Agenda 4Jan11/GLAM-WIKI review
- Remaining actions needed
- Approval of the completion of Liam's contract
- Paying invoices and expenses (expense claim forms are en route to Tango)
- Some results
- 126 registered attendees
- Photographs and audio recordings on Commons at commons:Category:GLAM Wiki UK 2010
- Signpost coverage of the event
- Overall cost to WMUK: ~8.3k GBP (~2.5k GBP of which was covered by event registration fees). Full details on the internal wiki.
- Things that went well
- Keynote sessions
- Attendance and involvement by Wikimedians
- Catering
- Things that could have been better
- Unconference sessions
- Some administrative aspects: booking accommodation etc. in advance, collecting registration fees on the day, paying invoices
- Wide advertisement of the conference amongst the GLAM sector
- Media coverage of the event
Liam's initial assessment of the survey results
The general consensus is that people are very happy with the conference. Particular standouts appear to be the catering, the three keynotes, and the range of issues covered. Complaints that arose multiple times included timing overruns, and lack of wifi.
A couple of interesting things that I note:
The people seem to be overwhelmingly happy with the prices we charged. However, it must be noted that this is a response from people who registered and attended, not those who were put off by the pricing, so it must be taken with a grain of salt. Also, despite the significantly higher number of registrations for the french conference they didn't actually have that many more actually appear on the day.
"Thursday & Friday" almost got as many positive responses as "Friday and Saturday". Given this was responded to only by those who actually did register I think we can assume that Thursday + Friday would be a better timing for the majority of people.
The workshop sessions apparently were not well received according to responses. However, it may be that people didn't see know what "workshop" sessions were as they were not listed as such in the schedule. Equally, the unconference wasn't so popular.
On the other hand, keynote and panel session types were popular and the latter should probably be expanded.
Word of mouth appears to be the most popular way of finding the conference - in include twitter in this too as it is a social communication form. Now that we have the registration and contact details of those who did attend, we can access those people again in the future to circumvent the "I didn't know about it" issue faster. Some Wikimedians said afterwards they did not know about it but this doesn't bother me so much (relative to GLAM folks saying this) as the event was, ultimately, not primarily focused on Wikimedians but rather on GLAM professionals.
Tom Morgan's presentation was a success by accounts from the "standout favourite" question, which to my mind cancels out the criticisms of there being too much copyright focus.