Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
Evaluation and findings prepared by: Rachel Satterlee, Luis Pereira, & Lauren Satterlee, with help from Sara McGarraugh.
MINN 2014 IDEA SUMMIT EVALUATION F INDINGS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Survey respondents were pleased with the second annual MINN IDEA
Summit; 95% of respondents were satisfied with the overall experience,
91% were satisfied with the keynote speaker, and 96% were satisfied with
the venue space. With 235 attendees and 112 respondents, the response
rate to the post‐event survey was 48% (consistent with the 2013 rate of
49%). Respondents offered some suggestions for improvement within the
areas of speaker selection, breakout session content, lunch, venue
navigation, and time management.
EVALUATION OBJECTIVES
The MINN IDEA Summit Committee and MINN Board agreed that surveying Summit attendees would
be valuable for understanding which components of the conference went well, as well as gain insight on
improvements that could be made to future conferences.
KEY FINDINGS
SUMMIT CONTENT
Overall, satisfaction was high; 95% of attendees were somewhat to very satisfied. While still high, satisfaction was slightly lower this year (2014) than in 2013. Fifty three percent of
respondents were very satisfied as compared to 68% last year. Satisfaction was fairly level amongst
attendees with varying years of experience in the international field; the
highest satisfaction was from attendees with no experience and those
with more than 10 years of experience (100% and 97%, respectively)
while satisfaction was a bit lower for the 1‐5 year and the 6‐10 year
groups (94% and 95% respectively). Of positive note is that 65% of
respondents who said they would attend in 2015 were new Summit
participants in 2014. Citing general strengths of the Summit, two
attendees commented, “The professional but relaxed atmosphere
facilitated a great deal of conversation and made connecting easy” and, "Well organized, friendly and
helpful volunteers.”
71% of 2014 respondents were new IDEA Summit attendees
“Great
networking
opportunity,
great keynote
speaker.”
‐ Summit Attendee
2
Networking and professional development are the most frequently cited reasons for
attending the Summit.
Although networking remained the most frequently selected primary reason for attending the Summit
(49%), just over a quarter of survey respondents said they attended for professional development
reasons, up from 15% in 2013.Twelve percent of attendees (20 comments) cited the opportunity to
network as a primary strength of the Summit, with one respondent appreciating the chance to talk with
both speakers and exhibitors to discuss challenges in doing international work. Another said that
because the Marketplace was all in one space rather than in a long hallway, it “brought more people
together and made networking much easier.” Interestingly, the largest portion of attendees with 6‐10
years of experience in the international field attended the Summit primarily to learn about the latest
trends affecting international NGO work (40%). Nine percent of the attendees cited NGO collaboration
as a strength of the Summit, such as the convening of NGOs in one place (4%), the diversity of
organizations represented (3%), the opportunity to learn about current NGO work (2%), and the
sharing of best practices (1%). While networking, professional development, and NGO collaboration
continue to be core draws for the Summit, this year participants did not see latest trends or innovations
in the international sector as core draws.
A higher percentage of people found the keynote speaker to be relevant to the conference
compared to last year.
Ninety‐three percent of attendees found the keynote speaker to be relevant to the conference, higher
than the 85 percent who felt this way in 2013.Of all respondents, 78 percent strongly agreed that the
keynote speaker was relevant to the conference while 15% agreed. In addition, 91% were satisfied with
the speaker. Of the strengths of the Summit noted by attendees, 25% specifically described the
keynote address with phrases such as “very motivational” and “an inspiring event to start the Summit.”
Three fourths of survey respondents were satisfied with the breakout sessions, consistent
with last year’s results.
Almost 90 percent of respondents found breakout topics to be relevant to their interests (morning
sessions: 91%; afternoon sessions: 88%). Fifteen percent of respondents (24 comments) cited the
breakout sessions as a strength of the Summit by praising specific session topics, presentations that
focused on examples of an organization’s work, the fact that MINN had a volunteer host each of the
sessions, and the overall quality of the sessions. A similar percentage ‐
and the largest portion of suggested improvements for the Summit (20
comments, or 12%) ‐ called for strengthening the content of the
breakout sessions. Suggestions included focusing breakout content on
training of practice and theory related to development work, having
more rigor or “takeaway,” and having dialogue and exchange of best
practices to foster sustainable development that does not cause
unintentional harm in the long term. An additional four comments
suggested enhancing the speaker selection process to ensure high‐
quality speaking skills and an ability to speak to the topic.
