Ideas to improve BarCampBank unconferences
Posted by Jeffry Pilcher on September 24th, 2008
I just returned from BarCampBank B.C. 2008. It was the first such event I had ever attended. I was only there for the first half of Day One, but I can say without hesitation that it was simply an amazing event.
There were no speakers, no presentations, no agenda. It was 60 or so financial professionals — from two countries, banks and credit unions, and included folks from all positions (CEOs, IT, marketing, etc.).
It was, quite simply, professionals learning from each other — a free exchange of ideas. They simply got together and figured out what they wanted to talk about. As Mark McSpadden noted, it took about 45 minutes to set an agenda, vs. the 3-4 months it normally takes to plan an event.
Each topic is addressed in an open, round-table setting. Everyone is welcome to speak, and no one is considered a “leader.” The beauty is that it entirely eliminates those boring, one-sided presentations where the inescapable conclusion is to “buy more stuff” from the presenter.
Everyone knows the interesting part of a presentation is the questions and conversation afterwards. So BarCampBanks just get rid of the presentation part altogether. Brilliant.
If you haven’t been to one, you should go. These events will only grow in their popularity, if for no other reason than that people get to talk about- and learn about things that are really relevant to them.
That said, here are four ideas that might improve both participation in the events, as well as the overall experience for attendees.
1. TOPIC SELECTION
Part of the charm of the BarCampBanks seems to be the spontaneity of the agenda. The topics were basically set on a first-come, first-serve basis about 5 minutes prior to the first session.
But this created some problems. Some topics were redundant or overlapped. William Azaroff, one of the event’s coordinators tried his best to fix things, but it’s tough (if not impossible) to do this in 90 seconds.
The biggest problem was that there were topics suggested that few people (if any) were really interested in. If someone was first to write their topic down and tape it up in a time slot, it was basically a done deal. If no one shows up, that topic is cancelled and a time slot evaporates.
So here’s the suggestion. There should be a website prior to the event where paid and registered attendees can (1) propose topics, and (2) give an “I Like This Topic” vote for all the proposed topics. There would only be a chance to express support for topics (not a thumbs up/down option — you only need to know which ones are popular).
This does a few things. First, it makes sure the most-popular topics aren’t all competing in one time slot; they can all be distributed across time slots to maximize the experience for attendees. It also makes sure that the time slots aren’t assigned simply on a first-come, first-serve basis (which seems to run contrary to the notion of populist decision-making).
If a Wiki was used to manage the topics, then topics could be modified, edited and combined in relatively real-time.
Second, it allows possible attendees, fence-sitters and other curious parties to see what would be covered. These events are scary/weird/unfamiliar to outsiders, so letting them know what they could learn or talk about PRIOR to making a 3-day, $750 cross-country trip would probably increase attendance.
Third, using a Wiki+Votes seems to be very much in the spirit of this “social media” thang. I’m sure changing the nature of BCBs is probably a touchy subject, but hey, isn’t this supposed to be all about things like “engagement,” “democracy,” “innovating” and “adapting in real time?”
2. SPONSORSHIP
BCBs could have all kinds of formal and informal opportunities for sponsorships.
What about a whiteboard where everyone got to draw their own ads on it, or put their name and email address on it — like an interactive billboard or mural. It would be like an analog version of those “buy-a-pixel” montages. Maybe a small space is free, while bigger spaces cost a nominal amount?
Or you could use a corkboard where people could tack up whatever they wanted as long as it fit on a 5” square piece of paper. Again, charge for this or not.
There could also be a table for people to put stuff out on. I’m sure folks would pay $50 for an 8.5×11 space. The breakout rooms could be sponsored with one sponsor’s stuff.
Sponsorships for things like the t-shirts, nametags, lanyards, etc., could be more formalized, with a list of items needed at the BCB website. Like a signup sheet for a potluck.
The point isn’t necessarily to make more money (although more money = more better). It’s that there are costs that can be covered by firms who will be glad to fork it over. They just don’t know how to.
3. SOCIAL NETWORKING
It seems like there’s a lot of social energy at the events, but the opportunities to network feel really outmoded: Handing out business cards? Come on…
There should be some simple way for attendees to find each other’s LinkedIn pages, Facebook accounts, email addresses, blogs, websites, etc. I don’t think the Wiki cuts it. There needs to be encouragement and a medium/method for social connections AT the event itself. A sign-in computer? Nametags would help, too. (Both are sponsorship opportunities.)
