--and the audience is none-the-wiser. Do they know that Presenter X failed to prepare and so we had to substitute Presenter Y? Nope. Do they know that because XYZ happened earlier, we chose to invite the keynote speaker from yesterday back? Nope. Do they know that we're throwing in extra activities because the energy seems low? Nope. They're going with the flow, and we're able to better do our jobs.


Not publishing an agenda may not work for all events--and often a minimal level of detail (when people go to breakouts, when the day begins, etc.) is needed in written form. But when one has the option, don't have a minute-by-minute breakdown of the event available to the public audience.
Comments

Driving Clients Crazy: Set in Stone vs. Flexible Events

Right now, we're ramping up for a good half-dozen January events. As we put together show flows, presenter scripts, emcee guides, etc. We're driving a few of our clients a bit crazy.

This certainly isn't on purpose, but some people need everything to be set in stone weeks before an event. We simply don't operate that way.

That doesn't mean that every single element isn't meticulously thought out--it is. What it *does* mean is that an event is a living, breathing creature. Without flexibility it won't necessarily suffocate in its own box, but it can be a fraction of its potential.

Here are the advantages of a flexible event:
  • Not having everything set allows you to adjust your presentations/flow to the mood of the audience.
  • Sometimes spontaneous activities need to be inserted to increase the energy level of the room.
  • Things happen at an event. You want to be able to comment on them, script them in, etc.
  • Flexible content allows you to adjust to the knowledge base of the audience. If things are too difficult to understand or too easy the audience is going to check out.
  • Sometimes the best ideas come out at the last minute. You don't want to reject something that could be exactly what the event needs just because it wasn't planned weeks in advance.
  • Mistakes happen. You need to be able to correct them seamlessly.
This is also, sometimes, why we don't publish a minute-by-minute, bullet-by-bullet agenda or content summary. If the audience has an exact road map of what's coming, they are utterly unforgiving when things have to be changed (and things, very often, DO change during an event whether things are supposed to be set in stone or not).
Comments

Presenters Like Presentations That Are Fun To Present

Here's a novel concept: a dense deck of PowerPoint slides is just as not-fun for the presenter as it is for the audience.

I guess we've always known this is true in the back of our minds; but if a presentation wasn't fun to present, why would a presenter present it? (Ladies and gentleman, your new tongue-twister.)

We stumbled upon this revelation (ehhem) when consulting with a client about their lunch-and-learn style presentations. They wanted a fun, brain-based presentation that was turnkey; anyone presenting could give a good, engaging presentation--even if they weren't their top choice for a speaker. Then our client said, "Well, if we have a fun presentation, it could make the presenter better. After all, presenters like presentations that are fun to present."

The lightbulb went on!

We're so entrenched in advocating for the audience to be engaged, that we forget that a speaker can become a talking zombie; someone who is just delivering the words and going through the motions without enjoying the experience. The presenters' enjoyment always took a backseat to the audience--and we went forth crafting energizing, brain-based presentations without being aware of the effect it had on the presenter.

It's true, there are some presenters who can make a proverbial silk purse out of a sow's ear--taking a 49 slide deck with 18 bullet points per slide and presenting it in an energetic way. . . but they typically aren't just *presenting*, they're also engaging with jokes and anecdotes and going off the slides, etc. If you had to substitute speakers at the last moment, giving that same presentation wouldn't be nearly as agreeable.

Just as the audience doesn't want to listen to a speaker just reading slide after slide, we can't imagine that that's what speakers want either. Not only does it not provide a creative outlet for them, but not having a presentation that engages the audience deprives a speaker of the critical positive audience feedback--the effervescent bubbling of energy in the room that you feel on stage when you're really *on* and they're really liking what you're saying.

So I guess the point is a humanitarian one: don't just improve your presentations for the sake of the audience, do it for the presenters, too.
Comments

Designing a Brain-Based Event: The Power of Competition

(Note: This entry will also be posted at the Experient E4 Blog)


In the Brain-Based Events Exchange Café at e4, the audience was divided into two teams and we played the Brain-Based Smackdown (an audience response game show). Now, we didn’t just play the game for fun’s sake (though it certainly was a lot of fun), we added both the team interaction and the competition into the presentation to increase the success of the event.

