Mediating Professional Knowledge, Facilitating Personal Learning:

Theory and Evidence from Intervention Research on Conferences and Meetings

Encompassing Knowledge MediationAarhus, May 10-12, 2012

Ib Ravn, Ph.D., Associate Professor Aarhus University, Denmark, www.edu.au.dk/fv

1. My main points today

• See the conference as a venue for knowledge mediation

• It is dominated by the obsolete transmission theory that renders receivers passive

• This results in conference fatigue

• Alternative: Conferences that take participants’ needs seriously

• In intervention research, we tested processes that do this

• Results were encouraging: small changes, big impact

2. The conference: A forum for knowledge

mediation

• Definition: A conference is an event where two or more knowledge-based presentations are made to an audience

• An important forum for knowledge workers to get inspiration and new professional knowledge …

• … and for societal agents to communicate their agendas

• A major industry: $6 billion in US in 2005 (venues, food, lodging, transportation)(MPI, 2008)

• Where you get invited to speak about your research (and mediate your knowledge)

3. Two kinds of conference

• (Scholarly conferences: Many papers, by paying participants)

• Professional conferences: Few papers, by paid experts and communicators

• Today, the latter

4. The problem: Conferencesrender participants passive

As it is Drawbacks

Message Indifference, resistanceOne-way People: two-wayPassivity Use it or lose itQ and A Silence, or ”I’m smart, too”Debates Many tangents. Success is randomWorkshops Just so many mini-conferencesPanels Congestion on one-way street Networking Many people too timid; suckle their

iPhones instead

5. R&D project: “The Learning Conference”

• Four Danish venues (Radisson SAS, Hotel Legoland, +) and five meeting organizers (Danske Bank, IBC, +)

• 1½ years. Financing from Ministry of Economics and Business

• 30 professional conferences. 70-300 participants each. 1-day

• With meeting planners, we made program more participative: less one-way, more interaction. We coached the moderators

• Data: (a) Survey of participants. (b) Logs by moderators and coaches. (c) Interviews with meeting planners. (d) Observation.

6. Publications from the project

• Elsborg, Steen, & Ravn, Ib (2007). Learning meetings and conferences in practice. Copenhagen, People’s Press.

• Ravn, Ib (2007). The learning conference. Journal of European Industrial Training, 33: 212-222.

• Ravn, Ib, & Elsborg, Steen (2011). Facilitating learning at conferences. International Journal of Learning and Change, 5(1): 84-98.

• Ravn, Ib (2005). Transformative theory in social research: The case of the learning conference. Presented to the Danish Sociology Congress, Roskilde University, August 18-20.

• Ravn, Ib (2012). Møder der kommer os i møde. Fra passiv lytning til faciliteret involvering. Kursulex.

7. The transmission model

• Knowledge mediation is the transmission of a message from sender to receiver

• Participants as empty containers

8. Conferences as if people mattered

• People have needs for autonomy, competence and relationships (”Self-Determination Theory,” Deci & Ryan, 2004)

In the conference:

• Autonomy = agency. Participants must be acknowledged and be active.

• Competence: Participants need to contribute their experience and skills, and they want to

• Relationships: Meet other people. Networking. Exchange knowledge and resources.

9. Five design principles for learning conferences

BlahBlah

1. Concise presentations

2. Active interpretation

3. Self-formulation

4. Networking and knowledge sharing

●●●

5. Competent facilitation

10. The design principles (for your own reading)

1. Concise presentations. Fewer, shorter, more provocative.

2. Active interpretation. There must be processes that help participants actively relate what they hear to their own experience. Time to digest, think and talk.

3. Self-formulation. There must be opportunities in pairs and small groups for everyone to talk about the personal interests and projects that brought them to the conference in the first place.

4. Networking and knowledge sharing. Facilitated activities that help the participants discover each other as resources.

5. Competent facilitation. The facilitator must create a safe and trusting space where people will join in the new learning processes.

11. Question

• What seemed useful or interesting to you in my presentation so far?

• Share this with someone in the next row (5 minutes)

• We’ll hear from some of you afterwards

12. Fourteen processes tested

1. Concise presentation: Divide it in two. Presentation as interview.

2. Active interpretation: Buzz dyads. The constructive spin. Silent reflection. Question cards. Speaker is cornered.

3. Self-formulation: Participants direct the speaker. You have won to consultants, free of charge. Use input for your own projects.

4. Networking and knowledge sharing: Meet people. Tables with six people. Find a new neighbor. Networking lunch with gaffer tape.

13. Results

• The small and simple processes were most successful

• They made a big impact (3 x 10: “Gee, today was different!”)

• 60-70% of participants were happy

• 5-10% were not. “The professional cinema” (learning questionable)

• Meeting planners and moderators were very satisfied

• Buzz dyad was popular, and robust

• Progression and variation of processes

• Courage to break old routines

14. Processes today

1. My (concise?) presentation was divided in two

2. The constructive spin: “What did you find useful?”

3. Pair up with stranger. Induces people to make an effort. Network.

4. Buzz dyads: Verbalize important points & learn from neighbor

5. Cherry-picking: What did you then find useful?

6. Silent reflection maybe, in a minute, before regular Q and A

7. Please corner me in the break with further comments!

15. Today’s basic ideas

• To facilitate knowledge mediation at conferences, wall-to-wall PowerPoint presentationsmust be cut back

• Five design principles for participant engagement

• Interactive learning processes that allow participants to digest the input by reflecting and talking to each other

Thank you!