The third most suggested improvement for the Summit (13 comments, or 8%) was to increase the
ability to attend more breakout sessions during the Summit (as was suggested in 2013 via 11
comments). Fewer respondents requested longer breakouts in 2014 (5 respondents in 2014, versus 8 in
2013), which appears to support MINN’s decision to lengthen them from 60 minutes in 2013 to 75
”I really found the breakouts to be more engaging, better hosted (by MINN) and more diverse than last year.”
3
minutes this year. Nearly three‐fourths of respondents also indicated there was adequate time for Q &
A. Each of the morning and afternoon breakout sessions attracted attendees with varying levels of
experience in the international field. Finally, three percent of suggestions (5 comments, in the top ten)
recommended that breakout session content (presentation and/or recordings) be shared online or via
email and four comments suggested session tracks or another clear indication of session subsections
(marketing, fundraising, etc.). In summary, concrete improvements were made to the breakout session
format and content this year, though there is a continued call to enhance content and speaker
selection.
Attendance at the panel discussion was down from 2013, but still well received.
Eighty‐one percent of attendees expressed satisfaction with the session. However, it was also the
second lowest‐attended component of the Summit and received some suggestions for improvement.
Seven percent of respondents (11 comments) said that the panel discussion was a strength of the
Summit, using words like “useful” and “excellent”. However, another 11 comments (7%) suggested
making improvements to the panel content (which fell within the top ten suggested Summit
improvements) such as: varying the topic more from year to year, making the topic more cutting‐edge,
and inviting a wider variety of panelists such as a representative from the government sector. Two
additional comments suggested ensuring the panelists are high caliber and experienced in the field, and
represent diverse focus areas. One third of survey respondents did not attend the panel. While the
panel was a strength again this year, there were requests for varied and innovative topics along with
diverse panel members.
Attendees appreciated some aspects of the Marketplace and the cocktail hour, but also made
some suggestions for improvement.
Falling within the top ten suggested improvements for the Summit (4%, 6 comments), attendees called
for a larger space for the Marketplace, perceiving it as crowded and noisy. However, as noted
previously, the fact that the Marketplace was in a room instead of a long corridor allowed for easier
networking. Of those who attended the cocktail hour, 74 percent were satisfied, which is comparable to
the 2013 rate of 77 percent. However, cocktail hour attendance dropped from last year, from 71 percent
in 2013 to 66 percent in 2014.
LOGISTICS
Amid mainly positive feedback about logistics such as venue space and lunch, attendees
requested improved time management and more facilitated networking time.
The great majority of respondents (96%) were satisfied with the venue space, a substantial increase
from 2013 (86%), though a few commented that the breakout session rooms were far apart and lacked
helpful navigational signage. Respondents were also slightly more satisfied with lunch (73% in 2014 vs.
63% in 2013), though the second most frequently cited suggestion (14 comments, 9%) was to improve
the catering quality and efficiency of service, including the availability of water, tea, and juice
throughout the day. Twelve percent of respondents considered the event to be well‐organized, noting
the logistics, event location, helpful and happy volunteers, and partnership with the University of
Minnesota. Other more commonly suggested improvements related to better time management
throughout the day and communication of upcoming activities with attendees (7%, 12 comments), as
well as more structured/facilitated time for networking, including suggestions like themed lunch table
discussions or a speed‐networking session (4%, 6 comments). Overall, participants were satisfied with
4
the logistical aspects of the Summit, though schedule communication is an area of possible
improvement.
Attendees continued to be satisfied with the value of their conference experience.
Despite slightly increased ticket prices in 2014, the same percentage of attendees reported the value of
the Summit as being equal to or greater than the cost. In this context, it therefore stands to reason why
the percent of those believing the value of the event was more than the cost decreased somewhat in
2014 from the prior year. In 2013, 21 percent agreed that the value of the experience was greater than
the cost, and 72 percent agreed that the value was worth the cost, for a total of 93 percent. In
comparison, in 2014, 16 percent agreed the value was greater and 77 percent agreed that the value was
worth the cost, for a total of 93 percent. Nevertheless, compared to last year, the same total
percentage of respondents said that the event’s value was worth or exceeded its cost.
Figure 1: To what extent did you feel the value of your experience was worth the cost of the event?
MARKETING
Participants heard about the Summit primarily through a friend or colleague, and secondarily
via a MINN email.
Like last year, the top two methods for hearing about the Summit were friend or colleague, or a MINN
email. Interestingly enough, this year, a greater percent (31%) heard about the Summit through a friend
or colleague versus email (27%), whereas in 2013, email was the most frequent means of hearing about
the Summit.