4. NAME
I have to throw this out there: I don’t think BCBs will go mainstream or get as big as they possibly can unless they change names. “BarCampBank” just doesn’t seem to fit. The word “Bar” implies there will be excessive drinking (which is fine, but…). “Camp” is a strange allusion that could confuse people about the texture of the event (“This one time at BarCampBank…”).
It’s not that the event needs a descriptive name — that’s not the point at all. It just seems like there’s an opportunity to have a name that is more reflective of the events’ personality. BarCampBanks are open, collaborative, democratic, fresh, informal, efficient, egalitarian, volunteer, leaderless, sharing — all novel and distinct aspects of this kind of event, vs. a traditional conference.
Does anyone have any name suggestions? I’m still mulling it over.
Jeffry Pilcher, publisher of The Financial Brand, has worked exclusively on financial brands for the last eight years. In summer months when he isn’t knee-deep in credit union brands and names, he’s knee deep in Alaska’s rivers, fishing for king salmon. The rest of his free time with is spent with his wife, Tina, or loving his faithfully devoted dogs Dude and Sweet P.
Subscribe to The Financial Brand’s RSS feed here or sign-up for the email bulletin here.
Hey Jeffry,
Wonderful to meet you f2f at last. You’ve made som great points that will make future barcampbanks even better, especially for first-timers. Here’s my take:
1.) Topic Selection – You are spot-on with this insight. Those new to BarCampBanks need to have at least a vague idea what this crazy thing is all about.
I had the privilege of seeing Frederic Baud, originator of BarCampBank, do his moderating magic at BCBSF. At BCBSF, we had half an hour between sessions. One thing gained by this time was the ability to re-juggle the topics in slots before each time slot, rather than try to set it correctly at 9:45 am for the entire day. Topics could morph/combine/separate as the day progressed.
As to the second half of your insight, indeed, with BarCampBank NewEngland and BarCampBankSF, even though we did it in the same OpenSpace format, we solicited topic ideas on the wiki ahead of time so that attendees had an idea of the nature of what would be discussed, and therefore why they should attend the camp.
2.) Sponsorships: Jeffry, I love you man, but gosh, this is an UNconference. I don’t want to speak for Gene, Tim, & William, but we don’t need every square inch of real estate turned into an ad. (Though the ads over the urinals at BCIT were HILARIOUS.) PodCampBoston3 was on a MUCH larger scale than BCBBC (500 people, held in a Harvard Medical School facility), and the organizers were very shrewd to make sure that the single largest sponsor of the event were THE ATTENDEES THEMSELVES.
3.) Social Networking: Right on. That’s why I put a twitter connection spot up on the white board. That’s easier than trying to do that on a computer. Perhaps a separate white board for each of the major networking sites would be helpful.
4.) Name: I agree with you on this one, but for different reasons. The ‘bar’ in barcamp derives from the software term ‘foobar’. So BarCamps as opposed to other types of camps (like PodCamp, StartUpCamp, LifeCamp, MashupCamp, GreenCamp, SocDevCamp, FacebookCamp, PhotoCamp, HealthCamp, etc.) are about web apps and programming.
Frederic Baud originally created BarCampBank as a spinoff of the broader BarCamp in Paris. So BarCampBank implies the software/tech aspect of finance. With much discussion that does not relate to web apps or programming, we should change the name to simply BankCamp, MoneyCamp, FinanceCamp, or something in that vein.
Jeff: One of the most important tenants of BarCamps is that everyone is not just an attendee, but a participant. If you spot something that needs to be done, just do it.
Thanks for attending, you added a lot to the conversation. Here are some of my thoughts.
NAME TAGS
Would have been great. I am to blame for that. I forgot to bring the plastic sleeves and paper. We tried to scramble for labels but it didn’t happen. William actually brought a bag of lanyard straps. Oh well.
TOPIC SELECTION
I am not sure that I agree with your thoughts on having discussion prior. I see your points, but we choose to honor the ‘Open Space’ process and build it on the fly. It has been done both ways at various camps.
