Posted by Whitney on Oct 16, 2009 in
Uncategorized A friend forwarded me this link to a new Unconference, PR Camp , taking place in New York on Friday, November 20, a day after the Web 2.0 Expo concludes in NYC. Given that I will be in New York, since the Podcamp Foundation is helping to organize the Open Unconference sessions at the Web 2.0 Expo, I was initially intrigued. I love Unconferences, and as Director of Operations for the Podcamp Foundation, I love to see how other people put them on.
Now, I have gotten into many interesting debates with people over what exactly constitutes an Unconference, and where the line between conference and unconference lies. We talk about scale, what elements are crucial to success, and which ones have some flex in them.
For me, the heart of the Unconference is the sharing. It’s speakers coming to educate, and to learn themselves, to be participants as much as leaders and educators. The essence to me is about learning and sharing, and that everyone has something to say and teach someone else.
The rules about “The Law of Two Feet” and being able to leave any sessions, to create your own experience, is important. The rules about “no pitches” and encouraging people to walk out of any session that becomes an infomercial is important to maintain the community spirit of the event. The rules about “No Rockstars- everyone is an equal” is important too, as is the fact that anyone can sign up to lead a session, which tend to be more discussion and questions and answer based, rather than lectures.
Barcamps tend to adhere pretty strictly to the rule that anyone can present, and the schedule is created that day- people can sign up for rooms and to lead sessions the morning of, not in advance. At Podcamp, we bend this rule a bit, and while we maintain open space where people can create content on the fly and in the moment, a good portion of the content, sessions and scheduling are set within a week or two of the event. Why did we make this choice?
After Podcamp NYC, where we had over 1,000 people sign up for the event and over 100 sessions in rooms of vastly different sizes in which to place these people, we decided that having people sign up for sessions in advance was crucial, as was organizing the sessions into some rough tracks, just to make the event logistics a bit easier for everyone. For example, one room night have great content about online video, while another focused on Search Engine optimization, and another on marketing your projects on the web. We found that Unconferences can scale, but logistics and fire codes are still important factors to consider!
The advance scheduling of sessions has had another interesting effect-people who typically might be a bit nervous about this Unconference thing attend, because they know a bit about what to expect in advance. They come and participate, and many have what I would call a conversion experience, where the differences in what they get out of an unconference compared to a traditional conference changes their minds completely about what a conference can be.
One of the things we say frequently about Podcamp is that at traditional conferences, the hallways and social events can be the best part of the event, and we try to turn the whole conference into the hallway. Chris Penn often says that we provide the canvas paint and brushes, but the experience and art you take away at the end of the day is up to you- you structure your experience to get the most out of it, rather than having it dictated for you.
So let’s take a look at PR Camp. It’s one day, limited to 200 people. So far, so good. The tickets range from $199 to $295, depending on when you sign up. That’s way out of the league of the charge of most unconferences, many of which are free. In fact, Podcamp Philly charges $20, but that money goes not to cover conference costs but to a local community charity, to help further support our community- this year was Covenant House. Likewise, Podcamp Boston charges $50, some of which covers operation expenses not covered by sponsors, and helps cover things like lunch, with any extra funds going to the Boston Foodbank. I have a hard time, even knowing what it costs to put on an event in NYC, how this pricing structure is in the Community-based, non-profit realm, which is also at the heart of most unconferences. Strike One.
The confirmed list of discussion speakers is a list of PR Professionals, but there seems to be no room for anyone in the community to sign up and lead a session. Strike Two.
I see a lot of people I know and who I know know unconferences participating, so I have some hopes that there will be some “unconference” in this event, but from the outside, it looks pretty much like a regular old conference to me.
I know that there are things the Unconference movement can bring to make any old conference better and more productive. But if you are going to call yourself a “camp”, if you are going to adopt the name unconference, particularly if you are in Public Relations, you have got to realize you are treading in shark-infested waters. Your PR brethren may not understand the difference, but there are legions of geeks who do who also consult to marketing and PR firms about the social web, and this is pretty much a poor PR move if ever there was one.
