\n2. Preparing for the conference

\n $\"\"$ \n

\n \n

(This chapter is not available in the sample)

",{"_201":202,"_43":44,"_47":16,"_45":46,"_69":70,"_203":204,"_232":199},"previewContent","

\n Conflux Books\n
\n Acknowledgements\n
\n Introduction\n
- \n How to use this book\n
- \n Why we wrote this book\n
- \n About the authors\n
\n
\n 1. Benefits - why run an internal tech conference\n
- \n 1.1 What is an internal tech conference?\n
- \n 1.2 The business case\n
- \n 1.3 Measurable benefits\n
- \n 1.4 Empowerment, Learning, Connection\n
- \n 1.5 Define what speakers gain\n
- \n 1.6 Define what attendees gain\n
- \n 1.7 What types of events work?\n
- \n 1.8 Learn from external events\n
- \n 1.9 Chapter Review\n
\n
\n 2. Preparing for the conference\n
\n 3. Running the conference\n
\n 4. Follow-up\n
\n 5. Case studies\n
- \n 5.1 Case study: The Financial Times\n
- \n 5.2 Case study: Metaswitch\n
- \n 5.3 Case study: Klarna\n
\n
\n Toolkit for internal tech conferences\n
\n References\n
\n Terminology\n
\n Index\n

\nConflux Books

\n\n

Books for technologists by technologists

\n\n\n

\n $\"\"$ \n

\n \n

\n\n\n

Our books help to accelerate and deepen your learning in the field of software systems. We focus on subjects that don’t go out of date: fundamental software principles & practices, team interactions, and technology-independent skills.

\n\n

Current and planned titles in the Conflux Books series include:

\n\n

\nBuild Quality In edited by Steve Smith and Matthew Skelton (B01)
\nBetter Whiteboard Sketches by Matthew Skelton (B02)
\nInternal Tech Conferences by Victoria Morgan-Smith and Matthew Skelton (B03)
\nTechnical Writing for Blogs and Articles by Matthew Skelton (B04)

\n\n\n\n

\nAcknowledgements

\n\n

We would like to thank the following people for their help and involvement in the writing of this book: Calum Loudon at Metaswitch; Rik Still and Mark Barnes at FT; Andrew Betts at EdgeConf for his experience and advice on running panel discussions; Thurston Tye & Michael Huniewicz at FT (photography); James Hamill and Ben Morgan-Smith for editorial assistance; Ben Maraney, Case Taintor, Kim Oberg, and Matthias Feist at Klarna; Rich Haigh (formerly of Paddy Power Betfair); the PIPELINE Conference team (Amy Phillips, Anthony Green, Beccy Stafford, Chris O’Dell, Inka Howorth, and Steve Smith).

\n\n

We’d like to extend special thanks to Manuel Pais for editing the original InfoQ article Internal Tech Conferences in 2016 and including it in the 2017 InfoQ eMag Scaling DevOps.

\n\n

We also give a big “thank you” to our reviewers: Ben Maraney, David Legge, Emily Webber, Mark Dalgarno, Portia Tung.

\n\n

Some icons are made by made by Freepik from www.flaticon.com - icons used in accordance with the Flaticon license terms

\n\n

\nIntroduction

\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n

Internal tech conferences can make a significant impact on an\norganisation’s level of sharing, learning, and communication by\naccelerating multi-team learning across technology departments. An\nincreasing number of enlightened organisations are using this powerful\napproach to spread and embed new ideas and practices.

\n\n

In this book we share practical advice on how to prepare, run, and\nfollow-up on an internal tech conference, together with some case\nstudies from several organisations showing the approaches in common and\nthe adaptations for each situation.

\n\n

\nHow to use this book

\n\n

This book is for people involved in technology leadership in some form:\npeople in “official” positions of leadership (CIO, CTO, Head of\nEngineering, IT Operations Manager, etc.) and those in more informal\ntechnology leadership positions, such as team leaders, senior engineers,\nand people who simply like to lead by example. Having been in such\npositions ourselves, we (Victoria and Matthew) want to help other\ntechnology leaders to devise and run successful internal tech\nconferences to act as a key strategic differentiator for organisations\nbuilding software systems.

\n\n

\nChapter 1 gives an overview of internal tech conferences and why you might want to run such an event. Read this chapter if you have never run or experienced an internal tech conference before to help you understand the purpose and the things involved.
\nChapter 2 explains how to prepare for an internal tech conference. Read this to understand what is involved, how long the preparation takes, and what kind of team you will need to make the conference happen.
\nChapter 3 covers the conference day itself. Read this chapter to understand all the operational aspects of the conference and to see what kind of help you may need on the day.
\nChapter 4 deals with the weeks and months following the conference. Read this chapter to see how to get the most out of the day by following up on talks and panel sessions and how to ensure that the conferences are an opportunity for learning and growth.
\nChapter 5 contains detailed case studies from a selected group of organisations. This chapter is different from the others in that the material is presented in a more linear, retrospective fashion (more like a story). Read this chapter to get a feel for how real organisations have run internal tech conferences and what they learned.
The Toolkit at the back of the book contains tools and templates for planning and running an internal tech conference; these can be used and adapted as needed.

\n\n

Chapters 1 to 4 deliberately read as “how-to” guides with quite specific\nrecommendations. Chapter 5 has a more narrative flavour, befitting the\ncase study stories. The Toolkit provides some templates and quick-start guides for getting results quickly.

\n\n\n

\n\n\n

\nWhy we wrote this book

\n\n

We met (appropriately) at a conference in 2015 where Victoria gave a\ntalk about some early changes at Financial TImes to create a learning\norganisation. We realised that we both had some similar experience of\norganising and running internal tech conferences and decided to write an\narticle, published by InfoQ in 2016 [1]. As far as we could tell, this\nwas the first online article to cover all aspects of internal tech\nconferences in detail, comparing approaches from different\norganisations, and it was included in the InfoQ eMag Scaling DevOps in\nMay 2017 [2].