Figure 2: How did you find out about the MINN IDEA Summit?
The MINN website (12%) and MINN representative (8%) were again important, though the Humphrey
School’s Global Notes listserv was also a means for people who did not find out about the event
elsewhere. Usage of the MINN website increased slightly this year while marketing via social media
reached many more attendees, attracting 954 visits to the Eventbrite registration page via Facebook
and Twitter, versus 128 visits in 2013. One person suggested that MINN take a more formal lead in the
16% 77% 7%
Value exceeded cost Value worth cost Value less than cost
8%
12%
27%
31%
3%
13%
33%
23%
MINN website
MINN representative
MINN email
Friend/Colleague
20132014
5
social media interactivity during the event, including live tweeting and use of other platforms other
than Twitter for greater reach. Overall, marketing via word‐of‐mouth and social media had unique
impact this year.
SUMMIT ATTENDEE DEMOGRAPHICS
Three‐quarters of 2014 Summit attendees were new to the conference.
Despite 90 percent of 2013 Summit attendees stating that they would attend again in 2014, only 27
percent of 2014 respondents said they were repeat participants. In considering future Summits, 74
percent of 2014 attendees said that they would attend the Summit next year and 24 percent were
unsure. Sixty five percent of those who said they would attend the 2015 Summit were new to the
conference. In summary, the number of respondents who were unsure that they would attend next year
increased, the number of new attendees was higher than expected, and new attendees were more
likely to say that they would attend next year.
The 2014 Summit saw an increase in immigrants and ethnically diverse attendees.
The 2014 Summit increased ethnic and racial diversity from 2013, with 25 percent of attendees
identifying as a person of color or Hispanic compared to 16 percent in 2013. In addition, 19 percent of
attendees identified as first‐generation immigrants, largely spread across all experience levels. While
racial and ethnic diversity improved, attendees provided comments on other types of desired diversity.
The sixth most suggested improvement (9 comments, 6%) related to increasing the diversity of
organizations participating in the Summit ‐ such as organizations from DC, NY, CA, greater MN, and
diverse types of NGOs ‐ as well as attendee diversity.
Those with more than 10 years of experience were mostly likely to have also attended the 2013
Summit, at 45 percent of the total, while 75‐100 percent of the other attendee groups with less
experience did not attend in 2013. Professionals with 1‐5 years of experience were the largest group to
attend in 2014 (47%), followed by those with over 10 years of experience (28%). In comparison, in 2013
experience levels varied much more widely with 20 to 30 percent of attendees falling in each of the 1‐3,
5‐10, or 10+ years of experience categories. Overall, there was increased ethnic diversity at the 2014
Summit, and more participants with experience in the international field.
Figure 3: How many years of experience do you have in the international field?
MINN MEMBERSHIP
The 2014 Summit saw an increase in the number of attendees holding a MINN membership.
MINN attendees with more than ten years of experience in the international field had the highest rate
of membership at 63 percent, while attendees with zero years of experience were the lowest at 29
percent. The largest number of new 2014 members was in the group of attendees with 1‐5 years of
6%
14%
47%
33%
19%
30%
28%
24%
2014
2013
No experience 1‐5 years 6‐10 years More than 10 years
6
experience at 11 people. Only two attendees did not renew their 2013 membership in 2014; one with 6‐
10 years of experience and one with more than 10 years of experience. Of the 20 respondents who were
new MINN members in 2014, 40 percent learned about the Summit via a MINN email and 35 percent via
a friend or colleague. The most common reason cited for not being a member in 2013 or 2014 was that
the attendee was not aware of all the benefits of membership (43%, 19 people) and secondarily that the
price of membership was too high (32%, 14 people). The most common reason cited for not renewing
membership in 2014 after being a member in 2013 was that the topics of MINN events were not of
interest. Other reasons given for not renewing membership were a lack of variety or availability of
benefits. MINN did well retaining and attracting new members, especially among participants with 1‐5
years of experience, though reasons for non‐renewal should be noted.
SUMMIT SCHOLARSHIP RECIPIENTS
The majority of respondents who received scholarships were immigrants.