And if I think this use of the terms Camp and Unconference is over the line and not appropriate for this conference, being the poster child of the Hybrid Conference myself and constantly getting heat from Barcamp folks about it, all I can say is: batten down the hatches and good luck. It’s gonna be a bumpy ride.
Tags: barcamp, chris penn, christopher Penn, podcamp, PR Camp, unconference
Posted by Whitney on Aug 17, 2009 in
Uncategorized I’ve spent the weekend reading through Trust Agents, by my friends, Chris Brogan and Julien Smith.
Trust Agents, at its heart, explains how the currency and language of the web is based on trust. Relationships online, for business or social reasons, require that both parties trust each other immensely. You can’t always seal every deal with a handshake over dinner anymore, and whether money changes hands or not, there’s a great deal of social capital invested between people, and they rely on the other party dealing with them fairly.
As an attorney by education and trade, I can look at the relationships people develop online as a social contract. Each party agrees that even in the most basic “friend” relationship on social networks like Twitter or Facebook, that certain rules will be respected. There is often a quid pro quo, where people reciprocate the friendship outreach. Let’s break this down further-
Mary decides to join Twitter. She goes out and “follow” a bunch of people, hoping these people will reciprocate. This “following” is like an offer of friendship or relationship, which may prove to be valuable, or it may be a burden, but just like any offer to purchase goods or interact with someone, no one has to reciprocate- it’s an offer, that’s all. If Jim reciprocates, a relationship, however tentative, has been formed. The offer has been accepted. This is the basis of a basic contract, with the “consideration” that binds the contract measured in willing to spend your attention and information with Mary. Now, if Mary decides the ongoing trading of information and links through tweets needs to take a turn towards a constant barrage of what might be considered “spam”, she may violate this social contract, causing Jim to simply rescind the conract and unfollow her. Jim’s opted out of Mary’s friendship, breaking their contract to connect and exchange the currency of ideas.
This social contract is the basis of online relationships. Basic friendship relationships on social networks have led to many real world opportunities for me, ranging from personal tours of Barcelona, to speaking engagements, to meeting Richard Simmons and beyond. There is a real store of value being built up in these social relationships that can be leveraged and translated into actual dollars and cents, and this is a large part of what Julien and Chris discuss in Trust Agents.
The point of being a Trust Agent is, of course, not to take advantage of all your friends and seeing them as walking wallets and opportunities. Being a Trust Agent requires that you have built a network of relationships, just like the guy with a great rolodex, long before you actually need it. As Chris Penn says, you need to bring the awesome all the time, and the the relationship currency will follow. Then, when someone is looking for a consultant, someone to hire, a speaker- you will automatically be the first person on the list, or at least on the list of people to consider, where those who do not help others and deliver value will long be forgotten.
This is a bit of a blue ocean, bread on the water strategy. It requires you to save -delivering value and building relationships, long before you get to spend- getting hired, or even asking some one to do a favor for you. The more value you have stored in these relationships, the “closer” your relationships, the more durable that bond is, just like any real world relationship.
If you want to better understand the concept of how relationships work online, and how you can become a Trust Agent yourself, run out and get a copy of Trust Agents. It’s going to be a classic guide to help people negotiate this world of online relationships, while helping you to understand the culture, and how you can leverage these relationships for success, just like Chris and Julien have done so well.
Tags: chris brogan, chris penn, chris pinchen, julien smith, podcamp barcelona, trust agents
Posted by Whitney on Aug 4, 2009 in
Uncategorized This year, we seem to be getting lots of questions and confusion about the difference between Podcamps and Barcamps. So I thought I’d do a brief post here so everyone is clear.
