Office 2.0: Death To All Panel Sessions

I am enjoying the Office 2.0 conference, in general, but the stream of panel sessions is wearing me down. I don't really like the panel session format: too many chance associations, too many banal thoughts and second rate insights mixed in with the occasional gem. It's like being at a cocktail party with no drinks.

The problem is that I am leading a panel session later today. I intend to act a little more like an interlocator, challenging the statements being made and asking others to follow up or counter the comments being made. In general, the panel leaders have been too namby-pamby.

No, I favor more individual presentations, although I also like shaking up things by having sessions of different lengths. How about five ten minute presentations, all on some central topic, like "The Future Of The Document" where one person might argue for the end of documents, another that documents are forever, a third suggesting some other alternative, and so on. Or having a serious debate between two contrasting views on some topic, like "Productivity versus Connectedness: The Ethics of The Web Workplace."

Any way, I will do my best to make sense of a role I don't relish.

tags: office+2.0, death+to+all+panel+sessions

Comments

[Anne]

I was surprised to see that the conference schedule was almost entirely panel sessions... I suppose it's easy enough for the panelists to participate, just show up, but I agree that it doesn't make for the highest quality ideas.

A debate would be very interesting.

I like the ten minute presentation idea; it has something in common with my podcast jam approach which is to concentrate content by limiting the time available. I think that's worked out over all pretty well for the jam, although today we're publishing a couple longish interviews.

I have your podcast ready to close off the jam tomorrow, it's short and to the point, and argues against those who say that 2.0 doesn't mean anything. Gets tiring to have people keep questioning whether 2.0 means anything, it clearly does.

[Chris Heuer]

I think the panel session is now intended for involving more people who might be widely known, to get more companies who might compete with or support those popular people to sponsor a conference as a result. The original intention was about getting a variety of viewpoints in front of a large crowd at the same time to encourage debate as Stowe points out - without good facilitation, however, there is no point to them at all.

[Jeremy Pepper]

It's about good faciliation and good panel speakers. If you have people up there just to be up there, it adds no value.

Or, you do the unpanel. Let the audience ask questions. Or, get a controversial subject or guess at the future. There are tons of ways to make good panels.

It's not the format, it's the content. ;) Better content (so, qualified and interesting people) means a better format.

You did good, though, Stowe. :)