There could be a bit more discussion and juggling, but I felt William did a good job. I think we all could have been a bit more bold and killed some of the sessions right off the bat. There were a few sales pitches that people used the rule of the feet and just didn’t attend.
As the person responsible for getting people to pay and making sure the Wiki got fixed when broken, it was actually really hard to get people just to enter their names and pay let alone enter into a discussion and edit a wiki around topics. I fear that the agenda would be set by a few active Internet savvy folks and would not be as democratic. This would quickly fall into old-school conference agenda setting.
SPONSORSHIP
We capped it at 5 sponsors and turned away 3. We had enough money to cover the costs and that was enough. The food was good and the fees were super cheap at $35. I am not sure why we would need more money. I don’t think it would have made it “more better.” It is meant to be not for profit.
SOCIAL NETWORKING
I like your ideas. After you left, the whiteboard turned into a Twitter board and filled up with a couple dozen people (check Flickr for photos). Perhaps further info could be added to the Wiki.
NAME
BarCamp has a legacy rooted in Tim O’Reilly’s Foocamp (look it up on Wikipedia). I like the name. It starts a conversation. These meetings are meant to be different. A more logical mainstream name would take the mystery out of it.
Personally, I don’t think the goal is to go mainstream. There are hundreds of expensive conferences featuring one-way dialogue that cover off that territory. There is something magical about a gathering that just happens organically without heavy duty advertising and planning.
Applying too much old-school conference process and ideas will kill it.
WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE
More conclusions. Less open-ended discussions. This is one area that I was left wanting more. Perhaps the last 10 minutes of each session could have a bit more structure, although I don’t know what that would look or feel like.
I’d also pay more to see more of Morriss and Andy’s incredible Pecha Kucha rocking! It was awesome.
Usually, I don’t sound like such a hippie, but in the case of BarCampBanks, let’s not overthink it.
Just let it happen man!
Looks like I submitted at the same time as Morriss!
Great ideas Morriss. And I like BankCamp as well.
Hi Jeffry, you’re right, thanks God, we still have a lot to propose for improving BarCampBanks.
Concerning the name. Well, like everybody has to more or less learn to live with the name they received from their ancestors, we may have not to give it too much thoughts about it.
I think one powerful aspect of the format is that anyone can freely replicate and modify it with very few constraints attached (keep it open and non-profit). So anyone is free to experience new tricks and be prepared to see them heavily copied if they work.
One of the things that troubles me the most right now is exactly what Tim said. We should find a way to give punchier conclusions to discussions that we often feel amazing, but lacking subsequent actions. We may probably find a solution as simple as “asking people to define 3 tags to sum up their discussion” or “provide answers to 3 basic questions”. I’m really eager to learn the result of experiments to work on this.
Going back to the name, I’m not sure that this is the major factor that will prevent or not BCB going mainstream. I think that BCBs are for people who are ready to give some of their time on a week-end because they are passionate about innovation. This may not represent a very large crowd in the end, but BCB goes very much along Margaret Mead’s quote ””Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world…”
CLARIFICATIONS:
It isn’t about taking it mainstream and making it bigger for bigger’s sake. It’s that people want to learn from one another. BCBs shouldn’t be a secret, insidery thing. It’s something that only gets better as more people participate. If keeping them small is important, then there should be more of them. But I’d discourage any activity that stunts the growth in popularity of these events.
RE: NAME. I wasn’t suggesting a descriptive or logical name. I’m suggesting a different name could be more reflective of the event’s personality while still sparking that conversation Tim likes. It can still be cryptic, if that’s important.
RE: SPONSORSHIPS: (1) People want to do things as simple as drop their business cards somewhere. Why not provide a mechanism for that? I’d be curious to stroll a table and see what people put out. You don’t have to charge for a table. I’m just saying you COULD. The BCB “brand” dictates things be kept informal, so stuff like booths would never happen. (2) As these get bigger (and they will), more money will be required. (3) It isn’t about monetizing the events, and certainly isn’t about making them profitable. It’s about responding to what attendees would like. Maybe it helps to think about the sponsorship opportunities as (a) another way for people to network (e.g., maybe just limit it to business cards?), (b) a way to cover costs — all costs, including t-shirts.
