Same as it ever was? #SoFresh, Case Studies, and Snark, Oh My
I've seen some criticism of the Social Fresh conference that took place this week, some of it deserved, and some that I think misses the mark. Before I address that however I'd like to make it clear that what I'm seeing is indicative of every larger conference. So while it is the Social Fresh conference comments that nudged me to make this post, most of them could just as easily apply to any other conference.
First, to the piece of criticism that I think hit the mark. Case studies. Or more accurately, the lack thereof and the setting of expectations. The reality is that the Social Fresh conference has evolved a bit beyond its own marketing message. Its materials present it as the conference that is different specifically because it focuses on case studies, or in its own words:
"Social Fresh flagship events are one day conferences targeted for marketers, focused on case studies"
Earlier Social Fresh conferences definitely had heavy leanings in that direction. But at St. Louis they were virtually non-existent, and in fact one of the primary things the keynote speaker @ambercadabra railed against was the notion of everyone clamoring for case studies in the social media industry and how ineffective, and irrelevant they are in most instances. That doesn't mean the conference was bad, not at all, it does however mean that it set an expectation that it did not deliver on. And by having their keynote speaker go against case studies in general it gave the implication that the conference supports that view, particularly when combined with the scarcity of case studies at the event. Basically there was a branding issue, whether it was a one off event or whether the conference has evolved and its branding message hasn't remains to be seen.
Other than that, most of the criticism is the same you hear at any other.
"Give me more details, more real world applications, more finite information with clearly laid out steps to take". Sure, that would be nice. But anyone who thinks that you can shove a few hundred people in a room, and for a few hundred dollars be given very specific advice that will be directly applicable to all of them in an actionable way is deluding themselves. Conferences don't work that way, sorry. That's what small workshops and 1:1 consulting are for. It's why I held workshops with clients before and after the conference. Call up one of the speakers who you resonated with perhaps. Maybe there was someone in the crowd you met later who offers that consulting to your specific vertical? There is no one size fits all. To speak to a few hundred people you have to stay top-line, you can only get so granular before you will completely fail to provide value to the majority.
Lastly you hear "the information was too basic, it wasn't advanced enough". There are three separate reasons that you hear this:
- The person making the statement is attempting to look smarter than the rest of the crowd
- The person making the statement really is beyond the topic being covered
- The person making the statement is actually below the topic being covered and doesn't realize how profound some of those "simple" statements really are.
To the last bullet point, I find in most knowledge areas that you go through three distinct stages of learning.
- The early sponge who absorbs and regurgitates as much as possible without completely comprehending it all, but doing their best. This person is most concerned about finding and engaging those who they wish to absorb from. A bit of hero worship can come out of this which can blind them when they get bad info, but for the most part they are on the steep angle of the learning curve.
- The early practitioner who has comprehended much of it and begun putting it into practice. This person is most concerned about finding clients and portraying themselves as an expert in that knowledge area. They want very high level information, they've learned the basics and want to move on. These people want to talk about the extreme details of what they are doing.
- The late practitioner. This person has "been there, done that". They've created and evolved many theories of their own over the years. Perhaps they go and speak at conferences. They've finally realized the true art (and difficulty) in taking extremely complex topics and filtering them down to their essence in a concise and meaningful way.
Take the statement of the week as an example: "Learn to BE social, not DO social" (courtesy of @jaybaer) . The stage 1 person takes that and runs with it, perhaps not fully grasping its power but its certainly a good one liner to be used at a later time. The stage 2 person sneers and says "duh, that's just common sense, when are you going to give me some real insights?". The stage 3 person hears it and is blown away, not because it is something they didn't already intuit, but because it conveys so much in such a small package. That is an art, and as a consultant the usefulness of such statements is extremely powerful. *Knowing* something is not nearly as powerful as being able to *communicate* something, and sometimes what you gain out of a conference is the ability to communicate what you already felt. Don't diminish the value of that.
Side note: There is *always* someone at a higher level than you and always more to learn, the trick is knowing that and being open to it. And if you're anything like me you'll find that you are at all 3 stages concurrently with various knowledge topics in your life.
Matt Ridings - @techguerilla
10 Comments
also, for those who complained about the conference with nothing good to say, clearly missed out on the importance of the F2F. Not all value is spewed from the mouths on stage. Connections and discussions that happen based on the profound statements we hear is where the real gold is.
Great post Matt. Looking forward to more...
Summer
@summerjoy
First, we get feedback for every event from about 40% of attendees on average. Our events have certainly evolved because of it.
About 20% of respondents typically have a specific complaint, half of which is usually venue or logistic (too cold, bad food, bad wifi, etc). We listen to this of course and try to improve these points, but ultimately, something like this is going to go wrong, no matter how much planning goes into an event.
The other half is about content and we give this the most attention. However much of the feedback is contradictory. Meaning we will usually get someone that wants more panels AND someone that wants less panels. Some people want more case studies and stories, while others want less and prefer instruction. Some want higher level info, while others complain content is too high level. Overall, we aim for the sweet spot and continue to increase the level of our content, slowly.
