I spent some time with the spreadsheet that Robert sent a couple of days ago. I appreciate the granularity.
First, I have a painful tendency to jump immediately to everything we could improve, without spending time calling out all the good stuff. So I do want to emphasize that this was a very smoothly-run show, with only a few exceptions. Most organizations would kill to have their annual show run like MOTM 2020. I don't want to take anything away from that. After-action reviews aren't meant to do that.
My general observations are about the MOTM content; we have a different challenge with deciding time and place. At the least, they should stimulate some further questions.
- We seem to have the hotel and food business down to a very acceptable level.
- The Sage presentations and presence was apparently better than usual, but some want a forum for Q&A
- A few were pretty dissatisfied with the content. I think we should actively invite them to participate in the committee that sets the sessions.
- Our members have no clue how governance operates: elections and financials. We shouldn't wait until next MOTM to correct this.
- We must choreograph our Annual Meeting far better than we did this one (I think this was on me.) We are a bigger, more mature organization now, and members expect more.
- Some think the board decides the session content and evening sessions. (One even implied I killed karaoke night!?) I think we should find a way to open this process up a bit more. Creating these event ideas is really hard, and we should consider trying to pull in those members who were most unhappy.
- We probably should look hard into an off-site event. (Although I personally am perfectly happy staying on-property.)
- We should look explicitly at how to make this a better experience for the Affiliates. Most members were surprised that the "booths" were so short-lived; that schedule was poorly communicated. Exploring a "swag bag" option is worth some effort. We should at least offer to help them make a decent presentation, although I'm pretty sure the only way to do this is through presentations not at MOTM.
- One member apparently thought the mfg-comparison session was "an Acumatica session." We must try harder to make comparative content sessions feel more exploratory.
- We really must figure out how to make more session guides available earlier, easily accessible, and with more detail about the *tentative* planned content. Session titles are just not enough.
- Everybody likes the headshot opportunity, but somehow several missed it. I don't know about that, but making a mirror available would be a nice touch.
We didn't get "best one ever" accolades as we did in 2019. Our attendance was flat with 2019. Next year will be a high challenge for us, and I think some of the criticism here can help us up our game.
------------------------------
Jerry Norman
VP, 90 Minds
Smartbridge Partners
512.419.1444 x112
------------------------------