RE: TOPICS – My specific suggestion isn’t really the point. It’s that there should be a way to make sure as many people get to talk about the topics that are most relevant to them. Is the first-come, first-serve system is the best way to manage it? It just seems a shame to close-out a slot, when 8-10 people might have got together to discuss something else.
BCBs should definitely not turn into secret happenings. They are open by nature, and should welcome anyone ready to give up some of their time on a week-end. By design, there is probably a limit on size for keeping them effective, so running more of them is more than desirable anyway.
RE: PROMOTION: at BarCampBankLondon, Thomas Barker organized to collect PDF flyers from many innovative startups around the world, print them and offer them on one of the table. Beside the cost and waste impact, this was a very good idea. I think that it would be great to have a mechanism (preferably electronic) allowing anyone to promote their activity on an equal access basis.
RE: TOPICS at heart, if 8-10 people want to discuss something else, they definitely should. Maybe we should make this clearer when exposing the use of the grid. Or we should think of an alternative way for people that can not express their opinion during the initial muddling to discover their affinity (Twitter, wiki page,..?).
STRIKE “
-sponsorships-” and REPLACE with “supporters.”BTW, Fredric, thank you for bringing this unconference format to the banking world. It’s a really great idea.
Jeffry, you’re welcome. But I should not take credit for that. The whole thing took off during BarCampParis4 with a critical mass of enthusiasts banging on each other. Pure BarCamp magic!
Couple of thoughts
- I am going to the TechCrunch “Meetup” tonight in Austin, I like the term Meetup, so maybe something like Bankers Meetup
- The term BarCamp is a leap for many to understand
- Figure out how to make the remote participation even more involved, although is was pretty darn good already
- I also really like the liveblogging idea (I was glued to the TC liveblog during the recent android/TM event), maybe this can be included somehow
Just finished reading all the comments, FredericBaud mentioned something that has been gnawing at me…
Basically … “Then What”
This is also one of my wife’s favorite sayings …
The point is, great discussion, lots of ideas, and that is valuable in it’s own right. But maybe in the last 5 minutes of a session, there should be a converted effort to crystalize some points or conclusions.
If there are no conclusions, that’s fine too, but some of the sessions I listened to there were definitely some things that could be distilled into a few nice conclusions.
This is also great for justifying to bosses in time/money spent on attending!
Great points, re: conclusions/action. I think taking five minutes at the end to state the summary points is a great idea (although that has the potential to devolve the conversation because, surprise, not everyone is pithy at these camps). But at the same time, I also think that developing an action planned based on ideas & discussion is up to each individual. It’s up to each of us to take and distill all of these great ideas, new insights, into something that each of us wants to take back, apply, and put into action ourselves.
My own ideas and action takeaways are not ones that were stated directly, but instead ideas shared that sparked my imagination into terms of how I could apply the idea in a different way to my own situation. But perhaps not everyone’s mind works in this way?
Also, I feel for those new to camps, sometimes these ideas are so mind-expanding, that it takes a few days to digest things discussed. Trying to bring it to a point at the camp itself might just be too difficult to do.
One of my favorite things about these camps and the nature of the current sharing tools is seeing the myriad perspectives from ALL attendees, via all the photos, videos, blog write-ups, tweets, etc. These are currently being collected on the bottom of the page of this camp’s wiki if others want to check it out.
Sounds like fun many had fun at the event.
What tangible and actionable outcomes resulted from the meetings? Everyone seems to like the events, but I have yet to hear specifics on tangible outcomes.
I also would recommend not having the videos displayed on this site. The audio is bad and in all honesty it makes the event look pretty slow moving and boring.
The most important thing in keeping BarCamps informal is running them at the weekend. We wouldn’t get curious people wandering along from moo.com etc otherwise. (And it completely eliminates recruiters!)
To start off, I personally like the name BarCampBank. Its fun to say, and if the BarCamp format becomes more well known its a way to make the association and know what exactly it is you are getting into.
As far as the way topics are proposed and voted on, I love that there is no voting. I love that its this organic, strange, collective effort to get everything in a place that people like. I like the idea of having a bit more time in between sessions to revisit the board to add or move topics.