All scholarship recipients who responded reported they were satisfied with their Summit experience. All
were new to the Summit ‐ not having attended in 2013 ‐ though a quarter of those who responded said
they would attend next year and 75 percent were unsure. Each scholarship recipient found out about
the Summit in different ways, including the UMN Global Notes, a MINN email, the MINN website, and a
friend/colleague. Seventy‐five percent of scholarship recipients who responded identified themselves
as immigrants. Half identified themselves as Caucasian, a quarter as Middle Eastern, and a quarter as
African‐American (non‐Hispanic) or African. Fifty percent of scholarship recipients reported having no
experience in the international field, while 25 percent reported 1‐5 years of experience, and 25 percent
reported 6‐10 years of experience. Related to MINN membership, three‐fourths reported not being
members. Half of these respondents cited the price of membership as a barrier, others reported status
as international fellow who will be leaving the country soon and others reported wanting to learn more
about MINN's work by attending the Summit, but expressed that they were not currently working for
an NGO. The other fourth of scholars reported becoming a new member in 2014. Scholarships proved
to be a good method for engaging diverse participants.
2013 VS. 2014: SUCCESSES IN IMPROVING THE 2ND IDEA SUMMIT
In the 2013 evaluation, attendees’ suggestions for improvement were collected into five considerations
for use when planning the 2014 Summit. Presented below are the five considerations from 2013, paired
with the relevant improvements and considerations from 2014.
2013 Consideration Addressed in 2014? 2014 Progress
Consider breakout session format and timing.
Addressed
Fewer respondents requested longer breakouts,
which supports decision to lengthen them to 75 minutes
Requests to revisit session descriptions & tracks
Repeat requests for the ability to attend more than two breakouts
Find a venue space that is more contained to assist with navigation and maximize conference time.
Addressed
More satisfaction with location and venue space
Locate breakout session rooms closer together
Increase navigational signage to rooms
7
Weight speaker selection towards those who can offer practical “on the ground” experience and high‐level (beyond basics) material.
Somewhat Addressed
90% found the sessions relevant to their interests
Speakers need to provide more rigor, more content on practice & theory related to development work
Repeat requests to provide “takeaway” content
Improve speaker vetting process (e.g., diverse
sectors, skilled speaking, experienced in field)
Revise pre‐Summit advertising techniques to draw in attendees from diverse backgrounds.
Addressed
Greater ethnic diversity this year; and 1/5 were first
generation immigrants
Marketing: Friend/colleague& professional referrals
were most common, and the rate that diverse attendees’ organizations sponsored of the event was higher than the general population
Consider offering strategic networking opportunities to facilitate greater collaborations and partnerships.
Not
Addressed
Networking was the most important reason for
attending, but facilitated networking opportunities was a repeat request in 2014. Implementation could help improve cocktail reception attendance & satisfaction, and would lend requested structure to breaks and lunch.
LOOKING FORWARD: 2014 FUTURE CONSIDERATIONS
The following are the top five considerations for improving the Summit based on 2014 survey
responses.
1. Consider the implication of maintaining ticket sales for an annual conference if the IDEA
Summit draws primarily new attendees.
The committee needs to explore the reasons for low returning attendees, and how this affects
future success and participation rates if this continues to happen year after year.
o Possible reasons to consider: Smaller organizations might need to rotate attendance
amongst staff.
2. Provide strategic networking.
Consider offering strategic networking during transition times, such as breaks, lunchtime, and
the cocktail reception.
o Incorporating strategic networking could improve communication throughout the day,
as could appointing a volunteer timekeeper and establishing a method to announce
transitions between sessions.
3. Continue fostering breakout session quality and rigor.
Ensure more rigor and provide theory take‐away and examples of on‐the‐ground practices.
Provide opportunities to attend more than two breakout sessions.
Screen for skilled speakers.
Consider providing speaker PowerPoint presentations and/or videos of the presentations online
or via email, a repeated suggestion from 2013.
8
4. Consider link between low and decreasing panel attendance and the request for more
innovative content.
Recruit panelists from organizations with diverse missions and from diverse sectors.
Consider intentionally choosing a cutting‐edge, innovative, and engaging topic
5. Increase diversity of attending organizations and continue increasing attendee diversity.
Extend invitations to organizations based where international development work is prominent
such as Washington D.C., New York, and California.
Extend invitations to organizations, schools, and groups working in Greater Minnesota.
9
APPENDIX: 2014 VERUS 2013 IN GRAPHS
2014:
2013:
10
2014:
2013:
11
2014:
2013:
12
2014:
2013:
13
2014:
2013:
14
2014:
15
2014:
16
2014:
2013:
17
2014:
18
2014:
19
2014:
2013:
20
2014:
2013:
21
2014:
2013:
22
2014:
2013:
