Social Media Breakfast: Singapore 2 - The Failure Part
May 25, 2008 – 7:34 pm | by Daryl TayAs much as I think SMB:S2 definitely did better than the first, there are a couple of things that bug me:
1) Retention metrics
2) RSVP-ing
Retention Metrics
I ran through the name list from the last SMB and looked for overlaps with today and it showed that only 17 out of 34 people who came for the first SMB, also came for the second. A 50% attrition rate is pretty scary, especially when the feedback we got from the first one seemed largely positive.
RSVP-ing
A rough count on the Facebook page shows that about 24 of the 62 people who said “yes” to coming, did not appear in the end. That’s about 38%. Luckily this was offset partially by people who said “maybe” but came in the end, as well as people who aren’t on Facebook who came, but the point is: someone has to pay for the food/venue. We’ve been lucky enough to have a great sponsor in Caleb for the last two rounds, but not turning up means we’re potentially wasting money by over-ordering.
I have a few solutions to this:
1) Stop mass-catering. ie each person pays for him/herself, which could end up in the region of $20/person including drinks and venue charges.
2) Make the event invitation-only with a combination of registrations and/or white/black listing.
3) Take the amount of “yes” RSVPs on the Facebook event page and cut down by 30% to save cost, but run the risk of running out of food.
Feedback
So in light of this I’d like to hear feedback from both those who came and those who didn’t. Was there a problem with the timing? Location? Just didn’t feel like coming? Overslept? No value to be gotten out of it? I’m curious to know so that you can help us improve the event.
If you did come yesterday, do you want more or the same, or something different? What would make you come back again? What wouldn’t make you come back again? Is there a “fatigue” developing due to the high number of events (this week alone had three or four). Post anonymously if you must, but frank and honest feedback/constructive criticism will definitely help myself and the other co-organisers hold a better event in the future.
I know there are people who are really into building the community (you know who you are!) and I thank you for supporting us, your feedback will definitely be welcome too! If the results show that we’re the only people who’ll take SMB seriously, perhaps we’ll need to work around that.
Tags: constructive criticism, feedback, listening, metrics, retention rates, rsvp, Singapore, smb, social media, social media breakfast singapore
19 Responses to “Social Media Breakfast: Singapore 2 - The Failure Part”
By Jerrick Lim on May 25, 2008 | Reply
At least for the retention metrics bit, I have to say that you’re reading way too much into it, there’re always bound to be people who can’t make it, didn’t register down onto the notebook, didn’t know etc. etc. You can never account for all these factors but they usually play a big role in the numbers that end up “showing up”. And shouldn’t we be looking for MORE new people as opposed to “old” people showing up.
As for the RSVP thing, I’ll be really honest and say looking at the venue, i don’t think it could have accommodated any more people than were already there in the first place. But even aside from that, FB is hardly the most formal way to announce one’s intention to be at an event no? I think FB numbers will always need be taken with a shot or two of salt.
The SMB will always be a great way for the blogging community to come together, so maybe there’ll need to be further outreach *shameless pimping* to other communities than Pingsters, even so far as to create a SMB website badge or something. Just a thought. Create a website, and make the event a more formalised scheduled affair. That may mean that we’ll have to pay… but hey what can one do.
By yixiaooo on May 25, 2008 | Reply
Hey Daryl,
Thanks for hosting the event.
I didn’t know what to expect for my first social media breakfast but I was serious relieved by how informal it was. I think maybe you could bring back speakers? Or maybe we could have a roundtable of some sort to make it more organized?
Er, I know this sounds totally WTH-prissy but it was a little warm and I felt drained towards the end. Ok you have every right to ignore this part of the comment. haha
By Yuhui on May 25, 2008 | Reply
Hey Daryl,
I didn’t put my name down in the name list because I’d done so the last time. I thought of the list as a registration list, not an attendance list. I dunno if other returnees thought the same way. If there was a substantial number of them, then your Retention metric is basically useless.
