How To Get Your Conference Talk Accepted | Hacker News Reader

How To Get Your Conference Talk Accepted

chadfowler.com

46 pointschadfowler10 comments

That's a post I've been meaning to write for a while.

Back before I had a reputation as a fairly decent (tech conference) speaker, I had a proposal which was accepted at the Business of Software, which was a bit of a reach for me honestly. I'll find the exact text if anyone is interested, but it hit three bullet points:

1) Social proof that I had something interesting to say (I run a blog, somebody you the conference organizer knows has cited me favorably before)

2) A one-sentence pitch for why my topic would be interesting and topical for the attendees

3) The (accurate) prediction that people would talk about my talk even after the conference was over, because (for a for-profit conference) this helps accomplish their #1 business goal, which is selling more tickets for next year (n.b. point #1 also speaks to selling tickets if you can claim an audience which will follow you to the conference)

Hmmm... I'm not sure I'd agree here. At 44Con[1] we get an average of between 100-150 talk submissions a year. Just reviewing all the talks once as part of the CFP panel is a herculean effort. If everyone had a 2 minute intro to their talk I guarantee that after the first few none of them would be watched by anyone on the panel simply because you're looking at adding 5 hours to each scan through the submissions.

The enthusiasm is a strong and valid point. People who are keen to come always score higher than people who can't be bothered putting the effort in.

I would suggest that anyone who wants to get a talk accepted needs to:

* Structure their submission properly

* Make sure they provide sufficient detail for reviewers to identify what the talk is about

* Provide enough detail for the reviewer not to have to google obscure terms

* Have somewhere on the Internet (e.g. a blog, github etc.) that allows reviewers to easily work out where the speaker's skills lie

* Have video or slides from the speaker available - e.g. on Youtube so reviewers can see how they speak. If you haven't spoken at a conference before, make a video of a howto describing something related to what you're talking about

[1] - http://44con.com/

If everyone had a 2 minute intro to their talk...

If everyone starts including a 2 minute intro, then it won't make you stand out anymore, and you'll need to take a different tack.

The reason I sent Chad that video was to demonstrate passion. Doing what everyone else does doesn't accomplish that.

I recommend taking this as an illustrative example, not a step-by-step guide.

Lets be honest though, if every presenter included a 2 minute video it would make the process faster, not slower.

100 presentations x 2 minutes is a little over 3 hours. That's not that bad. I'd imagine reading and debating a 2 page questionnaire would take longer.

If everyone starts including a 2 minute intro, then it won't make you stand out anymore, and you'll need to take a different tack.

Having helped with conferences that strongly encourage submitting videos along with session proposals - folk would likely still stand out.

Coz a surprising number of those videos still suck quite badly...

I feel a little sad that you felt you had to send a video to demonstrate passion. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying it was the wrong thing to do and it does show you're making a serious effort, but your talk should stand up on it's own merit. FWIW A talk on how to use vi like a pro I would expect to be well received at a developer focused conference. If I was there I'd certainly attend the talk and no doubt I'd learn a lot.

We have submissions where the passion comes across in the content - in fact we've had some where people have said they really want to come and hang out at the con and this is the easiest way for them to do it (as we cover airfare and accommodation).

Glad to see the expert advice. However, I'm a little stunned to think 5 hours is considered too much trouble to go to, to ensure qualified speakers at a conference. I know they're for-profit, but when I plunk down $1000+ I'd think that enough to pay for 5 hours of labor for this critical item.

Sorry, that's 5 hours in addition to reading through each abstract, spending time checking linkedin, github and other profiles, watching videos of other talks they've done, doing due diligence to make sure the speaker's presence isn't going to cause the conference problems and that's pretty much for each person on the CFP panel (as far as they're willing to do it. I do the whole thing on each and every submission we receive).

I do this because it's easy to have a snappy title and a good sounding abstract that pushes the right buttons, only to end up with someone that doesn't live up to it because they're bad at communicating, or they wrote the abstract before doing the research and didn't get round to it until the night before the conference and so on.

And while we're more around the $500 mark than $1000 your point is absolutely valid. If you can't take pride in your work and do a proper job then you shouldn't really do it at all, whether it's running a conference or cleaning windows.

This applies to everything you do which depends on review.

Want a particular job? Put in more effort than everyone else. Create a ‘I want to work for you’ website. Be prepared at the interview. Understand everything about the organisation. Quote its founders.

Want to have your paper accepted? Do a little research about what they are looking for. Contact the reviewers directly and ask for help. Get your article reviewed by people who have been accepted previously.

Want to have your RFQ response win? Read the requirements carefully. Make the reviewers jobs very easy. Address criteria directly and clearly. Ask questions.

I am consistently surprised by how little effort the average person puts in to any reviewed endeavour. It really doesn’t take that much effort to stand out.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com