\n\n

Since the article was published, we have been happy to see several new\nonline articles covering internal tech conferences, and we know from\nspeaking to people in the industry (at least in the UK) that the\napproach is becoming more widespread. We therefore decided to write this\nbook to provide a template and set of guidelines for not just running\nthe conference itself but how to go about preparing for one and how to\nget the most strategic and tactical value out of a series of\nconferences.

\n\n\n

\n\n\n

\nAbout the authors

\n\n\n

\n\n\n

Victoria Morgan-Smith is Director of Delivery, Internal Products at the\nFinancial Times, where she has been helping teams succeed since 2009.\nBefore this she was a developer for 9 years, a background which fuels\nher interest in finding fun ways to coach, energise and motivate teams\ninto self-organising units. She is passionate about collaboration beyond\nthe team, adopting agile principles to get under the skin of what will\ndeliver measurable business value around the organisation.

\n\n

Twitter: @VictoriaJMS | LinkedIn: victoriamorgansmith

\n\n\n

\n\n\n

Matthew Skelton is Head of Consulting at Conflux\n(confluxdigital.net), where he\nspecialises in Continuous Delivery, operability and organisation dynamics\nfor software in manufacturing, ecommerce, and online services.\nRecognised by TechBeacon in 2018 as one of the top 100 people to follow in DevOps,\nMatthew curates the well-known DevOps team topologies patterns at\ndevopstopologies.com and\nis co-author of the books Continuous Delivery with Windows and .NET (O’Reilly, 2016), Team Guide to Software Operability (Skelton Thatcher Publications, 2016), and Team Topologies (IT Revolution Press, 2019).

\n\n

Twitter: @matthewpskelton | confluxdigital.net

\n\n\n

\n1. Benefits - why run an internal tech conference

\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

\n $\"\"$ \n

\n \n

\n\n\n

\n1.1 What is an internal tech conference?

\n\n

An internal tech conference is effectively a technology conference run\nby and for the staff of a single organisation. Done well - as suggested\nby this book - an internal tech conference helps to bring together\ndisparate teams and individuals in a shared celebration and examination\nof the current practices and approaches within the organisation,\naccelerating learning at a time of rapid technological change.

\n\n

The conference could be a half-day event, a single day, or multiple\ndays; it might be every few months or just once per year. Speakers and\nconference organisers alike are drawn from within the organisation,\nmaking the day a real “team effort”. The focus is on learning and\nimproving together as an organisation in a setting where\nsometimes-sensitive details can be shared openly with colleagues. With\nmany public tech conference tickets costing upwards of €800-1000 per\nperson, many organisations find that an internal tech conference is a\nhighly cost-effective way of training and developing staff whilst\nsimultaneously improving cohesion and camaraderie.

\n\n\n

\n\n\n

\n1.2 The business case

\n\n

Modern software development has co-evolved with cloud and IoT\ntechnologies to become a vital part of how successful organisations do\nbusiness. Gone are the days of “death march” software projects; instead\nwe have long-term product-based or service-based ownership of business\nservices and user experiences, all enabled by rapid infrastructure\nprovisioning, ubiquitous automation, and high-fidelity instrumentation\nand telemetry.

\n\n

Software delivery approaches such as Lean Agile and DevOps have\ndemonstrated convincingly the value and power of focused collaboration\non key aspects of technology and user need. Research from industry\nexperts such as DORA and Google has shown that organisations that invest\nin technical and social practices for their teams consistently perform\nbetter than other organisations [46] [47]. Internal tech conferences\nare an excellent way to invest in team social practices.

\n\n

In their 2018 book Accelerate, authors Nicole Forsgren and colleagues\nidentify some key drivers of organisational performance, based on\nresearch involving thousands of organisations worldwide. Their research\nshow that staff loyalty and how well members of staff identify with the\nmission of the organisation are important components of high\norganisational performance [48].

\n\n

We believe that internal tech conferences are one of the best ways to\nincrease staff loyalty and identification with organisational goals for\nseveral reasons that we’ll explore in this book:

\n\n

People see their work celebrated and validated within the organisation
People see their colleagues and coworkers on-stage, presenting their work in a compelling way, and can be inspired to do the same
People have a chance to reflect on recent achievements and consolidate their understanding of recent changes
People can see that the organisation is investing in learning and development in a very visible way
Where organisations run internal tech conferences on a regular basis, people can see that the organisation as a whole takes learning and improvement seriously. Learning and mastery are key to staff motivation [54] so learning helps with loyalty too.

\n\n

By bringing people together in the same physical or temporal space for\nan extended period of joint learning, organisations help ideas and\napproaches to spread and align across many different teams [45].\nIncreasing inter-team cohesion like this helps to produce a culture of\nexcellence based on mutual learning which in turn increases\norganisational performance.

\n\n\n

\n\n\n

\n1.3 Measurable benefits

\n\n

An internal tech conference can be a powerful way of communicating and\ncelebrating technology teams that build and operate the software systems\nthat are increasingly essential to many organisations.

\n\n

An event like this has many immediate, measurable benefits, as well as\nsome hidden, long term ones. One major goal is to shape and promote a\nculture where people are encouraged to challenge the status quo and to\nget excited about new possibilities by having the space to experiment\nwithout the fear of failure. Psychologically, people are braver\nsurrounded by people they know and trust; an internal tech conference\ncan help people get to know each other in an open context, allowing them\nto share opinions and ideas.

\n\n

In our research for this book, we have examined the motivations of many\norganisations for running this sort of event. For example, employees at\nMetaswitch say that their conference “reminds them they work with a\ngreat bunch of people” [3] says Calum Loudon (head of architecture\nand conference organiser). Investing in a full day for employees to\nshare the things that excite them enables them to appreciate each other\nafresh and boosts their engagement with the organisation (the full case\nstudy from Metaswitch is in Chapter 5).

\n\n

Other organisations had similar experiences. In fact, three clear themes emerge as reasons for running an internal tech conference: Empowerment, Learning and Connection.

