Now that many potential conference topics have been aired during the roundtable, we need to bring the divergent phase of conference topic selection to a close. I do this by asking attendees to visually document their wishes for the upcoming conference sessions. Then, we determine which of the suggested peer session topics are popular, and finally we schedule the chosen sessions into a conference program. The whole process takes about an hour and can be held during an early conference social event.
By creating a visual record of all attendee session suggestions, each attendee can be sure that their desires have been included in the group’s pool of topics, and the entire spectrum of possible choices is made available for all to see.
The
procedure is very simple. I set out, either taped or pinned on walls or laid on
tables, multiple letter-size signup sheets like the one shown here.
I ask everyone to use these sheets to write down descriptive titles of session topics that they’d like to attend and/or present. Only potential peer session topics are entered on the sheet at this stage. People can suggest as many sessions as they’d like, writing each one at the top of a separate sheet. They are encouraged to ask for anything they’d like to have happen, irrespective of whether they think it will be popular or not. Attendees are also told that they don’t need to duplicate a topic that someone has already suggested, but, if they have a slightly different idea for the session, they should write their own version on a separate sheet.
At the end of peer session signup, attendees have a wall or tables full of session topics to review.
Next we discover which topics are popular, and find attendee resources that will enable us to create feasible sessions on the subjects people want.
To determine popular peer session topics I use a simple voting scheme. Attendees are asked to review all the topic sheets on display and sign their names under every topic title in which they are interested. I explain that signing their name doesn’t obligate them to attend any session, it simply will be used to indicate the degree of interest in each topic.
I also use peer session signup to find out who might be able to help make the session happen. As people sign their names, they are asked to indicate if they could potentially help with the session—as a facilitator, as someone with experience or expertise in the subject, as a presenter or panelist, or as a volunteer scribe who will create a record of the session. They do this by placing an ‘F’ (facilitator), ‘E’ (experience/expertise), ‘P’ (presenter/panelist), or ‘S’ (scribe) next to their name on the relevant signup sheet.
Discovering available resources for proposed peer sessions allows us not only to find people to lead sessions, but also to avoid scheduling peer sessions on popular topics that no one at the conference knows much about.
Once peer session signup is over we have almost all the information we need to choose and schedule sessions that meet the attendees’ expressed needs and wants. While peer session signup is going on, I assemble a small group of volunteers to create and schedule the peer sessions. I include people who are subject matter experts on the conference topic, so we can evaluate any obscure topics that people have proposed. Once signup is over, the volunteers retreat to a quiet location with plenty of table space where the signup sheets can be easily viewed, shuffled, and clustered.
Before the conference begins, I draw up a preliminary schedule for the time allocated for peer sessions to take place. Over the years, I’ve found that assigning time slots of 45 -60 minutes works well for most peer conferences. Occasionally you may want to revise this schedule if a compelling session opportunity turns up; e.g. someone brings a long polished presentation that other attendees are anxious to hear.
Normally you’ll want to have more than one peer session scheduled during each time slot. An exception would be if a suggested topic is so popular that just about everyone wants to attend the session, though this rarely happens. A very small conference might have as few as two simultaneous sessions, a larger conference as many as four. Once you’ve decided on the maximum number of sessions you can start to chose the most popular viable topics.
This diagram outlines the steps needed to determine which peer sessions will be held, and to schedule the resulting sessions. First, topics are scanned for overlap, low interest topics are removed from consideration, and the most popular topics (based on the number of signatures) chosen.
After a final decision as to whether similar topics should be merged, the remaining topic sheets are checked to see whether the session is viable—are there attendees who are able and willing to facilitate and/or provide appropriate expertise? Expertise is not always needed, as discussion-oriented peer sessions often just require a competent facilitator. If a particular peer session requires specific attendees to be present, this is the time to ask them whether they will commit to being there. Most people are flattered to be asked, and happy to agree.
If expertise is needed for a group but not available, then the topic is not scheduled. This rarely happens, but it’s important not to schedule a session that can’t be supported by peer experience. I usually announce this to attendees, so they understand why a popular session isn’t on the program. If the conference is a repeated event, the organizing committee may want to consider inviting an appropriate outside expert to a future conference.
Once a final set of peer session topics has been chosen, scheduling them to specific time slots in the program is done essentially in the same way as a conventional conference. The topics are sorted into tracks, and each topic in a track is scheduled to a different time slot. One advantage over scheduling sessions at a traditional conference is that we have the signup sheets for each topic. By comparing the names signed up for each topic, we can schedule peer sessions to minimize attendance conflicts between simultaneous sessions.
The last task is to assign each group a place to meet. This involves matching the popularity of the topic and any resources it may need, like whiteboards or digital projection, to the size and capabilities of the available locations.
After the selected peer sessions have been scheduled in time
and space, the schedule is printed and given to each attendee. I also post
copies of the schedule around the conference site, including the places where
attendees socialize and where peer sessions are held.