Two weeks after the event and the feedback forms have been steadily rolling in. In all, we have received 54 feedback forms, out of the 120-odd who attended the conference. And while I don’t profess any great skill in statistical analysis, a response rate of roughly 50% seems pretty reasonable to me.
So, what did you say?
Most of you felt that the conference was a well-run, interesting and relevant event - and a great opportunity to network with your peers. The average rating for the event overall was about 3.5 (1 was “poor” and 5 “excellent”) - so I guess that we can officially declare comms@06 a success.
I have made up a dodgy Excel graph that shows you how you all rated the various components of the conference. I am not sure what the margin of error is but, given my aforementioned grasp of quantitative analysis, I would guess ‘high’ would be the correct answer.
In any event, the numbers are pretty conclusive: between 40-50% of you though that the presenters and the organization was excellent (5), and that everything else was around a 4.
The diversity of topics was great and provided a good balance. All the speakers were good at relating their content to the communications issues presented. I felt this was a real strength of Comms@06.
The good spread of attendees from across the government sector added to the value of the event.
Tony
There is also a graph depicting your responses to the individual speakers - which is not a ‘league table’, but it does give you an idea of how the different presenters were rated by those who chose to respond.
Again, the weight of opinion is solidly in the 4 region, with the exception of the remarkable David Slack who managed to rate as ‘excellent’ with 83.5% of the people who responded. Well, I guess that makes one of the decision’s about next year’s line-up a little easier…
I was impressed with all the speakers, who have a wealth of experience in their fields. In just one day I’ve learnt so much that will help me in my job. It’s nice also to have confirmation from the experts that I am on the right track in most cases.
Anon
Lessons we learned
Fortunately, through a combination of dumb luck and the good will of those involved, we managed to get quite a lot of it right. That is not to say that we can’t improve. More interaction was highlighted by a number of you - that might take the form of, for example, some break-out sessions or even a half-day workshop to complement the conference next year.
The whole ‘vegetarian incident’ is something we won’t let happen again: I can’t tell you how relieved I was that no-one went into anaphylactic shock; that is just what we need at a conference on issues management: an ambulance parked out the front.
You also made some suggestions around the small things, that actually make a conference really sing:
- Distribute a list of all the attendees
- More fruit for snacking
- Better audio/visual setup
…all of which we will do next year.
I think the final word (apart from any comments that you would like to add yourselves) should go to Kate, who -for me anyway- summed it all up beautifully:
An excellent, very good value event, head and shoulders above the crappy expensive ones we are constantly bombarded with invitations to!