\n\n\n

\n\n\n

\n1.4 Empowerment, Learning, Connection

\n\n

\n1.4.1 Empowerment

\n\n

Successful organisations are increasingly finding that a vital part of\norganisational agility is the empowerment of teams. Giving teams\nlocalised autonomy over their work enables a tighter feedback loop\nbetween action and results, helping the organisation to self-steer\ntowards better outcomes for customers and users.

\n\n

If you are looking to introduce a more egalitarian mindset within your\norganisation - where employees are given more autonomy over how they\nwork, have more opportunity to be creative, are expected to take more\naccountability for making smart and responsible decisions, then you need\nto engage them in the bigger picture. Empowerment needs to be taken, not\ngiven - and this is a great opportunity to create an atmosphere that\nwill enable that to begin.

\n\n

It is clear that the traditional model of having senior managers provide\nall of the answers, expertise and direction is severely limiting. This\nevent can act as an implicit invitation to collaborate with leaders to\ntake collective ownership of your department’s health.

\n\n

Most of the organisations in this book talk about their internal\nconferences being organised from the bottom up, by ordinary staff.\nWhilst in some cases there is a clear agenda set by leadership based on\na theme they would like to address, many others facilitate an empowered\ncuration of content. In both scenarios - whether leadership are asking\nthe questions, or inviting the room to ask them - they are inviting the\ndepartment to help answer them.

\n\n

Internal conferences help to open the floor to all people, elevating\nvoices not often heard. People do not necessarily need to be talking\nabout weighty topics, simply the fact of being given the opportunity to\ndesign their own day is empowerment in action. Of course, if people do\nchoose to join some debates about some of the options and choices made\nin terms of technology, ways of working, or department goals and\nstructure, then that’s going to have a huge impact on their levels of\nengagement.

\n\n

\n1.4.2 Learning

\n\n

Building and operating modern software systems is a challenging task:\nthe pace of delivery is rapid and we need to draw on a wide range of\nskills and experience in a coordinated, joined-up way. As our world\nchanges, and new ways of working and leading emerge, so should new ways\nof learning. Spending money on sending a handful of people out to public\nconferences no longer seems to make the impact we need it to, at least\nalone; public conferences are often too expensive for all staff to\nattend and they are not tailored to the needs of the organisation or\nindividuals.

\n\n\n

\"Talks, — Talks, panel discussions and even classroom sessions are all great ways to promote learning at an internal tech conference. Image credit: Matthew Skelton

\n\n\n

There are smart people working hard in technology departments the world\nover - experimenting, discovering new ways of solving problems every day\n- and yet most organisations tend to look outside for learning. That is\nof course vital, but what the companies that feature in our case studies\nhave also realised is that if they look at their own employees then they\ncan learn a huge amount without going anywhere at all.

\n\n

\n
Hearing about the approaches other teams have used to solve problems\ncan help you think differently about the challenges you are facing.\nLearning about how others ensure quality, for instance with different\napproaches to security, testing, monitoring or deployment, can inspire\nyou to step up your own game. As an extra bonus, at an internal\nconference, these solutions are more likely to make sense in the\ncontext (infrastructure, regulation, culture) in which your\norganisation operates. - Ben Maraney, formerly of Klarna [50] (Read\nmore about Klarna in Chapter 5.)
\n

\n\n

Empowerment is closely linked to the shifts in corporate culture that\nenable emergent leadership. It is held that by encouraging\nself-organisation and self-management, companies will end up with a\nbetter-led organisation.

\n\n

The Learning 3.0 approach is a response to this. Just as there are\nbetter ways to lead an organisation - encouraging everyone to be\nproactive in their quest to make their company a better place to be -\nthere is also a better way for employees to learn than to passively\nreceive information. In his book How Creative Workers Learn\nAlexandre Magno talks about emergent learning - people\nlearn through experience and interaction, not through consuming reams of\npre-prepared material. “Learning emerges from the connection of\nstories, ideas and practice”, he says [5].

\n\n

Whilst a conference that has the agenda driven externally can teach\nattendees something “theoretically”, an internal conference brings the\nexciting opportunity to explore ideas and challenges within the context\nof the organisation, with insights coming from the collective and not\nsolely from a few appointed experts.

\n\n

The Financial Times recognises the value of sending people out to public\nconferences, but their Engine Room conference “ensures that we also\nlearn from the brilliant people inside our company.” Cait O’Riordan\n(CPIO) explains that “Ideally that would happen anyway in the course of\nour daily lives - but putting some time in the calendar makes sure that\nsharing actually happens and happens at scale” [5].

\n\n

Furthermore, from the perspective of the speakers, giving a talk means\ndoing a lot of learning themselves. In order to get up and speak\nauthoritatively on a subject, speakers need to do some research into\nwhat else is being said in the industry on their chosen topic to\nvalidate or update their viewpoints. So this is their opportunity to\nfurther enlighten themselves on something. “Be the protagonist of your\nown learning” says Learning 3.0; an internal tech conference should be\nan enriching experience for speakers to grasp with both hands.

\n\n

\n1.4.3 Connection

\n\n

In the 2019 book Team Topologies, Matthew Skelton and Manuel Pais\nidentify the need for regular learning and cross-team knowledge sharing\nusing a range of techniques, especially internal tech conferences\n[45]. One of the challenges of the increasingly common culture of\nautonomy is that people often don’t take the time to connect with\ncolleagues beyond their immediate team. Agility has seen a move towards\nself-sufficiency, giving teams the ability to realise the value of their\nwork without depending on anyone else who might slow them down. Although\nthis self-sufficiency is generally positive, it does create its own\nproblems. In particular, the desire by engineers to solve their own\nproblems means that the same problems are often being solved repeatedly\nin the same department: autonomy without alignment.

\n\n

There are benefits to connecting with other teams beyond the opportunity\nto learn and swap stories. It is hugely valuable for people to have the\nchance to break out from the normal team silos and to encounter other\npeople in a setting that is not defined by project scope or operational\nproblems. The parts of the conference day where the interaction is at\nits highest - whether it’s in an open space discussion, lunchtime chit\nchat or evening drinks - are in many ways the most important parts of\nthe day.