Why put the audience into teams and add competition into an event?
· A person can get lost in an audience of 100…500…1000… It’s more difficult to get lost in a team of 10-20.
· Being on a team provides a personal, supportive environment at an event.
· Having team competition makes attendees accountable to their peers for engaging in the event.
· Competition reinforces content and adds energy, excitement, emotion and engagement.

Ways to add competition:
Game shows: Game shows are a great way for teams to earn points in a team competition. You can either add a single game to a workshop/breakout session, or have a game that runs throughout the day (previewing information, reviewing information, teaching information, etc). You can use the same format in different rounds (i.e. Multiple matches of a Jeopardy-style game) or you can use different game formats. Game shows can even be structured in tournament style to make them an event within the training.
Audience-response game shows can be particularly effective. Everyone has their own game pad so everyone plays along (and individual scores go towards the team tally).

Knowledge Bucks: A great way to keep individuals engaged and participating in a less structured session is "Monopoly money" or Knowledge Bucks. This funny-money can be given out when individuals respond to a question, arrive on time, etc. Team members can put them in a designated box, and they are added to the team's total score. These can be tallied during breaks.
Energizers: Have the teams organize a post-lunch cheer, with the most creative, on-point and well-executed cheer receiving the most points. Have a paper-toss where members write questions on paper, crumple them up and toss them around until a designated time period passes and one person from each team must answer the question in their hand--for a certain number of points a piece. Activities like this both contribute to the energy of the room and the team competition.
Leader Board: Have a leader board that shows the tally of team scores for all activities--game shows, knowledge bucks, team cheers, etc. Update it at breaks so teams can see where they stand and to stoke a little competition. This doesn't have to be anything fancy--a grid on a white board or a PowerPoint slide will do nicely.

Dan Yaman is the Founder and CEO of Live Spark, the event design firm that produced Eddie and Ellie the eagles. Live Spark also consults on presentations and events, designs custom game and audience-response experiences and more. You can check out our blog for more tips and event insights—or check back here for more postings to come.
Comments

Designing a Brain-Based Event: Adding Emotion

(Note: This entry will also be posted at the Experient E4 Blog)

In the Brain-Based Events Exchange Café--recently presented at e4--we talked about ways to engage an audience at an event and make sure that your message is communicated in a way that people will remember.


Emotion has been proven to increase the rate of recall in events. When there’s an emotional context, the brain secretes adrenaline and this helps to fuse memories. This creates a powerful event where more key information is retained by attendees.

Within our café session, we asked participants to brainstorm ways that they can add emotion into an event. Here are some of the great answers we received:


Share stories: Stories activate the brain and engage us emotionally. A story can be an anecdote or can even be the “story” of a product.


Create a personal connection: Good speakers get audiences to relate to them using rapport, anecdotes, humor, etc. Creating a personal connection could also mean making it possible for people to bring and share their own experiences within an event. Setting their own powerful, highly-personal goals and outcomes.


Incorporate humor: Ellie and Eddie the Eagles are good examples of incorporating humor into an event. You don’t have to have a giant talking eagle co-hosting to engage the audience in a humorous way, though. Jokes, anecdotes, videos, etc. are also ways to add humor.


Create competition: In the Brain-Based Events session, we played an audience-response game show to re-engage participants, but also to create the emotional experience of competition.


Inspiring videos: Hollywood spends millions of dollars producing products that will emotionally connect with an audience. In the right context, an inspirational video can be extremely powerful. (The locker room scene of “Miracle on Ice” comes to mind.)


Use music: Our brains are wired to engage with music. The music you use as the audience walks in, leaves, and reflects/discusses during the event can have a huge emotional impact. On example of musical mis-use? I attended an event where the opening song, as the audience walked in, was “Rainy Days and Mondays (always get me down)”. Talk about setting an inappropriate context for the event!


Scents: We saw scents being used at the e4 event to draw people into areas. Scents can have a powerful emotional connection—the smell of popcorn in the lobby, fresh-baked bread, the sharpness of peppermint etc. Keep in mind, though, that scents are somewhat risky to employ at an event because there can be so many sensitivities, and strong scents can be a trigger for headaches.


