Using QR codes
Wed, May 14 2014 01:11
| Amusement, Event Trends, QR code technology
| Permalink
We found this whiteboard snapshot floating around the internet:
We found it incredibly funny. We do get clients who want to use a QR code for their event. Sometimes they can be useful ("checking in" to certain elements for an event--like in a scavenger hunt) but mostly it's unnecessary. People generally don't know how to utilize the QR codes, or information could be more easily conveyed in a way that ISN'T a QR code.
Additionally, a lot of people still have to install additional apps/QR readers to process QR codes. This leads to permissions and personal vs. company phone issues.
So our response (with some exceptions) skews toward this flowchart.
Comments
How to Acknowledge Sponsors...in a Song.
Fri, Nov 2 2012 09:30
| Amusement, AniMates, Best Practices, Emcees, Event Tips, Solutions
| Permalink
We come across this issue frequently--especially in forums, associations, or events with a showcase/tradeshow component: How does one give sponsors appropriate face time in the main event?
We've seen logos on the wall, in PowerPoints...we've had emcees and presenters thank them, we've had sponsor signs in break tables, etc. All of these things are good, but in addition to those we like to thank sponsors...in a song.
Not only is a parody song funny and engaging, but it ensures that every attendee is paying complete attention when the sponsor is getting their name-check. Sponsors are often very important and they deserve a little fanfare.
The video in this blog is Neighthan the Horse, thanking the sponsors to the tune of "My Favorite Things" at an event. Not only do they get a name check, but they also have a line about what they do--elevating the sponsor shout-out above a slide with logos and a round of applause.
Presenters Like Presentations That Are Fun To Present
Thu, Dec 9 2010 09:55
| Amusement, Observations, PowerPoint, Presentation Tips
| Permalink
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.
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.
Doodling Along
Thu, Jul 22 2010 11:19
| Amusement, Anecdotes, Event Tips, Links
| Permalink
The photo to the left was taken during the recent Kagan hearings. (Credit: AP photo)
It shows Minnesota Senator Al Franken doodling while the hearings are taking place. This has been remarked on positively and negatively, and while we won't touch the partisan politics, we do believe that this photo illustrates (pun intended) a point.
I, myself, am a meeting-doodler. This has frustrated some bosses I've had, because they take the doodles as a sign of disrespect or inattention. The truth is, however, that I need to sketch, doodle, write, etc. (do something!) with my hands while I'm listening to a presentation. It helps me focus...and I'm not alone in that. (Sen. Franken, for one, appears to be in this camp as well.)
This is why, when we design meetings, in addition to any structured workbooks, sheets, etc., we always suggest blank notebooks. It appeals to the kinesthetic learner--those who need to move to learn.
Some people will write notes (and even if they never look at them again, the act of writing them down helps cement the knowledge), some people will doodle (forming strong visual associations in their mind along with keeping their hands busy and brain focused) and others won't use them/don't need them. Whatever the audience's personal involvement with their notebook, everyone needs the option of having a space to physically write, doodle, draw, note-take. It doesn't mean that their attention has waned, in fact, quite the opposite.
It shows Minnesota Senator Al Franken doodling while the hearings are taking place. This has been remarked on positively and negatively, and while we won't touch the partisan politics, we do believe that this photo illustrates (pun intended) a point.
I, myself, am a meeting-doodler. This has frustrated some bosses I've had, because they take the doodles as a sign of disrespect or inattention. The truth is, however, that I need to sketch, doodle, write, etc. (do something!) with my hands while I'm listening to a presentation. It helps me focus...and I'm not alone in that. (Sen. Franken, for one, appears to be in this camp as well.)
This is why, when we design meetings, in addition to any structured workbooks, sheets, etc., we always suggest blank notebooks. It appeals to the kinesthetic learner--those who need to move to learn.
Some people will write notes (and even if they never look at them again, the act of writing them down helps cement the knowledge), some people will doodle (forming strong visual associations in their mind along with keeping their hands busy and brain focused) and others won't use them/don't need them. Whatever the audience's personal involvement with their notebook, everyone needs the option of having a space to physically write, doodle, draw, note-take. It doesn't mean that their attention has waned, in fact, quite the opposite.