1.Podcamp is Not Barcamp. This is a biggie. Barcamp veterans often write me and say that they think Podcamp is not a “true” unconference because we have altered the format to be a bit more of a bridge between a Barcamp Unconference and a regular old conference. To be honest, this seems like a silly debate to me. The decisions on how a Podcamp differs from a Barcamp, which I’ll discuss below, were made to help make the events accessible and comfortable for people who are used to regular conferences, while maintaining the community feel and the basic rules of Unconferences.
2. The Podcamp Rules (Click here to read Chris Penn’s Excellent Blog post on this subject)
Here are the Six Rules of PodCamp:
- All attendees must be treated equally. Everyone is a rockstar.
- All content created must be released under a Creative Commons license: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/
- All attendees must be allowed to participate. (subject to limitations of physical space, of course)
- All sessions must obey the Law of 2 Feet – if you’re not getting what you want out of the session, you can and should walk out and do something else. It’s not like you have to get your money’s worth!
- The event must be new media/digital media focused – blogging, podcasting, video on the net, social networks, etc.
- The financials of a PodCamp must be fully disclosed in an open ledger, except for any donor/sponsor who wishes to remain anonymous.
3. The way we do Session Planning.
For most Podcamps, we set up a wiki or Google Form where people can sign up to speak in advance- once the spots are filled, they are filled. We also attempt to leave at least one set of rooms open for people choosing to add content the day of the event, Bar-Camp Style, or to extend conversation sstarted in sessions.
The reason we allow pre-planned sessions is that it gives people an idea of what to expect at an event, and whether they should sign up or not. Surprisingly, many people don’t want to commit to attending an event where they don’t know who is speaking, or on what topic! This tweak has actually been shown to help boost attendance at Podcamps, and aids the organizers immensely when planning for any swag or amenities they might provide. It also helps potential sponsors have a better idea of what Podcamp is about and thus make a more informed decision about their sponsorship investment in the community.
4. We don’t “vote” on sessions to decide whether or not they should be presented. While some events, like South by Southwest take suggestions or submissions for sessions and then let the community vote for what they want to see, we don’t. As a result, Podcamp is not a popularity contest, but if you want to present, it’s always prudent to register as a speaker and submit your session as early as possible.
Venues do not have infinite space, and we have a limited number of sessions available over the course of a weekend. Sessions are usually 30 to 45 minutes long rather than rapid fire, five minute presentations. So with limited physical space and limited time, we can’t always accomodate everyone who wants to speak. This can lead to disappointment for people who don’t feel they were warned that sessions spaces were getting tight, but the lesson here is that the early bird gets the worm and those who procrastinate may lose out on opportunities.
5. Unlike Barcamp, we don’t use the “morning of” sign up for sessions. As discussed above, many podcamps, but not all, have moved away from the day of sign up for sessions. Often, this is to avoid the chaos of hundreds of people gathered around a whiteboard, or problems caused by being unable to access an online schedule. Because our attendees are computer and internet afficianados, their ability to crash and slow internet connectivity is close to legendary. All of these folks in one spot often leads to connectivity issues, even with robust wi-fi systems.
6. Some Podcamps charge an admissions fee. Podcamp started out as a free to attend conference like Barcamp. But after we found that only about half on the people signing up to attend Podcamp were showing up, several Podcamps, including Podcamp Boston and Podcamp Philly have instituted a nominal fee. This has raised attendance rates to well over 80%, making planning for space and for events much easier and much more predictable. The admissions fees are used, typically, either to pay for event-related expenses like facility rental and insurance, or some have donated the admissions fees to charitable causes. In either case, the fees are well below typical conference fees and we have yet to have people question the value proposition.
I understand that Podcamp is not everyone’s idea of an unconference, and some of the community-organized features can frustrate those expecting more of a professional conference experience. I look at Podcamp as being partly a laboratory, we are not only are learning from each other during the event, but with each version, we try new things and make improvements to try to do better each and every time.