\n\n

The informal interaction during the internal tech conference day is\nwhere people build up a healthy balance of “social capital” [26].\nEach time social capital is boosted it is like an influenza jab,\ninoculating them against later conflict when a more difficult time\nappears. If people need help from each other, their interaction will be\nswifter and smoother after spending time chatting at the conference. If\nthey need to present a challenge to one another, they will do so with\nmore humanity. It is said that for technology departments and\norganisations today the only constant is change, which means that\nmisunderstandings and and conflicts are never far away. Social capital\nprovides a buffer to help people pull together across the department\nwhen these changes arise, so anything that builds up those reserves is\nworthwhile.

\n\n

Donald Clark’s excellent article Conferences – jumped up classrooms?\n[30] presents a challenge to prevent an internal conference from\nturning into a scenario where “people turn up to be spoon-fed by sages\non the stage talking at them […] a lazy approach to learning”. He\nurges readers to evoke some emotional response and to not fall into the\ntrap of being a “forgetting experience”. For internal tech conferences,\navoid anything that feels like pure instruction, and instead seek to\nstimulate some lively debates that will actively engage employees and\ntrigger some shifts in mindset. The behavioural change that comes with\nnew ways of thinking and seeing others is the lasting effect you can\nmost hope for.

\n\n\n

\n\n\n

\n1.5 Define what speakers gain

\n\n

Speaking in front of a large group of colleagues can be daunting for people, so be clear about the benefits for speakers. Management will also want to understand the advantages of investing time in training and preparing the speakers.

\n\n

\n1.5.1 Celebrate unsung heroes

\n\n

An internal tech conference is a great opportunity to identify and\ncelebrate ‘unsung’ people, teams, and achievements; it’s a way to\nshowcase team projects that might be forgotten or that do less exciting\nbut crucial work. You may decide to deliberately look for people who\nhave done particularly interesting, foundational, or transformative work\n- such as database upgrades that allowed them to shift platforms or\ndeployment automation that reduced outages - or perhaps someone who can\ndescribe in (painful) detail what it’s like to be on the 1st-line\nsupport team.

\n\n

\n1.5.2 Personal growth

\n\n

Speaking at an internal event will help people to challenge themselves.\nThe opinions they’ve been expressing on a daily basis to their\nneighbouring coworkers will need to be fact-checked if they want to\nexpress them on stage, then do a bit more research to be sure they know\nwhat they’re talking about. A team can easily become a small echo\nchamber, so it’s healthy for people to raise their head occasionally.\nThen they can say, “Hey, it’s not just me - other people are saying this\nstuff too!”. Many conference speakers will tell you that the biggest\nthing they get out of talking at an event is the extra learning they do\nin order to test and flesh out their message.

\n\n

\n1.5.3 Confidence

\n\n

To many people, public speaking is the most terrifying experience in the\nworld; consequently many great ideas and opinions remain unheard. If an\ninternal tech conference can help people tackle that fear of speaking,\nthat’s a huge gift. As we see in Chapter 5, many people go on to talk at\nexternal conferences as a direct result of gaining confidence to do so\nat internal events.

\n\n\n

\n\n\n

\n1.6 Define what attendees gain

\n\n

Attendees at a well-run internal tech conference should receive a huge boost to their awareness and enthusiasm for their work, but how do they know this beforehand? Take the time to spell out exactly how attendees will benefit.

\n\n

\n1.6.1 Engagement with the organisation

\n\n

One of the big benefits for attendees is the buzz of sharing insight and\nsuccesses; this makes an organisation feel like a great place to work.\nThe organisations in our case studies have all reported a general boost\nin morale after these events, as the chance to take time out and think\nabout things in a different way and to hear inspirational stories from\neach other gave employees a renewed connection with the company.

\n\n

\n1.6.2 Feeling valued

\n\n

Metaswitch ran in-depth workshops that last 2-3 hours giving people a\nchance to get stuck into the new technologies like the Internet of\nThings - in parallel to talks on both tech and non-tech subjects, thus\ndelivering something for everyone. Across disciplines, attendees felt a\nstrong sense that they were considered worth investing in.

\n\n

\n1.6.3 Learning and validation

\n\n

Another benefit of internal tech conferences can be the validation that\ncomes from hearing colleagues talk about practices used elsewhere in the\nindustry too. Encourage some speakers to talk about practices in other\norganisations by referring to books they have read or talks they have\nseen. By bringing a piece of the outside world into a company, everyone\ngains a better understanding of how their shared work makes up a bigger\npicture. Often this involves reinforcing that they’re doing the right\nthings already - a big motivation.

\n\n\n

\n\n\n

\n1.7 What types of events work?

\n\n

There are several options for the type of event you run. The format you\nchoose will depend on what outcomes you seek from your event, as you can\nget quite different results with each format. The following examples\nprovide a flavour of the different kinds of events that have been proven\nto work well.

\n\n

\n1.7.1 Financial Times: 1-day annual event with internal speakers only

\n\n

The Financial Times (FT) is a global news organisation with roots in\nLondon, UK. The FT team decided to run a full day event with a mixture\nof content and debate from a diverse set of people across the\ndepartment, joined solely by an internal audience. The conference\nconsisted of Lightning Talks, Panel Debates, Open Spaces and a game,\nrounded off with beer, chatter, and more beer. The conversation-based\nsessions proved hugely successful at capturing the mood and stimulating\nchanges in the department [7].

\n\n\n

\"A — A lively panel discussion at FT during their first internal tech conference. Image credit: Thurston Tye

\n\n\n

A panel at the FT’s Engine Room Live event get ready for a question on\nits way from the audience - complete with soft blue throwable microphone\n[8]!

\n\n

\n1.7.2 Metaswitch: 2-day annual event with internal speakers and “friends”

\n\n

Metaswitch, a software for telecommunications company, ran an energetic\nmulti-stream 2-day event, incorporating a mixture of full-length talks\nand workshops, with team-led social events in the evenings. The audience\nis almost entirely internal, but with a few “friends of Metaswitch” as\nguest speakers. It’s described as a highlight in the company calendar,\nand has directly influenced employee engagement within the engineering\ndepartment.