Nostalgia: Company heritage pieces are a good example of using nostalgia for emotional impact. Old photos, sound clips, etc. can also be employed.


Novelty: Changing up the program and adding elements that are completely new and surprising can provide an emotional experience.


Photos: There’s a reason that people display “happy snaps” on the morning of the second/third day of an event. It reconnects people with their experience at the event.


Environment of the room: Lighting, seating, staging, etc. can all subtly influence emotion in the room. Dark rooms with close seating create a different feel than an open room with theatrical, flashy lighting.


Interaction: Interacting with the audience at an event can foster an emotional experience… but more on creating interaction later!


Emotional connection with an audience doesn’t have to be complex, and it doesn’t have to be one single emotion. Making an event FUN adds emotion. Having a team competition adds emotion… And that all leads into higher content retention and a more effective event for you and your clients.


Dan Yaman is the Founder and CEO of Live Spark, the event design firm that produced Eddie and Ellie the eagles. Live Spark also consults on presentations and events, designs custom game and audience-response experiences and more. You can check out our blog for more tips and event insights—or check back here for more postings to come.

Comments

Designing a Brain-Based Event: Adding Interaction

(Note: This entry will also be posted at the Experient E4 Blog)

In the Brain-Based Events Exchange Café--recently hosted at E4-- we talked about ways to engage an audience at an event and make sure that your message is communicated in a way that people will remember. Adding interaction to an event and within presentations is absolutely critical to success.


Studies cite different attention span limits (Dr. Medina stated 10 minutes), but on average, the adult attention span in a live event is from 5-7 minutes.

That means that in most typical presentations, there is going to be a lot of attention atrophy, and the messaging will be lost. So how does one mitigate against this effect in a typical, 60-minute presentation? By adding interactive elements at regular intervals.


During our exchange café, we brainstormed ways to add interaction within a presentation, and here’s what we came up with as a group:


Add a game: In our own presentation, we played a game show. In addition to being a way to review, preview and present the information in a unique way, it also added an element of energy and competition that broke up the content.


Do a skit: At an event we produced, instead of just giving the finer points of coaching, the presenter brought an assistant on stage and modeled the coaching interaction.


Have discussion: Give the audience opportunities during a presentation and an event to reflect and discuss your content with a neighbor or at their tables. Not only does it reinforce content and add interaction, but it also creates personal relevance.


Demonstrate: If it’s a new product presentation, don’t just rattle off bullet point features—have a prototype to show, or things that the audience can “play” with and interact with. If it’s a new process, actually go through the chronology.


Show a video clip: Media is a great way to break up a presentation, add emotion and captivate the audiences’ attention.


Ask questions: When a speaker interacts WITH the audience, it makes they audience accountable for their participation in the presentation. Gathering their opinions, thoughts, misconceptions, etc. makes a presentation more personally relevant.


Switch speakers: While the best-intended panels of mice and men may often go awry, the concept behind a panel or interview or tag-team speakers is a good one. Switching speakers resets the attention clock.


Use different sounds: When this was brought up in our session, it referred mostly to the modality of a person’s voice—varying tone and timbre to be a dynamic, continually engaging speaker. However, using music, sound effects, etc., could be a way to add novelty and re-engage the audience.


Add activities: An audience wants to play. Participating in hands-on activities not only increases interactivity and extends the attention span, but it also gives the opportunity to practice with key concepts and content.


Tell a joke: Humor is a wonderful way to re-engage the audience, because it evokes a strong emotional response (also causing the brain to secrete chemicals that aid in binding memory). Getting the audience to laugh is a great way to keep their attention. (This is another reason why we use live animated characters, like Ellie and Eddie the Eagles.)


Tell stories:
Speaking of emotional engagement… A good story can captivate attention far beyond the typical attention span, because that’s how we’re wired to receive information, process and learn.

Dan Yaman is the Founder and CEO of Live Spark, the event design firm that produced Eddie and Ellie the eagles. Live Spark also consults on presentations and events, designs custom game and audience-response experiences and more. You can check out our blog for more tips and event insights—or check back here for more postings to come.

Comments
See Older Posts...