By Daryl Tay on May 25, 2008 | Reply
@Jerrick: Yeah I think the “new” people part turned out really great. I think I met as many people yesterday as I did at the first SMB! As much as FB events are iffy and not the most formal way, I just with people would have a little more thought before clicking “yes”. I mean a “maybe” would’ve been better than a yes cos at least it wouldn’t inflate the numbers too much. Btw website/badges are in the works! Stay tuned
@Yixiao: Hey you’re right it was a bit warm. But better than it raining =) We’ll be mindful of the aircon in the future. You think you’d like a roundtable discussion?
@Yuhui: hey don’t worry there’s no double-counting. Basically I looked at the list from the first SMB and counted off it. It’s independent from people who added their names to the registration for the first time on Sat.
By ladyironchef on May 25, 2008 | Reply
Only 17 of the intital 34 came? I was under the impression quite a lot people were from the first SMB. Anyway its good that we have new blood, mayb the intital people got something on and couldn’t make it
Mayb everyone buy-your-own will be a good idea to test out in SMB:S3, if we do not have a sponser for the next one.
The RVSP part, people who said yes but didn’t come, i guess thats pretty common, sleep late, last min lazy to come, last min got something on, etc. So cant reallly be helped.
I guess the buy-your-own food will solve the problem as we wont over-order for the number of people going. So if last min got people didn’t turn up, we wont need to incur the additional cost
By Jonathan Wong on May 25, 2008 | Reply
Make it a high tea in the early afternoon, and I guarantee you a lot more of those “maybes” will come. Lots of folks use Saturday morning to make up sleep for the whole week.
By coleman on May 25, 2008 | Reply
As with SMB1, my expectations for SMB2 were pretty low, so the event was fine. I got to meet a few new people, catch up with old friends, and generally had fun.
But if I was there expecting good discussions on Social Media, I would have been quite disappointed.
Also, for free events, 30% no-shows is quite typical.
By Derrrick Kwa on May 25, 2008 | Reply
I’m definitely not in favor of doing this invite-only. Personally I would want to keep this as open as possible. We’ll discuss more about the cost issues when we get down to planning the next one yeah?
Not sure about the metrics because we didn’t really do a proper count.
By Daryl Tay on May 26, 2008 | Reply
@Derrick: My guess is they’re quite accurate. even if they’re not fully representative of the true number, I don’t think we have closer figures that can shed any more light on it.
@Coleman: Good point. Y’think we should incorporate both sides of it? Like a 45 min rountable (similar to the ad:tech meeting) and then the rest of it can be open discussion?
@Jonathan: The timing is always a bitch. Put it in the morning and people have work, the later the day goes on the more likely people have personal stuff. It’s frustrating!
By Derrrick Kwa on May 26, 2008 | Reply
Maybe we can get a “order your own”, but the sponsor pick up the tab at the end. That way, we leave it open, and don’t have to charge (which is quite important to me, tbh), but we don’t have the issue of leftover/shortage of food.
I actually like the morning-ish timing. Gives more flexibility for things after. For example, a group of us went out for lunch together after the event on Saturday, until 4+.
On another note, I’d say to not worry too much about the numbers/metrics from an absolute perspective. It’s not so much the number of people as what we each gained out of it. Maybe some people who came for the first felt that it wasn’t a right fit for them, and that’s perfectly fine.
I’m with Coleman in that I would like this to be informal and fun (at least that was my intention in starting it). There are lots of formal events with formatted discussions and all, and there’s a place for that, but I would want this to stay relatively informal and lighthearted, as a place to catch up with and make friends, not just business contacts or anything, if you know what I mean.
By DK on May 26, 2008 | Reply
I guess you are reading too much into the numbers. All these are common at events (especially for Singapore).
I think the biggest problem is that not much social media discussion was taking place at the event. Perhaps we should try do something to set the direction of the discussion at SMB 3.