\n\n

\n1.7.3 Klarna: 1-day internal off-site event for all in engineering

\n\n

Klarna is a major European bank based in Sweden. Since 2014 Klarna has\nrun an annual 1-day internal tech conference in Stockholm, bringing\ntogether an increasingly large engineering community to share ideas and\ndiscover new approaches. Klarna found that by mentoring and training\ntheir own staff in speaking and writing talks, the quality of talk\nsubmissions has grown each year. All speakers are now drawn from within\nKlarna and this helps to make the event highly relevant for all\nattendees [10]. The main conference (attended by everyone) is a 1-day\nevent, but Klarna also use the day before the conference for additional\nworkshops and roundtable sessions for smaller groups; this is the only time in the year when they have all the engineers in one place.

\n\n

Read more about the Klarna, Metaswitch and FT examples in the Case Studies in Chapter 5.

\n\n

\n1.7.4 Paddy Power Betfair: off-site, with some external speakers

\n\n

Other organisations have found different formats that work well for\nthem. For instance, the online betting and gaming company Paddy Power\nBetfair hold an annual DevOps Community conference for everyone in\nProduct and Technology [11]. Rich Haigh, former Head of Delivery Enablement at Paddy Power Betfair, explains:

\n\n

\n
“On the morning we invite vendors to come and talk about how we have used their products – what’s coming up in their roadmaps, etc. In the afternoon we open the floor to talk about projects they have been working on, interesting tech, R&D they are doing, etc. We then have a social event in the evening. … We hire an external venue … and we video everything so we can share the knowledge further after the event.”
\n

\n\n

\n1.7.5 ING: internal and external speakers, with a specific theme

\n\n

At the Dutch bank ING, an internal change from older, silo-based ways of\nworking to a more fluid, DevOps-inspired approach was accelerated by\nrunning an internal conference based directly on the DevOpsDays\nconference format, combining external invited speakers, internal talks,\nand short ‘lightning’ talks of 5 mins each. This event helped to “stir\nup the discussion” around new ways of working and inspired people to\nattend and help organise a public conference (DevOpsDays Amsterdam)\n[12].

\n\n

Furthermore, after the ING people blogged about their conference and\nshared the slides, a team at US retailer Target were inspired to run\ntheir own conference [28]. The recently-published DevOps Handbook by Gene Kim et al has more on the approach at Target [40].

\n\n

\n1.7.6 UK-based ticket retailer: 6 monthly half-day event, all staff invited

\n\n

An online ticket retailer in the UK opted to invite teams outside of\ntechnology to learn what the tech teams actually did, as that was a\nmystery to many people; the sessions were known as ‘Engineering Day’.\nAll staff in the London office were invited. The first installment was a\nfull day session with many different speakers from the engineering teams\n(and some from other departments too). Subsequently, the team ran\nfocused half-day Engineering Day events every six months which allowed\nmore people to attend as they found it easier to spare a half day rather\nthan a full day. Teams in India were included via video conference and\neventually the show went ‘on the road’ to the teams in Edinburgh [9].

\n\n

Consider an “unconference” if your organisational culture is right. An\nunconference is a learning event that prioritises peer-to-peer learning,\nusually with a schedule developed on the day itself by the participants.\nThis format works well in situations where those involved are confident\nabout presenting and sharing ideas [55].

\n\n

\n1.7.7 Permission to pause

\n\n

There is no ‘right way’ to run an internal tech conference - it depends\non what your team, department or organisation needs. An important thing\nto consider early on is the audience: who should we invite? Who would\nbenefit most from the conference? The answers to those questions should\nhelp to frame your conference planning: as the attendee list grows the\nfocal point of discussions stretches to fit the audience, whereas a more\ncompact group of attendees allows the focus and aims of the conference\nto remain tighter.

\n\n

However you choose to run your internal conference, it’s important to\ngive people enough time and space to immerse themselves in the event:\nhelp people clear their calendars so they can ‘shake the every-day out\nof their hair’. This is a chance for people to give themselves\npermission to pause - they need to be ready to get as much out of the\nday as possible.

\n\n\n

\n\n\n

\n1.8 Learn from external events

\n\n

Much can be learned from looking to successful external (public)\nconferences for inspiration. In a blog post How to run a good tech\nconference [44], Matthew Skelton identifies nine key things to address:

\n\n

Find a fabulous organising team
Choose a venue wisely
Make the conference practitioner-led
Make the conference inclusive
Find good sponsors and suppliers
Plan the money side carefully
Use a decent ticketing platform
Treat all people involved with respect
Find great keynote speakers

\n\n

Of these nine points, only point 5 (sponsors and suppliers) and point 7\n(ticketing) do not really apply to an internal conference. A strong and\npassionate organising team is essential (see Chapter 2). You may be\nrestricted to company offices for the venue, but if you have the option\nof hiring an out-of-office venue, look for a venue that does not “split\nup” the conference, so that every one of the attendees can feel part of\nthe same shared experience.

\n\n

Build the organising team with representatives from across your\nengineering organisation. This is particularly important for the people\nwho solicit and review talk proposals. If attendees know that the\norganisers and speakers are practitioners like them, they interact as\nequals and feel able to share more; make sure to encourage practitioners\nto get involved, particularly those who are from underrepresented groups\nor those who have not spoken before. An inclusive, diverse conference\nwill generate better engagement and discussions than a\nconference with the same faces that always speak.

\n\n

As we have seen, many of the challenges and activities between external\nand internal conferences are similar, but there are some differences\nthat are worth bearing in mind, which we explore in the following\nsections.

\n\n

\n1.8.1 Tickets

\n\n

External conferences generally have two sources of income to cover the\ncosts of their event: ticket revenue and sponsorship. For an internal\nconference it’s unlikely that you would want to charge your employees\nmoney to attend your conference. You might use a ticketing platform for\nconvenience, but keep the tickets free.

