A BIG thank you to the organizers of the 5th annual Silicon Valley PCamp. As usual, it was wicked awesome. 650 Product Managers in one place! Wow!
The Cranky Product Manager was very impressed by the quality of the presentations, as well as the organization of the event. Well done, everyone. The organizers did an absolutely tremendous job. And to think that we get to attend for free! It’s amazing.
Except for one thing (and it is absolutely no fault of the organizers):
Ballot Stuffing.
The Cranky Product Manager (and no doubt your mother, who TRIED to raise you right) has one simple request for you:
==> If you are NOT planning to attend our PCamp, don’t vote on the sessions! EVEN if a vendor bribes you with free stuff in exchange for your vote.
If you participated in this votes-in-exchange-for-free-crap scheme, SHAME ON YOU.
You screwed up the room assignments and screwed over your fellow product managers.
Sparsely attended sessions, that nonetheless fraudulently garnered a lot of votes, were assigned to the biggest rooms. More popular topics were assigned to tiny rooms that ended up overflowing with people and unable to accomodate everyone who wanted to attend.
And a note to the vendor(s): Why are you even doing this? The Cranky Product Manager doesn’t get it. It does not make you look good. If no one wants to attend your sessions based on their own merits, why tilt the playing field in attempt to put the session on? Instead, why not take the untampered-with voting as market feedback on your offerings, and next time propose more compelling sessions?
{ 19 comments… read them below or add one }
Cranky,
Couldn’t agree with you more. My session got 60 votes and was set for 60 but almost 90 attended – from the chairs, the floor, the edge of the room and the hallway. Went to another one that got a lot of votes but turned out to be a very thinly veiled product presentation. I walked.
Keep up the crankosity. It will only help to improve Product Camp.
Tj
Thanks from the entire organizing team for the kudos…we are blown away at the success of this year’s Camp and the fantastic feedback and good words we have heard…thanks to all for being great Campers!
And, yes, totally agree with you about the improper vote solicitations…I have always shared with people who were concerned about having to ‘play the game’ by soliciting votes that the ultimate embarrassment is a ‘too empty’ room for the interest in your topic…people who have a great reputation and topic WILL get a session and the fantastic Programs team will put them in the right rooms if they have the ‘right’ data…trust the process! Thank you, Cranky PM, for separating this issue from the good intentions and hard work of this FANTASTIC organizing team…
See y’all next year!
Jen
MT @crankypm: #prodmgmt – Silicon Valley PCamp. Wicked Awesome, but for one thing. http://t.co/YIrl6aiW #svpcamp
@crankypm blog post. #svpcamp and ballot stuffing – Stop it, it makes you look bad. http://t.co/Urg8nqI2
+1! RT @johnsontc: @crankypm blog post. #svpcamp and ballot stuffing – Stop it, it makes you look bad. http://t.co/OrFqBZja
+1! RT @johnsontc: @crankypm blog post. #svpcamp and ballot stuffing – Stop it, it makes you look bad. http://t.co/OrFqBZja
+1! RT @johnsontc: @crankypm blog post. #svpcamp and ballot stuffing – Stop it, it makes you look bad. http://t.co/OrFqBZja
+1! RT @johnsontc: @crankypm blog post. #svpcamp and ballot stuffing – Stop it, it makes you look bad. http://t.co/OrFqBZja
RT @crankypm: Silicon Valley PCamp. Wicked Awesome, but for one thing. ##prodmgmt http://t.co/fECEkX0F #svpcamp
Silicon Valley PCamp. Wicked Awesome, but for one thing. http://t.co/uQPTcvhd #productmanagement
I felt the same way, strongly enough to go directly to Brian Lawley and tell him how disappointed I was in the “bribery” approach (oddly his email requesting votes was the only notification I received that session voting was open). His response helped me understand the vendor perspective better, and I do think there is a measure of blame we should assign on the practice of pre-meeting voting on topics. I will definitely be giving this feedback to the organizing committee. I think it is possible to do all voting on the day of the conference, live and in person.
Overall Pcamp is a great resource, though this year I felt there were too many vendor presenters (2012 was my second). I’d rather hear from a more diverse mix of peers and vendor experts. Perhaps an idea is to let each vendor sponsor deliver one session in the first set, letting the crowd ideate and deliver presos in true un-conference fashion for the rest of the day?