The Organizers are volunteers, and do this for the love of the community and their belief in the experience that Podcamp delivers. It is not a profit making enterprise, but seeks to run budget neutral for each event. The organizers from each community conference live in the community and the surrounding area, and while the Podcamp Foundation has set forth the rules for what constitutes a Podcamp and what does not, the formal affiliation between events remains largely in name and spirit only.
While the Directors of the Foundation, including myself, Chris Penn and Chris Brogan, strive to provide advice and guidance for any Podcamp or potential Podcamp organizer, we are not directly involved in producing Podcamps outside of those we have always been associated with at this point in time. I’m happy to help anyone start a Podcamp in their area, and we are currently working on an e-book in our “free” time to try to make this process easier.
Please let me know if you have any additional questions about Podcamp I can answer in the comments, and I look forward to seeing you at Podcamp Boston and/or Podcamp Philly.
Tags: barcamp, chris brogan, chris penn, podcamp, podcamp philly, unconference
Posted by Whitney on Jul 8, 2009 in
Uncategorized Chris Penn had an interesting post on his blog today that boils down to this point: It’s in the way that you use it. Just like the Eric Clapton song says:
It’s in the way that you use it,
It comes and it goes.
It’s in the way that you use it,
Boy don’t you know.
And if you lie you will lose it,
Feelings will show.
So don’t you ever abuse it,
Don’t let it go.
Nobody’s right till somebody’s wrong.
Nobody’s weak till somebody’s strong.
No one gets lucky till luck comes along.
Nobody’s lonely till somebody’s gone.
Almost everything we use, from the most basic tool to pencils to computers and communication tools can be used skillfully or crudely. They can be good or bad. They’re just tools. It’s in the way that the tools are used that determines whether you have artwork or scribbles, commercial success or failure, a masterpiece or mere scrap.
Whenever I run across someone who says “computers are bad for kids” or “social media tools are useless” or any other blanket statement against what i consider a tool, I try to get them to consider it’s not so much the tool, but the deployment of that tool that makes the difference in the end product. For example, you can use a pencil to write the great american novel, or send a ransom note. It’s not the pencil’s fault- it’s what the user does with it that determines the outcome.
Likewise, in the world of Social Media, there are many tools available. For those who want to be truly overwhelmed, just go and look at the list on Go To Web 20- it’s a seemingly endless list of Web 2.0 tools that are being developed and deployed, used by communities all over the world. All of these tools are meant for different purposes, have different features, and are adopted by different communities as their own. Some will take off and become the next Twitter, and others will meld into obscurity.
Deciding which tools to use requires some knowledge about each of them, their communities, and how they might fit in your overall marketing or community outreach strategy. The thing that currently separates Social Media Experts and novices on the web is that the Experts have more experience and have been using the tools at hand longer than most. They have a good sense of what is possible and worth the time, and what may not be.
While no one yet (and this is about to change) has a college degree in Social Media Marketing, there are clearly people out there who have the most experience, have a deeper knowledge of the possibility of the tools, and a willingness to explore new tools, always looking for a better way to accomplish the task at hand. Just like a master craftsman, the real social media experts have a pretty deep toolbox and are looking not to use every tool in the drawer, but use only the ones that will accomplish the job at hand.
The big social media tools like Twitter and Facebook are like a hammer and a screwdriver- they’ll get a lot of jobs accomplished for you. They are utilitarian. They are great, and you might not want to live without them. But a good homeowner knows that sometimes, simple tools like duct tape, or more complicated tools, like a drill or power saw, are required to get the job done. You also can’t use them all interchangeably- a hammer doesn’t make a good saw, for example, and you need the right sized wrench for the job, or you just don’t get the torque you need.
Whether you are using more prosaic tools like email and newsletters, or the shiny new tools like Facebook, Mahalo, Friendfeed, or other social tools to communicate with others, the results you get will be determined by how the tool is used, not what it is.
It’s a simple concept, but still one a lot of people seem to miss.
