by 
Not too long ago, Blueprint 1543 helped with the design and facilitation of a multi-day, interdisciplinary academic workshop. Based upon the reactions of the project leader and the participants, we regarded the event as a great success and were gratified that we could help. But every time we do an event, we take the time to consider what went well and where things could be improved in future events. From this event we noticed a common misstep that we want to discourage: placing the wrong people in the wrong places of responsibility.
It is common for project leaders to assign students, and sometimes recently-minted PhDs, the role of designing and handling logistics of events. We get it. Students and early-career scholars need support and giving them jobs like these can help them pay the bills. But advanced education in anthropology, biology, psychology, or theology doesn’t exactly make someone well-suited to booking lodging, arranging ground-transportation, selecting menus, constructing clear and timely communication with participants, or tracking expenditures. Let’s not confuse the skills of a junior academic with the skills of an experienced administrator, particularly one with experience with event logistics. Not only are academics rarely well-qualified to put on an excellent event that has any complexity, it is even the rare academic administrator who has the head and heart for this sort of creative hospitality.
Likewise, few project leaders are also adept at designing effective, high-impact events, let alone facilitating such an event. Wouldn’t it be nice if the project’s lead scholar can enjoy being a lead scholar instead of being the MC, logistics boss, interviewer, discussion-leader, schedule enforcer, and problem solver? Because we so commonly run our own classroom discussions, departmental colloquia, or even conference panel sessions, we academics think that we can do a passable job with running more complex events. And often we can do a passable job, but what if our event deserves an excellent job?
After about my fourth academic conference, I realized that most conference programs are not very strong and that the value of the event is in meetings with the interesting people who attend. And yet, we keep replicating the same conference models that don’t maximize the best parts of the meeting. We copy what we’ve seen because putting on events is not part of our professional focus or skillset. Doesn’t it make more sense to outsource our event design and facilitation to people with the skills to make it excellent? How much more effective could we be at accomplishing the goals of our event if we have the right team in place?
Are you a scholar with a public-facing event that you want to be impactful instead of merely box-checking? Are you a project-leader wanting to build a tight-knit interdisciplinary team through a series of workshops? Do you lead a philanthropy that wants to build a community of practice around one of your funding areas or wants to sharpen your funding strategy through productive conversations with subject-matter experts?
Blueprint 1543 can help.