\n\n

\n1.8.2 Sponsorship

\n\n

Whilst sponsorship for your internal conference might be possible, it is\nsomething to approach with caution. Your conference is probably focused\non things that are core to your organisation and will most likely only\ninclude external people as guests. As such it is unlikely to be\nappropriate to introduce someone else’s brand/context to your event or\nhugely beneficial to any potential sponsor; you should expect costs to\nbe covered entirely by departmental/divisional budget. Use the example budget in the Toolkit to help you establish what the budget\nshould be and adjust your plans accordingly.

\n\n

\n1.8.3 Marketing

\n\n

An internal conference will need some marketing and promotion to attract\nstaff but probably not to the same degree as an external conference.\nConsider how to create a “buzz” around the event without making things\ntoo polished or formal. Whether people are expected to attend or the\nconference is optional, how can you make it exciting or interesting?

\n\n

\n1.8.4 Publicity

\n\n

The organisation probably expects some kind of positive publicity from\nthe internal conference, but you will need to be careful with some of\nthe photographs, videos, and details - it’s likely that some of the\nmaterial in the talks will be confidential or for internal-use only. At\na public/external conference, it’s normally safe to assume that all the\nmaterial has been checked for sensitivity, but this is not the case with\ninternal conferences. Check with relevant people before publishing\ndetails of talks. Of course, the fact that you are running an internal\ntech conference should be something to publicise; make people want to\njoin the organisation so they get to find out more details about the\ntalks!

\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

\n $\"\"$ \n

\n \n

\n\n\n

\n1.9 Chapter Review

\n\n

Every organisation is different, and what you decide to do will be dependent upon your context. Use the ideas here to help you decide what you want to do.

\n\n

Some benefits are “tangible” and immediately measurable:

\n\n

Working groups forming to tackle a cross-team problem
Projects transformed through “lightbulb” moments
Social capital injection avoiding wasted time and energy in future conflicts

\n\n

Ask yourself: What tangible benefits would you hope to see from your event? And how will you measure them?

\n\n

Other benefits are harder to measure, but arguably far more significant:

\n\n

Empowerment - and the resulting responsibility
Learning - peer-education, shared lessons
Connection - improved relationships and collaboration

\n\n

Ask yourself: What goals do you have in your department that would benefit from improved inter-team relationships?

\n\n

Provide lots of opportunity for personal development:

\n\n

Participants - confidence, public speaking skills, grasp of their chosen topic
Attendees - engagement, new knowledge, relationships, validation
All - sense of being valued

\n\n

Ask yourself: In what ways would you like your employees to grow and develop? How can you use this event to help them do this?

\n\n

Choose the approach that will give you the outcome you want:

\n\n

“By the people, for the people” - a bottom-up approach
A specific theme for the day
Showcase your group to the rest of your organisation

\n\n

Ask yourself: What do you want to achieve from this event? What opportunities or constraints might you have that help determine your approach?

\n\n

Decide whether this is something for you:

\n\n

Consider how you could experiment and learn whether this is really for you. Set a limited budget, run it once, and review whether to scale up or down the following year.

\n\n

Ask yourself: How much are you willing to invest in this?

\n\n\n

\n $\"\"$ \n

\n \n

\n\n\n

\n2. Preparing for the conference

\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

\n $\"\"$ \n

\n \n

\n\n\n

(This chapter is not available in the sample)

\n\n

\n3. Running the conference

\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

\n $\"\"$ \n

\n \n

\n\n\n

(This chapter is not available in the sample)

\n\n

\n4. Follow-up

\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

\n $\"\"$ \n

\n \n

\n\n\n

(This chapter is not available in the sample)

\n\n

\n5. Case studies

\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

\n $\"\"$ \n

\n \n

\n\n\n

\n5.1 Case study: The Financial Times

\n\n

The Financial Times is one of the world’s leading news organisations,\nrecognised internationally for its authority, integrity and accuracy. It\nis part of Nikkei Inc., which provides a broad range of information,\nnews and services for the global business community.

\n\n

The story of the FT’s experience of internal conferences is deeply\nfascinating. Internal conferences offer a window into what is happening\nwithin the broader Product & Technology department and provide\nopportunities to communicate any changes within the team.

\n\n

During the four years covered in this case study, the FT saw three\nthings emerge:

\n\n

A dramatic growth in pride and recognition of product and technical\nexcellence

\n\n

Showcasing innovation and letting people tell their stories at these\nevents all encouraged more experiments and boundary-pushing by teams\nafterwards.

\n\n

Enabling the sharing of pain points across teams galvanised people to\nbreak out of their silos and find creative and tangible solutions to\nproblems.

\n\n

Dedicating time to talking about what their engineers were proud of\ntriggered a new passion for setting and raising the standards, for\ninspiring each other and generating excitement that was longer lasting.

\n\n

Open debates brought Product and Technology together to form a\npowerful partnership. Previously two separate groups, the Product and\nTechnology departments came to recognise each other and ultimately\ncombine in 2016 - leading to far smarter decisions being made around\ntheir business model and tech strategies.

\n\n

The conference was a manifestation of cultural change and then a\nyardstick for measuring it

\n\n

The department saw emergent leadership; opening up the floor to\nquestions and topics encouraged new voices.

\n\n

Open debates and the freedom to discuss topics led to the evolution of a\ndeep democracy for some difficult departmental changes such as\nadopting DevOps and shifting ownership for Quality Assurance to\nengineers.

\n\n

The bonding experience of the event created connections that continued\nfar beyond the day - peer coaching and training activities were spun up\nand a new rhythm of bootcamps and rotations between teams helped\nconversations to continue.

\n\n

The FT became a destination employer - a place people wanted to be

\n\n

Everyone started to take responsibility for making the FT somewhere they\nwanted to be, no longer relying on the leadership team to set the rules.

\n\n

More people started talking about diversity & inclusion, psychological\nsafety, empathy and respect. Employee-led initiatives and groups started\nto form around mental health, diversity, coaching and mentoring, in\naddition to various engineering specialisms.