Tags: chris penn, mastery, tools
Posted by Whitney on Jun 24, 2009 in
Uncategorized For just two letters, this word may be the most powerful one in the English language. It sets limits. It defines boundaries. It has the power to stop. It can discourage. It causes more fear than any other single word.
It’s easy to assume that No gets used way more than any other word as well. It’s the word of defiance used early in our lives, to show us boundaries, and anyone who has seen an average two year old, knows that it is one of the first words we master and use with others.
No can motivate. Once I know the worst someone can say to me is no, and I am prepared for that response, almost anything becomes possible. I am free to try, to swing for the fences, because I am already prepared and accept the worst they can throw at me- a simple No.
But surprisingly, we use No sparingly. We avoid saying No because we don’t want to hurt anyone’s feelings, so instead, we’ll try to take on that extra favor for a friend, or find extra time we don’t have, or hang up on a solicitor rather than simply and politely saying No Thanks. We’d rather avoid being honest than pull out that little word, No.
Recently, Chris Penn was asked whether he would post a presentation of his to the web, and he said, “No.” I have a recording of that presentation, and I am also honoring his “no” and won’t be posting it or my notes to the web. Why would people very involved in the podcasting community and in sharing, people who host events about group learning decide to say no and withhold information from others? Chris got a lot of email from people who were upset with him for saying no, for imposing a limit. Yet my question is “Why do you feel entitled to his presentation and intellectual property for free?”
Chris spoke at the merged “petcha kucha/Battledecks” presentation we had at 8 am on Sunday morning. As is usual for early morning at most conferences, only the die hards and truly dedicated were there. Chris gave one of the most useful 5 minute presentations I have ever seen, and felt it was a reward for those who were there, who recorded it, who took notes and were paying attention, and those that did not come, missed out on something special. And he does not feel obligated to serve those who were not willing to get out of bed or make seeing his presentation a priority.
People were getting upset that he decided he would not share his information out further. Chris decided to say no, simply and elegantly. He set a boundary, and people got mad, just like the two year old who’s told it’s bedtime.
My question is this: If you aren’t willing to attend someone’s session, if you aren’t willing to give him your presence when he speaks, why should he give you his information later on? What have you done to earn or deserve it? And why should someone else like me, who may have recorded the session, make that material available to you?
The community doesn’t like the word No. They will tell you it’s against the very nature of bringing people together to set up limits and boundaries. But these are the same people who said No to getting up early, to taking in an experience even if it was inconvenient. The no’s balance out perfectly, and harmony should be restored.
One of the challenges internet communities have is that the all-access pass of communication, 24 x 7, gives an illusion that anything you want should be yours. And that simply is not true.
Community leaders who have run Podcamps, for example, are beginning to want to see others take over the work that they’ve started. Yet many people just seem to want events to appear for their convenience, not appreciating the work, the planning, and the long hours and stress that a few people bear for the sake of everyone else. And the people who have stepped up are getting to the point where they need to say no. They have other interests. They have other demands on their time. They have families who’d like to see them from time to time.
People are having to say no and set limits regarding their time and resources. I respect this, no matter how much I would rather hear Yes. We are living in a world where abundance is no longer the rule, and scarcity will start to rule the day. People are having to make do with less and less. And we need to seriously consider that there is going to be an increase in quid pro quo- things will no longer be free, but will require an equal exchange, a barter, to make things happen. This means also being aware of your value proposition, and be willing to say to others that you can’t have it all for free. It may not cost you money, but it will cost you effort or time to show up and participate, at the very least.
No is powerful. You need to understand the quid pro quo of your No’s. If you aren’t showing up at events or sessions, you are saying no, even while you say yes to other things, as simple as investing your time and money elsewhere. Expecting others to bear the burden and cost of your no’s and provide you what you missed, no questions asked, is no more fair and equitable than asking someone else to pay the tab at a restaurant where you’ve enjoyed the meal.
Opportunity costs. Yeah.
Tags: chris penn, community, conferences, no, pab09, quid pro quo, sessions