To this point, your "distinct stages of learning" is brilliant. Actually fits exactly with the types of comments we get and the people making them.
As our events have evolved, the pure focus on case studies has loosened, and you are right, that is a branding issue, but probably mainly the case in St. Louis, which I will get to.
When it comes to case studies at Social Fresh, let me spell out our view of why they are important and how we feel it integrates into the event as a whole.
One, perhaps our focus on case studies should be restated as "we focus on speakers that have experience in the field" (agency and brand side). This means they have the stories, examples, case studies to back up the answers to hard questions from an audience of marketers. This is our focus, has always been, and is one of the main reasons we brand our events as focusing on case studies.
Two, we have not had much step by step instruction at Social Fresh events in the past. This is mainly a time concern. Since we focus on an event that is one day, instruction is tough to pull off. It takes more time the day or and more prep time. Case studies are examples and at a conference these case studies will come out but not in a detailed, down to the dollar and cents account. We do not blame companies for avoiding the finite details, and we do not intend to imply that case studies = blue prints. They are knowledge, inspiration, and confidence.
Three, and this was specific to St. Louis, most of our brand side folks were on panels in St. Louis. Some big case studies from brands that were originally scheduled to speak fell through, and the brands replacing them felt more comfortable on panels, good or bad. But, because of it, these folks, the ones with their hands in the social media pie every day on behalf of one company, gave no presentations. This has never happened at a Social Fresh event before, and looking back, was a mistake. I still feel plenty of value was to be had. But shifting to onus to much onto the observer to ask the all right questions is an imbalance we do not want.
Thanks for the great conversation Matt. Very smart assessment.
I'll also give her credit for trying to make the presentation "fun" by incorporating the zombie theme, but I came ready to take copius notes and probably only wrote down one or two things worth remembering. What I took away is that when your boss asks you one of those cliche, broad questions you should reply by asking an even vaguer, more rhetorical question. Is that the best way to advance your career and brand?
The content of your response if nothing else solidifies for me that from a business perspective at least we see eye to eye. You could have easily responded with a defensive, angry rant. You obviously care about trying to provide the best experience to the broadest swath of people you can. Outside of that I'm not sure much else matters. My hope would be that future attendees would read your response here prior to attending. It would be a real selling point to me frankly.
I'm grateful you took the time to try and clarify the brand where case studies are concerned. It makes perfect sense. It's more difficult to convey in a soundbite, but that's what good branders do and you have plenty of them around you to talk to about it :)
Cheers,
Matt Ridings - @techguerilla
First off, appreciate the direct comments and feedback about the keynote. In my estimation, keynote presentation are rarely about illustrative, instructional talks, but much more about ideas. That's somewhat the approach I took, and I understand that I can't always provide the presentation everyone loves.
Let me clarify a bit about my take on case studies, because I'm not sure what I said came across correctly from the stage.
Case studies are great, for many reasons. They can spark ideas, provide inspiration, show a new perspective, illustrate some data points (for the good ones) that can be used as a foundation to build on.
What I was railing against was much more the notion that case studies can and should be used as roadmaps or checklists, mostly because my direct experience has shown me that's exactly what some companies are trying to do. It's a shortcut to a strategy for some, and that's an unhealthy precedent.
But I'm all for sharing the stories, helping each other understand what works and what doesn't and provide as many examples as possible in real world terms. My real message is that while case studies are a start perhaps, or a spark, companies need to hypothesize, trial, test, learn, and repeat for themselves in order to discover the true value of social media for THEIR business.
Trill, if you'd like to discuss more directly and in more detail, you can reach me at amber@altitudebranding.com. In fact, I have lots of ideas and examples of non-vague, direct, and specific questions we need to be asking of our teams, colleagues, and management in order to outline solid social media strategy.
Cheers and thanks for the discussion,
Amber
Yes, there was some information that I've heard before- I know that you should use social media to provide value to your customers; that you should make it a conversation and not just sell sell sell; that measurement is key; that there is no single checklist to success; bla bla bla. Does that mean I didn't find the conference valuable? No way! There were definitely some new things I learned, and some things I already believed that were just drilled in further.
One of my favorite things about conferences, and Social Fresh included, is the chance to be around like-minded people. People that 'get it.' Especially in our industry, I feel like we are constantly fighting for attention, fighting for people to see us as legitimate (i.e. What? You sit on Facebook all day? That's not work!), Social Fresh gave me the chance to spend a day meeting people that could relate. It got me fired up and inspired when it comes to social media. And I think that is just as important as walking away with a bunch of new information...
I posted some of my thoughts on the conference and shared some of the advice I learned at the Atomicdust blog, if you want to check it out- http://www.atomicdust.com/blog/single/ten-things-i-learned-at-social-fresh-in...
What I learned at Social Fresh: Don't be a Zombie http://bit.ly/bgGI4G via @MissLiz27
Leave a Comment