Acronym

Interesting. I didn't even see the first part of the session. I don't have as strong a reaction, but I do find myself 'trained' over time to come in late since I like to sit up front anyway. So often the preliminaries whether entertainment or introductory speeches leave me a bit cold. The sponsor recognition, etc. come with the territory but I often prefer the alternative of continuing a hall conversation until the speakers start (whom I thought were wonderful).

I missed the opening session yesterday, but I know what you're talking about.

I think there is some value in this, in a very vague and general "drumming up excitement" sort of way. At the same time, I agree that it can often come off as kind of cheesy and forced. I guess it's worth considering though, with a group so large as ASAE attendees, and with such a diverse range of age and background, there's virtually no entertainment that *everyone* is going to agree on.

Whether this sort of thing would justify the expenditures made on the organization of it is not really for me to decide. It can be a little hard to swallow at 8am, but admittedly I've never been a morning person anyway.

I liked the orchestra (showing my fondness for classical stuff)... but the question about the cost vs the benefit is a good one. However, I thought the closing of the opening session (and the resulting snafu in communications in not letting attendees into the exhibit hall) was not well thought out. In the past, there's been some wind-down of the general session that has allowed exhibitors to slip out to staff their booths before attendees arrive... that was not the case this year. This needs to be rethought.

OMG...the open session made me feel like i was in some kind of mega-church...can you believe that the song actually had the word "association" in the lyrics...are we going to have a rap version at the closing ceremony? (because you know we heard those were kool).

When it first started, I thought the same as Jason, and I do see the social responsibility point you're trying to make with the "how does spending the money on the X benefit us as members?" The mega-church comment was pretty funny as well.

My question to Jason and others is - what would you have done differently? - just had John Graham start it out by talking, introducing another speaker, who the introduces another speaker? Personally, being a first-time attendee, I found it to be invigorating to have the opening session kicked off with some pizazz and excitement. If John Graham would have gotten up there and just dryly started talking to kick off the conference, I certainly wouldn't have been as excited about everything as I was with the way it was kicked off.

Anyway, perhaps that excitement would have been accomplished with a good video intro or something, but I really liked how they kicked off the conference with some excitement. It got me invigorated to be there, which isn't usually easy at 8:00 in the morning. They also got a lot out of the money they spent, as all of the music during the little vignettes was played live by the orchestra...

Lastly, I hope that even though you didn't like the forced entertainment, you did find some value in the panel. I know I certainly did. Have a great rest of the conference!

Sorry for the multiple posts... Wasn't going through, and I must have hit the Post button a few times. My apologies.

Following on Bruce's comments...i think starting off the conference with something energetic and exciting is a great thing...however every part of a conference doesnt have to go back to the theme...entertainment can just be entertainment. How about something "cirque du soleil"-like. We came into the room with techno music pumping energy into the crowd and with the staff using lighted airline pointer things to seat us...all was great! Then...then...chuck shudders. Cirque du Soleil...Montreal, Canada...Toronto...2009...hint hint.

Yes, enjoyed the panel/content.

Also, the video profiles/etc, were very well done - both production quality and in terms of what members were saying, etc.

In terms of what to do, sure something to get the crowd excited/energized is smart. It just needs to be something less cheesy and more authentic (eg, extending the videos somehow).

Jason

I sat in the "authentic" thought leader session yesterday and Gilmore cited the morning's entertainment/production as the kind of thing that qualifies as an inauthentic experience. Sometimes the thought leaders purely fly at the 30,000 foot level (or sometimes they're roughly on the moon) but it was interesting to hear someone weigh in on the programming from the podium, as well.

I find it interesting that you asked the question "from a social responsibility standpoint could this money have been spent on something else" about the opening session entertainment ... but not about the opening party, which you described as a "very nice spread" in a prior post.

If one expects a question like that to actually be taken seriously, shouldn't one ask it about everything?

In regards to the entertainment, starting with some excitement is a very key part of determining the psychology of an event and its attendees. (This year's opening wasn't the best example of that, however.)

It did feel as though the individual(s) responsible for the "warm-up" had been trained by a certain big-box retailer. You know the one.
A good video presentation highlighting the beautiful sights of San Diego, set to an energetic, popular song would have done the trick.

The safer route would have been to go over-the-top cheesy, although synching cheesiness with diversity would have been a real challenge.