\n\n

Engineers started to contribute to the wider community, such as engaging\nwith coding clubs for under-represented groups outside the organisation,\ntalking at conferences about what they do and providing open-source\ntoolkits for building accessible websites.

\n\n

“Nudge”

\n\n

An internal tech conference cannot possibly take all the credit for a cultural \ntransformation, but it can play a big part and mark out a useful \nrhythm of checkpoints.

\n\n

Thaler and Sunstein coined the term Libertarian Paternalism in \ntheir book Nudge - Improving decisions about health, wealth and happiness [20]. It refers to the desire to give people the freedom \nof choice whilst also keeping an eye on what is good for the person. \nIt means creating opportunities for people to make decisions - and \nmaking it easy for them to make the decision that is in their best \ninterests, without removing their right to make a “bad” decision.

\n\n

So all these activities - inspiring a forum where conversations that are happening in small pockets could reach a wider audience for debate, and then gently encouraging some of the spin-off activities it triggered - could be \nviewed as simply a series of nudges. Neither the conference, nor its \nagenda, nor even the follow-up activities were created by the \nleadership team but were merely the conditions for them to happen.

\n\n

\n5.1.1 How it all began

\n\n

Unwittingly, the FT triggered their first event just as a cultural shift\nwas trying to happen - so what started out as a conference about\ntechnology became a catalyst for real change.

\n\n

That change can be mapped out across the next four years - each\nconference not only nudging that transformation along a bit, but also\nacting as a mirror to reflect on just how far the department’s culture\nhad evolved since the previous event.

\n\n

The decision to run the event came the day after some engineers and\ntheir CTO attended a large external conference. This group realised that\nthe recent changes that had already happened at the FT - a massive\ngrowth in investment in technology, accompanied by a broad move towards\nagility in terms of methods, processes, engineering practices and\ntechnology choices - meant there was a huge amount of knowledge and\nexperience within the department already. The challenge at that time was\nnot a lack of knowledge, but a lack of knowledge-share.

\n\n

Much has been said about the challenges of empowered teams and\nabout the silos that happen as a direct result of team autonomy.\nIndependent structures are great for streamlined decision-making and\nagility, but dreadful in terms of sharing ideas, services, skills,\nexperiences and best practices.

\n\n

Not only that, but there were an awful lot of opinions that weren’t\nbeing shared. Leadership would talk about agility, about empowerment,\nabout wanting a collaborative culture - but if they were the only ones\ndoing the talking, then change was going to be very slow indeed.

\n\n

The decision was made: run an internal technical conference, “by the\npeople, for the people”. This would mean a group of volunteers from\nwithin the department creating it from scratch, calling upon their\ncolleagues to generate content.

\n\n

\n5.1.2 2015 - it began with a vision

\n\n

Over the past few years there has been an almost exponential increase in the speed of change within the technology sphere. Coupled with this has been the growth of the FT Technology department in terms of numbers and expertise. The size, scope and speed of delivery is greater than ever. It is close to impossible for individuals to keep abreast of all these changes.

\n\n

However, communication, in a friendly, inclusive environment, can help. By communicating we can address the challenges and increase the benefits of this rapid change. We can and should learn from each other so that great ideas, useful tools and smart ways of working can be shared.

\n\n

Vision statement:

\n\n

\nEngine Room Live is an internal conference for the FT Technology department, an opportunity to learn from each other and make connections between teams to increase communication, productivity and innovation.
\nParticipants get a chance to take part in a conversation that matters to them, and to test out their public speaking voice in a safe environment.
\nAttendees get to discover and take away good ideas and new channels of communication with other attendees. A chance to lift your head from the weeds and think about something other than delivering the next feature.
\nThe company gets better working practices spread around more teams, happier staff and improved communication between teams and people, so that job satisfaction, productivity and efficiency can increase.

\n\n

They sold it to the rest of the department as a chance to ‘lift your\nheads up from the coal face for a day and maybe even choose a better\npickaxe’ [40].

\n\n

FT’s tech department leaders showed their support for the event by\njoining in as delegates on the day. The department’s Delivery Coach\nkicked things off with a short introductory talk on how much the FT\nTechnology department had changed in the last few years and how a\nconference fitted in perfectly with the ‘always learning’ ethos of the\nFT’s then parent company Pearson [22].

\n\n

Having set the scene, a day of panel discussions followed - some of\nwhich were written up enthusiastically by attendees on the FT’s blog\n[23]. Having invested a lot of energy and excitement into the day, the\nresults were remarkable.

\n\n\n

\"Questions — Questions during panel discussion at FT. Image credit: Michal Huniewicz

\n\n\n

No-one quite anticipated just how much impact the day could have. Here is what emerged:

\n\n

Teams came away saying they would definitely be trying new ways of working (the organisers followed up - they did!).
A monitoring “action group” emerged as a result of opening up a discussion on dealing with alerting overload in the world of microservices - one team’s problem became a department-wide challenge to focus on.
A centralised Dev Tooling team, who owned the automated deployment mechanisms, committed publicly to making small individual tools for dev teams to free them from the perceived tyranny of central control.

\n\n

Most importantly, there was a real sense that people had started to\nthink about how they could change things. The event itself - and the\nCTO’s talk at the end of the day about how people needed to take\nempowerment, rather than waiting for it to be bestowed upon them - had a\nprofound effect and encouraged lots of opinion-sharing over the drinks\nthat followed that evening. Those opinions continued to be shared and\ndebated over the next few weeks and months.

\n\n

\n5.1.3 2016 - change is in the air

\n\n

By the time the second conference came around in 2016, a lot had changed\nalready, and 25 people volunteered to help organise it. More topics were\nput forward for discussion, more people volunteered to sit on the panels\n- people had found their voices! People who had sat on panels in the\nfirst year were now speaking at external conferences; other people\nwho had been inspired to realise they could make change happen had\nbegun lunchtime learning sessions and working groups.

\n\n

Some of the attendees in 2016 felt that they’d been a bit shy the first\ntime around, and wanted to get stuck into the really hard topics this\nyear. So DevOps got some real attention - with one of the most brave,\nrespectful, but deeply honest discussions that could be hoped for with a\ntopic that impacted so many people across the technology department.