"We Have Met the Enemy, and He is PowerPoint"
Tue, Apr 27 2010 01:44
| Amusement, Articles, Brain-based Learning, Links, PowerPoint
| Permalink
While perusing the news, I came across this article in the New York Times about the U.S. Military rallying against PowerPoint as an instructional tool.
Full text is here: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/27/world/27powerpoint.html?no_interstitial
The slide to the left was used to explain military strategy. Do you get it? Apparently, neither does anyone else--showing the striking lack of clarity that relying on PowerPoint can bring to a presentation.
A few quotes out of the article (emphasis and italics mine):
Wow. Those are some pretty powerful statements from some people who have the responsibility to convey information effectively to the troops, higher ups, strategists, etc. The highlighted points in particular are both astounding and accurate:
Sitting through PowerPoint can be agony.
PowerPoint relieves the speaker of the responsibility to convey a concise, persuasive point.
PowerPoint is great when the goal is not imparting information.
And yet, PowerPoint is used almost exclusively in corporate presentations. What we've seen through the years has been right in line with the impressions of the article. Speakers all too often use PowerPoint as a crutch, and all too often, the PowerPoint itself hinders the ability to convey information--which is the opposite of its intention.
And yet:
Full text is here: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/27/world/27powerpoint.html?no_interstitial
The slide to the left was used to explain military strategy. Do you get it? Apparently, neither does anyone else--showing the striking lack of clarity that relying on PowerPoint can bring to a presentation.
A few quotes out of the article (emphasis and italics mine):
“PowerPoint makes us stupid,” Gen. James N. Mattis of the Marine Corps
Gen. H. R. McMaster, who banned PowerPoint presentations. . . [likened] PowerPoint to an internal threat.
“It’s dangerous because it can create the illusion of understanding and the illusion of control,” General McMaster said. . . “Some problems in the world are not bullet-izable.”
Gen. David H. Petraeus, who oversees the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and says that sitting through some PowerPoint briefings is “just agony,”
Commanders say that the slides impart less information than a five-page paper can hold, and that they relieve the briefer of the need to polish writing to convey an analytic, persuasive point. Imagine lawyers presenting arguments before the Supreme Court in slides instead of legal briefs.
Senior officers say the program does come in handy when the goal is not imparting information.
Wow. Those are some pretty powerful statements from some people who have the responsibility to convey information effectively to the troops, higher ups, strategists, etc. The highlighted points in particular are both astounding and accurate:
Sitting through PowerPoint can be agony.
PowerPoint relieves the speaker of the responsibility to convey a concise, persuasive point.
PowerPoint is great when the goal is not imparting information.
And yet, PowerPoint is used almost exclusively in corporate presentations. What we've seen through the years has been right in line with the impressions of the article. Speakers all too often use PowerPoint as a crutch, and all too often, the PowerPoint itself hinders the ability to convey information--which is the opposite of its intention.
And yet:
“There’s a lot of PowerPoint backlash, but I don’t see it going away anytime soon,” said Capt. Crispin Burke, an Army operations officer at Fort Drum, N.Y.It's not going away in the corporate space anytime soon either. So what can we do about it? Find the best ways to use PPT as a TOOL instead of an obtusification device. I've spoken a lot about PowerPoint on this blog here, giving tips such as making PPTs clean, clear, concise, not having them be speaking notes, etc. Those are just a start. Perhaps we need to seriously rethink our stance on PPT as a given--or cut back drastically. After all, if the military can see it, shouldn't a CEO/VP/VIP?
A little bit of Funny...
Wed, Aug 12 2009 04:32
| Amusement, Presentation Tips
| Permalink
The Onion consistently amuses us for various appropriate and inappropriate reasons.
We thought this was too funny not to share:
Wow Factor Added to Corporate Presentation
It makes us think about what *really* adds a "wow factor" to a presentation...interaction, simplicity, engagement, stories...perhaps not just the bullet points. :)
We thought this was too funny not to share:
Wow Factor Added to Corporate Presentation
It makes us think about what *really* adds a "wow factor" to a presentation...interaction, simplicity, engagement, stories...perhaps not just the bullet points. :)