[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: training question



I have had to deal with this issue, and often groused about presentations
that were "too commercial".  I have also myself been accused of talking too
much about our projects (although this may simply be a character defect on
my part) and appearing "too commercial".  Reading the responses to Burt's
question leads me to suggest that we may need a definition of "too
commercial":

Sales staff v. technical staff giving the talk?
Touting a specific solution?
Lack of balance at a particular gathering between "science", "what's
available", and "applied info"?
All pie-in-the-sky; nothing about problems?

I hesitate to say that where a person pulls up to a desk can be used to
define whether or not they will be too "commercial".  I also hesitate to
rely too heavily on recommendations, since as someone in the audience I
prefer levity and a good story, and as a conference organizer I tend to
prefer, "Just get to the point!"  One cross-cutting theme that I always
appreciate from any presenter is "How To Make A Good Choice of X".  This
perforce captures a problem review, an options review, and some
implementation guidance that can be customized.  Of course, presenters will
tend to put a certain emPHAsis on certain syLLAbles to make sure that their
option is seen favorably...but it's a balancing act, right?      


>Hi all.  A recent P2 training event leads to this question:
>
>Considering that P2 programs have reputations to protect, is it appropriate
>to have vendors with specific technical solutions participate in an
>industry-specific P2 course?
>
>I ask because I heard that the recent event sponsor refused to allow such
>vendor participation because it would be "too commercial", although there
>was a person ready to help who was not going to do a company sales pitch
>but a presentation on the specific applications of specific hardware.  As a
>result, the participants left with some ideas about basic technologies but
>no idea about who sells them, "inside" tips about how they work, what it is
>like to install and use them, what they cost, etc.
>
>How can this tension between "commercialism" and the real need for specific
>solutions be resolved in training in P2 training?  My own feeling is that
>P2 training should be "pure" as advertised, but that an OPTIONAL vendor
>presentation the next day, or after lunch, would be ok and useful as long
>as it was clearly advertised as complementary but not necessary.
>
>I hope this stimulates some good discussion.  The US govt and some states
>are sending people all over the place doing P2 training, and the local
>vendors of appropriate tech are asking to participate, and now often have
>the door shut on them.  This does not seem to be very helpful all around.
>How to balance these interests?  Any thoughts?
>
>Burt Hamner
>********************************************************************
>Burton Hamner
>President, Hamner and Associates LLC
>Adjunct Professor, Asian Institute of Management
>4343 4th Avenue NW, Seattle Washington USA 91807
>Tel/fax: 206-789-5499 (call before sending a fax)
>Email:  bhamner@mindspring.com
>Web:  The Sustainable Business Webspace, www.mindspring.com/~bhamner
>********************************************************************
>



Terry Foecke, Managing Partner
Materials Productivity LLC
1821 University Avenue, Suite S-219
St. Paul, MN   55104
(p) 651-603-8282
(f) 651-603-8286
tfoecke@matprod.com