By claudia on May 26, 2008 | Reply
Hey Daryl, having missed the 1st one, I’m very glad I attended the 2nd. Although I did feel that there’s lack of SM discussions, but I’m sure some of us did manage to get good conversations going among the small groups. The turn out for the day was very good already and if there’s more, we might not be able to be that comfortable. The group will grow eventually. The next thing you know, you might have to hold SMB4 at a conference hall or something!
Have to agree that a roundtable discussions to kick thing off at SMB3 might be good. Or even have some topics open for discussions among the groups. Ehh… I got some ideas. I think it’ll be easier to share over msn. Let’s bring the discussion there when we’re both online ya.
Looking forward to SMB3!!
By Shannon on May 26, 2008 | Reply
Thanks for organising, Daryl. I thought it was a blast.
I’d say keep the event free, but cater for 50% of the RSVP list (or expected attendance). Not everyone’s going to eat anyway, and if it’s a free event, it’s ok for the food to run out. I didn’t actually get a chance to eat cos I was busy meeting and talking to people. Which is why I thought it was great.
By Daryl Tay on May 26, 2008 | Reply
@DK: Haha well we did have a good short discussion about racist bloggers and XX!!
@Claudia: Hmmm. When we’re both online? You mean 24/7? =))
@Shannon: That’s true I didn’t eat much either. The leftovers that day can speak for that too!
By brian on May 26, 2008 | Reply
Well, what the community wants, the community gets -)
that’s what i like to think about events like these organised by bloggers (well, namely @uniquefrequency & @derrickkwa)
well, i think overall, SMB2 was a positive light, it’s a great casual excuse from bloggers of different walks of life to meet other bloggers, and how we can continue to build this scene.
it’s the same with local music, we always attend gigs just to see what’s going on despite the difference in genre and style..
so perhaps the next SMB will see some casual questions put forward by speakers and presenters? perhaps -)
By Tania on May 27, 2008 | Reply
As an events organizer myself, I sympathize with you about the “Attendings” who didn’t show but unfortunately, that’s the norm. What we normally do for all events is automatically cut the attendance by 20% when putting in an F&B catering order. Hasn’t failed me yet.
Re: Returning visitors vs newbies, I look at it this way: keep having smallish, fairly regular gatherings (once a month/once every 2 months?) to establish the event/build cred. With that level of frequency, you probably won’t have the same faces at every one, but you’ll be able to cater to differing schedules and overall get to meet more folks. I anticipate each event will then have a nice mix of returners + newbies.
Having a speaker in for a fireside chat every now and then (maybe 2-3 times a year?) will be a nice addition and provide a fresh injection of insight for future/ongoing discussion.
My $0.02
By Robert A. Henru on May 27, 2008 | Reply
Hi Daryl,
sorry couldn’t make it this time round. Hope I won’t miss the next one! I believe you guys had a great time.
Thanks for your persistent effort in organizing SMB!
Robert
By Mark Khoo on May 28, 2008 | Reply
Hey Daryl,
Thanks for having me! It was great to know that the ppl going there were so laid back and informal. I was talking to ppl i didn’t recognize until I saw some of their pics in the marketing magazines, lol…
It was my first time so i was kindda clueless as to what I was suppose to do or wait for, mayb bringing back the roundtable or speakers like some of the others suggested, so the noobs like myself wouldn’t be lost?
But great job overall!
Mark
By Daryl Tay on May 28, 2008 | Reply
@Brian: Haha trust you to give the music analogy! I think the exposure that you mention is great. Both 1 and 2 proved that it seems to work great at opening boundaries. Maybe 3 onwards needs to move a little forward from that.
@Tania: Learning opportunity =) I like your $0.02. I think we should look at that “model” a little bit. It’s a good way to build momentum and as you mentioned, cred.
@Robert: You were missed! I’ll see you at the next =)
@Mark: Hey thanks. I think you highlighted a great point. I think we took it for granted that people knew what to do (and my arriving late didn’t help matters). We need to set up a proper “welcome” table at the next one to prevent that happening again. Great feedback and see you at SMB3 yes?