Would you mind shedding some light on the “vendor perspective” here, because for the life of me I just don’t get it?
@CPM: The perspective was that sponsoring P-Camp is not a small investment, and getting maximum return on that investment within the rules of the conference is an objective.
As a (software) vendor who attends conferences with marketing objectives, I understand the motivations, and wonder if I wouldn’t do something similar myself if I were on that side of the table, even if it is against my better judgement. Does this perspective justify the act? In my opinion it does not, again we (you and I) are kind of biased here based on what we want out of P-Camp (and what we want to contribute to P-Camp) as attendees. Given the size of SV P-Camp I don’t know if it is feasible to hold the event without vendor sponsors.
I think it does expose a potential flaw in the P-Camp process of allowing session pre-voting. The exact same ‘bribe & vote’ scenario could have played out with any speaker who had proposed a session prior to the conference, whether or not they are a vendor, though non-vendors likely have less means to offer something back to a voter.
“I felt there were too many vendor presenters… I’d rather hear from a more diverse mix of peers and vendor experts.” @Todd: It looked like every session suggested was presented (there were a couple of empty rooms for the last time slot), so it wasn’t a question of too many vendor presentations as it was too few peer proposals.
We’re always trying to encourage PM practitioners (aka REAL live PMs) to pitch topics…sometimes an active discussion about a common issue/problem is just as valuable as a polished presentation. Any ideas on how to do a better job of encouraging these presentations in future Camps?
@Jen I think your description “an active discussion about a common issue/problem” very specifically describes the value I am looking for out of P-Camp, and frankly that I expect. This year I didn’t feel confident enough to propose a session of my own but I definitely will next year.
As for ideas on how to encourage real live PMs to present, that is a tough one to crack for sure. I get the sense there is an assumption among attendees that a “presentation” requires a PPT file and prepared remarks, but have no proof to validate that assumption. Maybe we just have to hit people over the head with the messaging that this is intended to be an un-conference…maybe explicitly tell people no slides allowed? Maybe we can use some kind of polling to identify top questions/issues and solicit attendee PMs to fill spots as panelists/facilitators? Or maybe we can have some fixed sessions that are PM-context relevant (for B2B, for B2C, Social Media, etc.), and just getting those folks together in one place would initiate discussion of common issues? Knowing you are not going to have to present alone might spur more participation, as well as networking.
The Cranky Product Manager actually prefers prepared presentations. She has been to too many loosey-goosey “sessions” in past P-Camp, and has often left them feeling she wasted her time. Because, well, the people talking were not prepared. Further, there was nothing to look at when a bunch of people were sitting around kvetching, and the Cranky PM (like many others) is a visual learner. And finally, panel sessions can become annoying on their own because they often get dominated by the most obnoxious panelist.
Any day of the week, the Cranky Product Manager will take a substantive, information-heavy presentation from someone who knows what he/she is talking about over a loosey-goosey last-minute panel session. Why? Cuz I don’t like to waste time. And, having been in the PM profession for close to a decade, I want to concentrate on focused, advanced topics.
I know that the unconference model technically values the panel-oriented, unprepared model. But in the Product Management field within the tech industry, PCamp/Product Camps have really evolved into the only REAL educational conference/event we have. And thus, it is not suprising to me that our “un-”conference is also a “conference”. The code jockeys have lots of regular conferences, so the unconference fits a particular need of theirs.
Sorry for the rambling.
To sum up, I think the current presentation-oriented format is just fine. Without a doubt, the bulk of the morning sessions – which were proposed and voted on ahead of time – were higher quality than the ad-hoc sessions in the afternoon.
But I do think that PCamp could benefit by putting forth a “code of conduct” for session proposals and session voting. It might be unenforceable by the camp organizers, but hopefully the broader community will punish violators with their feet. Code of conduct would say “do not vote on sessions before voting opens”, and “no soliciting votes by offering prizes”.
Ahhh, thus the dilemma for the PCamp Programs folks…how to balance the expectations of those who want less ‘canned’ presos with the expectations of those who are looking for professionally done, well-tested presos by thought leaders…getting the balance right is tough!
Silicon Valley PCamp. Wicked Awesome, but for one thing. — The Cranky Product Manager http://t.co/IzYBUF1h #product