Comments on: More PASS Speaker Thoughts

By: PASS Election information about Allen Kinsel | Allen Kinsel - SQL DBA

PASS Election information about Allen Kinsel | Allen Kinsel - SQL DBA — Mon, 23 Aug 2010 21:50:36 +0000

[...] I have blogged quite a bit about growing the pool of speakers and we have made some very good steps in the right direction in this space. There were two fundamental changes I worked into the program committee. The first was adding a «speaker bureau» option to the speakers contract. This will allow PASS (where the speakers agreed) to hand off speaker info and abstracts to the local chapters that the speakers are near, which will hopefully facilitate some interaction between the chapter leaders and some local aspiring speakers they may not know about. There is still work to do to build and enrich the process around this sharing of information back out to the chapters but the first (most important) step has been taken. I also worked it into the summit speaker contracts that we would release aggregate scores to the other speakers presenting so they could know where they stood compared to their peers. This was decided as a good first step in open conversations generated by the discussion in this post [...]

By: jonmcrawford

jonmcrawford — Thu, 06 May 2010 13:51:59 +0000

Late to the party, but I say publish the scores (web and in the book are both good ideas), and that there’s nothing wrong with the Rock Star-ness. Everyone wants to know that they’re getting value for attending an event, so you want to know that someone worthwhile is speaking, not just show up and find me on the podium.

Plus, it would help all speakers to determine how they need to improve, and there could be things they can learn from the high scoring speakers. I don’t think publishing the numbers will scare anyone off any more than currently is happening, just knowing that Paul/Kimberly/Itzik/Kevin/Brent/Allen/Buck/etc will be submitting sessions.

By: Brent Ozar

Brent Ozar — Thu, 29 Apr 2010 19:25:05 +0000

Jay – wow, there’s so many good thoughts in there.

I’ve heard other people rant against some of the “hero worship” that’s been happening lately. To some extent, things like Twitter follower counts and webcast attendee metrics build up a cult of personality, and that’s not healthy.

You’ve inspired me to do a blog post for tomorrow! Off I go…

By: Steve Jones

Steve Jones — Thu, 29 Apr 2010 13:21:51 +0000

Jay,

There is something to what you say, but there is also some merit to showing off the speakers that the peers find more interesting. You might have gotten one of the exceptions there in terms of an unknown speaker giving a great presentation. I’ve seen lots of unknowns that didn’t do a good job.

I think we can push some people as RockStars, but more we ought to be trying to raise the quality of all speakers, choosing them based on not only content, but the ratings from PASS *and* local events. Get local chapter leaders and others to submit ratings of user group presentations and SQL Saturday presentations.

I would encourage more people to speak, but you have to have a thick skin, and you can’t get caught up in worrying about what other speakers do. Do your best job and teach people something.

By: Kevin Kline

Kevin Kline — Thu, 29 Apr 2010 13:11:45 +0000

Jay, You get extra points for using the words firmament and luminous!

I’m with you on this one overall. The compromise I might offer would be to publish the Top 10 from each track, as PASS has been doing, then leave the rest private. It’s sort of extending the old management axiom of “Praise in public, discipline in private”.

By: Jay Taylor

Jay Taylor — Thu, 29 Apr 2010 02:41:22 +0000

Brent,
I got an email this morning from a PASS chapter saying that a “mystery rock star” would show up at an upcoming chapter event.
Don’t get me wrong. I like SQL rock stars. I have personally talked to a SQL rock star, and he is a smart, helpful guy, even humble! He gave me a copy of his book, no charge. He answered questions for me via email. Sql and .Net rock stars help me every day via Google, Safari and my book collection. They are great. But I do think that there are drawbacks to star systems, and this discussion — about whether to publish speaker ratings — highlights one of them. I’ll call it the “Who do you think you are?” problem. That is, who do you think you are to believe that you can speak in front of other programmers – you’re no Itzik Ben-Gan! Organizations create, promote and use star systems, in part, to market themselves. Dude, would you go to Seattle to hear me speak? Of course not. You might go to hear Itzik, though. He’s a star, in the best sense, and when PASS is trying to sell pricey tickets to its events, it markets the speakers. The brochures and web pages tell this story. Call them rock stars, marquee names or celebrities. And I believe that SQL rock stars work for their fees and fame. But the star system can be a problem when the less-than-luminous want to get involved. At a recent programming event I attended, a SQL speaker spent the first five minutes telling us that he would never have applied to speak had he known that Rock Star 1 and Rock Star 2 and Rock Star 3 were going to be speaking at the same event. Yet after he unburdened himself of hero worship and personal inadequacy and so forth, he gave one of the best presentations I’ve seen – coherent structure, strong examples, understandable metaphors. Let’s get him on Sql Idol! If you take him at his word, he is saying he wouldn’t have come forward had he known the stars would have been there. It would have been too humiliating, etc. What a shame that would have been. Perhaps he was speaking rhetorically, and if so I suppose his message was twofold: he really is in awe, and – in case the rest of us didn’t know – we should be too! I can’t say to what degree this speaker represents the hoi polloi, but I can say that the star system can inhibit those who might have a few good presentations in them. If PASS makes the ratings public, this will scare off even more of those who are not in the firmament. There is a degree of intimidation that comes from the star system. You may disagree. It’s a pretty subjective area, and well discussed, so I’ll leave it there.

By: Brent Ozar

Brent Ozar — Mon, 26 Apr 2010 16:59:33 +0000

Jay – whoa, that’s scary to hear. When you say “PASS seems to support rock star posturing among its experts, which promotes unhealthy competition,” can you elaborate on that? I’m interested in hearing more about both how PASS promotes that, and how it’s unhealthy.

By: Jay Taylor

Jay Taylor — Mon, 26 Apr 2010 16:32:20 +0000

Ratings are very subjective, and citizen reviewers all enter the room with different expectations. I think that after a while the ratings could suffer from sabotage and pique, because PASS seems to support “rock star” posturing among its experts, which promotes unhealthy competition. I don’t support publication, but I would support highlighting popular speakers and noting their accomplishments, such as publication or MVP status.

By: AjarnMark

AjarnMark — Mon, 29 Mar 2010 21:10:37 +0000

Because it is part of PASS’s objective, as communicated to the Program Committee each year, to include some relatively new speakers, I think the biggest challenge will be finding something that does not penalize new speakers. That’s why I like the idea of highlighting veterans or gold medalists better than publishing ratings for everyone.

If PASS wants to provide additional details in the feedback that goes back to the speakers so they know better how they compared to others, that is fine, but I think separate from helping attendees with the next event’s program guide.

By: AjarnMark

AjarnMark — Mon, 29 Mar 2010 21:06:44 +0000

I don’t think PASS should necessarily publish speaker ratings, although if PASS wants to encourage the use of or somehow integrate with SpeakerRate, that would be okay.

Allen, in one of your comments, I think you hit on a key idea…make a bigger deal out of the fact someone was given a Spotlight session. It wasn’t until I became a member of the Program Committee that I understood what a Spotlight was and why. So, I suspect that many of the attendees don’t really know. I think it needs to be communicated better and more frequently.

I also like Brent’s idea about giving a rating/award to speakers that is published in the guide (ideally included on the short-list, not just the full blown book). That could be Gold/Silver/Bronze or something like “PASS All-Star” or “PASS Veteran”. After all, if the Program Committee keeps accepting someone to speak year after year then that says something about either the speaker or the expected content.