I personally really dislike the thought of pay for space advertising/sponsorship/support. I like that the format gives the underdog a level playing field. I like that the sales, the advertising, and the pitches stop at the doors and its only about discussion.
@amy
Its hard to say what the tangible, actionable outcome from the event was. BCB’s aren’t about best practices or being presented a finished product and saying “that’s what you have to do”. Its about discussion, creating new ideas, and inspiring the attendees. I personally came back from BCBBC with tons of ideas, but it takes time to turn them into something usable. The value is in sparking that creativity and the ability to take what means something to you and your institution home and creating something unique with it.
Well, outside of capturing session takeaways, it sounds like these events are fine as-is — that is, for those currently going to them.
Carry on.
While I think the fundamental nature of the camp is excellent, they can always be improved, and I for one, appreciate this post and comments. (When someone like Ron Shevlin, who dislikes most traditional conferences, but loves BarCampBanks, you know you have a winner.)
Jeffry – to your follow-up point about Topics and democracy—I’ve attended PodCampBoston 2 and 3, which are similar in nature to BarCampBank, except that attendance is in the hundreds, and the conference agenda is determined ahead of time via wiki and other online tools. PodCamp has spread far and wide even faster than BarCampBanks. In part because PodCamps are bigger, and even more formalized, there is an entire ‘track’ devoted to hallway conversations. Everyone is encouraged to post their topic and where they are holding it. The same thing can happen at BarCampBank… no topics or time slots are ever shut out. Everyone is free and encouraged to have hallway or lobby conversations, and often these are better than the officially posted ‘room’ discussions. The funny nature of Camps are that the whole thing is comprised of the hallway conversations found at traditional conferences. So what happens when you make the hallway conversations the ‘official’ conversations?
Also, I think BarCampBankBC was highly successful in many ways. Attendance was truly outstanding, and the tweeting/blogging/photos/videos/mogulus coming out of it was excellent as well. To my mind, the biggest factor in judging success is how much and how well it was captured/recorded by the attendees.
Even though we only had 15 brave souls attend the first BarCampBank NewEngland, I feel it was also successful because of how well folks like Andy LaFlamme, Ginny Brady, Ron Shevlin, Gene Blishen, and Charlie Kroll recorded their thoughts, impressions, and takeaways via video, blog, photos and such.
How did I miss this thread?
I like this comment from Jeffry: Carry on.
Is there room for someone to come along and take a whole lot of Jeffry’s suggestions and create a Banking Meetup? Of course, and that would be fantastic.
Personally I like the BarCampBank format as-is. I like that the wisdom in the room gets to set the agenda based on what is happening right then. Doing a bunch of pre-work seems counter to what we’re trying to achieve.
It’s not for everyone, but it’s 100% right for people like me, and that doesn’t happen to me a lot.
A great conversation. Carry on indeed.
I have a session I’ll try to remember to propose for any future camps that I attend… a session devoted simply to “what websites and tools are you currently using?” I had never heard of mogulus, and we got to see how amazing it is first hand courtesy of the illustrious Mr. Dixon. I want to know what is the latest and greatest that folks like Brent can share with us, and I’m SURE that Roland Tanglao is using all kinds of cool cutting-edge web tools. I’m sure we’d have no trouble at all discussing that for an hour! (aside: the fact that a non-financial dude such as Roland Tanglao showed up and shared his thoughts is a wonderful feature of the camp format.)
Doug Ebner started just such a topic on the camp’s crowdvine. I responded but no one else did. :)
Surprised that no one has stepped up yet to speak to actionable items from this barcamp or real actions from previous barcamps.
Also, does anyone think I am wrong about the videos?
@Amy,
I think that BarCamps are very much of an “experience” product. Which means it’s almost impossible to explain logically why something that sounds so unorganized can produce any value. I think it did spread mostly because when you hear people that you respect telling you how great their experience was, you tend to think you should give a try. Then you get caught, or not, by what BarCamps are all about.
I’m also very bothered by how we could give more impact to BCBs by finding astute ways of creating momentum after the events. But it seems obvious that this format is already very powerful in creating bounds between committed people, and that’s something that should probably not be discounted.
Concerning videos, you are certainly right. But for most people who did experience BarCampBanks, I think they probably do not find them as boring at all.