Featured Posts

MemberClicks' Great Small-Staff iPad Giveaway When Apple made its big iPad announcement, we started thinking ... How could small-staff associations use the iPad to manage their business operations? We were intrigued,...

Readmore

Working virtually: How one small-staff does it I had a chance Tuesday to speak with Debra Helwig (you may know her on Twitter as @dhelwig) to find out more about her organization's operations. Debra is the marketing and...

Readmore

Introducing ... The Small-Staff Journal Happy Monday! I hope everyone attending ASAE's Great Ideas Conference made it to Colorado safely, and if you're not able to be there in person, be sure to follow the Twitter...

Readmore

Splash: A Blog from MemberClicks Rss

Ideas for a more fulfilling virtual meeting experience

Posted on : 27-08-2009 | By : Shannon Otto | In : resources

Tags: , , , , , ,

4

This is part two of a series exploring the value of virtual attendance following the Aug. 25 Association Chat (#assnchat) on Twitter. Part one can be found here.

It’s no secret the economy is flailing. And, though things are looking up, a trip to Toronto for ASAE and The Center’s Annual Meeting and Expo probably wasn’t in many organizations’ budgets this year. Creating a fulfilling virtual experience one year can drive “real-life” attendance for the following year, which should be ASAE’s goal.

I initially was going to rehash some highlights and quotes from the transcript, but I ended up retyping practically everything. Some key takeaways, though:

  • Virtual attendees could pair up with exhibitors for sponsorship on blogs. For example, a blogger would host an ad for a certain exhibitor in exchange for them sponsoring the blogger’s virtual attendance. (@maggielmcg)
  • Create a virtual event manager role to maximize virtual attendance. (@maggielmcg, @jmoonah)
  • Charge for the edited package of video, audio, etc… There should be a revenue stream attached to valuable content. (Many participants shared this view.)
  • What if virtual attendees had access to the live sessions and then paid what they thought it was worth afterward — otherwise known as the Radiohead model? (@dcoriale)
  • “Virtual” could encompass a lot of items put together that could not be so easily replicated (i.e. professionally edited packages). (@spkrinteractive)
  • Offer a “teaser” for free (perhaps of the general sessions), but have virtual attendees pay for other content. (@spkrinteractive)
  • Most content creators want to be paid for what they create. (@busyevent) (My thoughts: Does it matter who pays them? It could be the association, the virtual attendees or perhaps the exhibitors.)
  • Volunteers could tweet and take video from each session. (@ceosolutions)

The amount of interaction available to virtual attendees should determine the event’s monetary worth. Maybe it’s worth nothing. Personally, I like the idea of hiring official content creators to document each session — they could essentially function as reporters. (I think it’s the journalist in me really likes this idea!) At this year’s ASAE, it seemed as if the majority of active Twitter users went to the same few learning labs, which minimized the amount of possible coverage.

Jeff De Cagna (@pinnovation), the chat’s moderator, said he was concerned that “associations are looking for ways to make virtual attendees pay for value that should be free. [IRL attendees] pay for the actual value of experience.”

Although I agree with that statement, shouldn’t there be a certain level of experience and interaction that comes with virtual attendance? Of course, face-to-face interaction always trumps electronic, but virtual attendance is becoming more viable as technology continues to evolve.

Perhaps there wasn’t a huge capability for a stellar virtual experience at ASAE this year, and that’s OK — we should look ahead to ASAE 2010 and explore different options. At the rate technology is evolving, there are probably possibilities for next year we haven’t even thought of yet.

The chat’s transcript is available here.

  • Share/Bookmark

Paying for content vs. face-to-face interaction

Posted on : 26-08-2009 | By : Shannon Otto | In : resources

Tags: , , , , ,

4

This is part one of a series exploring the value of virtual attendance.

Should socially produced content be repackaged in a more “professional-looking” format to be sold to virtual attendees? Or should every session be live-streamed for free? What is the true value of a virtual experience?

Every week at 2 p.m. EDT, association professionals take an hour to discuss with each other issues facing the community. The platform? Twitter. Attaching the designation/hashtag #assnchat (yes, it’s horrible and attracts a few trolls now and then) to our tweets, we chat about technology, social media, membership and anything related to associations.

This week, the discussion was focused on takeaways from ASAE and The Center for Association Leadership’s Annual Meeting and Expo, as well as ideas to improve next year’s meeting. What began as a discussion about key learning points turned into a conversation about how to create a fulfilling experience for virtual attendees, and what it should cost — if anything.

As association professionals, do you pay conference fees for the interaction with your peers or for the content it provides?

This is a sticky situation, especially since a lot of content surrounding these conferences is now “socially created” through tweets, blog posts, podcasts or videos. Real-life attendees paid to be at the conference, and they supply other content to virtual attendees, who pay nothing.

I can’t help but be reminded of the news industry (whether it’s broadsheet, broadcast or broadband). Consumers have never truly paid for news. Advertisers have. And that’s the problem facing many industries (news providers, associations and more) today.

The business model is changing. And no one knows what to do about it.

The chat on Aug. 25 was one of the liveliest I’ve participated in in awhile. There were many, many opinions — some believe virtual attendance should be entirely free, some proposed different business models (for example, charging for edited content while allowing “raw” content to be free) and some thought event planners should hire content creators and charge for the work they generate.

Of course, every situation is different. Should valuable content be given away for free? Content creators obviously want to be compensated for their work, especially if it’s extremely time-consuming.

For starters, I don’t think the virtual experience at this year’s ASAE was too great. I’m sure everyone enjoyed following the tweets (hashtag: #asae09) and learned a lot, but there were very few live video streams of general sessions and learning labs. Jeff de Cagna streamed his session live and also took questions via Twitter, which I think is a great start.

But the majority of presenters — ideally, everyone — should do something similar. And what works for one conference may not work for another. I welcome any additional suggestions, thoughts and criticisms.

Part two will be available on Aug. 27, and will explore different options for associations, focusing on ASAE and The Center’s Annual Meeting and thoughts from the Aug. 25 #assnchat.

The chat’s transcript is available here.

  • Share/Bookmark