\n\n

It was obvious at this point that the FT’s Tech and Product team no\nlonger relied on their leadership team to talk about change - movements\nwere beginning from the ground up and they were starting to see\nemployee-led change.

\n\n

\n5.1.4 2017 - getting into the groove

\n\n

Fast-forward to 2017, and the topics that were being discussed had moved\nfrom technical challenges to cultural issues. Diversity and Inclusion\nfeatured highly and some very candid, sometimes painful stories were\ntold to a room full of 150 colleagues - a moment that made FT Technology\nleadership proud. It legitimized the claim that the FT Product &\nTechnology team has a great culture of respect, openness and honesty.

\n\n

If it is not already clear - internal tech conferences are about so\nmuch more than tech.

\n\n

\n5.1.5 2018 - change is Business As Usual

\n\n

By 2018, conversations about the type of organisation the FT wants to be\nwere a part of the fabric. There were year-round employee-led working\ngroups on diversity and inclusion, leadership skills, collaboration\nstyles, accessibility, standards, data and success metrics. People were\nnow familiar with the idea that if they wanted something to change, they could\nstart the conversation.

\n\n

In terms of public speaking experiences, there were regular Lightning\nTalk sessions to give people a small non-threatening window to speak at,\nsocial events organised by a “Culture Club” and lots of “pop-up” (ad\nhoc) learning activities.

\n\n

\n5.1.5.1 Pushing the boundaries

\n\n

A major change in the preceding 12 months was the opportunity for\nfurther collaboration across the FT and with external organisations. The\ncompany had been bought by Nikkei in 2016 [24], and so the FT team had\nbeen involved in collaborations with the Nikkei technology department;\nthey also worked on an innovative external project with Google. Partner\ncompanies were also now working with the FT to build capabilities for\ntheir “FT Specialist” publications.

\n\n

\n5.1.5.2 A new type of conference

\n\n

The focus of 2018’s Engine Room conference was on helping people within\nthe department to lift their head up and realise that whilst cross-team\ncollaboration is amazing, cross-organisation collaboration is even\nmore so! The main organiser said he wanted to “help people understand\nthat we’re a bigger organisation than they think” [25].

\n\n

With a different purpose comes a different format. This was more of a\ntop-down piece of education for the department, and partners were\nbrought in to share their knowledge, creating an opportunity for\nawareness and cross-fertilisation of ideas at a broader level. A fixed\nagenda of well-attended talks with Q&A time replaced the panel sessions\nof previous years.

\n\n

So many of the important conversations about how people work together -\nworking styles, technology choices and coming together to solve bigger\nissues - now just happen because the channels for discourse are open and\nwell used.

\n\n

\n5.1.6 What’s next for Engine Room Live?

\n\n

The FT will bring back panel sessions in 2019, where the original values\nand vision of Engine Room Live will be revisited.

\n\n

The values of the first conference - “by the people for the people”,\nbuilding up social capital by opening up debates and letting the\naudience dictate the conversation - have become deeply embedded in the\norganisation. They didn’t need a big event to bring this to life in\n2018, but they’re not ready to take them for granted just yet either!

\n\n

\n5.1.7 3 Takeaways

\n\n

Across FT’s four years of Engine Room conferences, some high level\nlessons are:

\n\n

There is so much more to a tech conference than tech

\n\n

This could be your chance to engage your department in some powerful\nconversations so that they can help define and shape the way forward.

\n\n

It doesn’t stop at the event itself

\n\n

If you are clear on your objectives, they should continue to be pursued\noutside of the event. Follow up to ensure that there is an immediate\nimpact, but also be ready to nudge and nurture other complementary\nactivities in pursuit of your goals.

\n\n

Always focus on what you are trying to achieve when deciding on your\nformat

\n\n

As your department changes, so will your needs from an event such as\nthis. Don’t be afraid to change a tried and tested formula if your needs have evolved.

\n\n\n

\n\n\n

\n5.2 Case study: Metaswitch

\n\n

Metaswitch is a “software for telecommunications” company with 800-900\npeople worldwide. Whilst most of the technology teams work in the UK,\nsome are across Europe, the US, New Zealand and Malaysia.

\n\n

For Metaswitch, the motivation for running an annual internal tech\nconference is pretty simple; it’s to keep engineers energised, engaged\nand innovative. Other departments within the organisation started the\ntrend of annual events by running global training days, flying teams in\nfrom around the world to offer a consistent and shared educational\nexperience. Being less globally distributed than the other parts of\ntheir organisation, the technology department did not have the same\nmotivations, but it inspired them to consider what they could achieve\nthemselves if they got everyone together in engineering for a couple of\ndays.

\n\n

This led to them holding their first technical conference to see if\npeople liked it – which they did. Calum Loudon (Lead Architect and\nconference organiser) tells us that whilst the benefit for the sales\nteam of a day together was formal and consistent training, for the\ntechnology department it was all about cohesion and the chance to\neducate, learn from and inspire their peers.

\n\n

The developers at Metaswitch say that the reason they work there is\nthe calibre of their fellow developers - so this is what they want to\nhighlight with their conference.

\n\n

They’ve been running events for five years, and have a consistent format\nand method that “feels really grooved now”, says Loudon. (See the\nToolkit in this book for some helpful tools for getting your own conference to run smoothly.)

\n\n

Several weeks before the event they start to drum-up interest and launch\na Call for Papers (with an incredible 80 submissions, interest in\nthe 2018 event was clear long before they even got to the day.). The\nfinal list of talks is selected by the votes of the attendees, with some\nminor tweaks to avoid giving individuals multiple appearances and to fit\nthe schedule into the various rooms that have been co-opted for the\nevent (including the neighbouring church hall!).

\n\n

Metaswitch have identified that people can need “strong encouragement”\nto lift themselves out of the day-to-day engineering and development\nroutine, so they explicitly ask everyone to attend. Limited capacity for\nmany talks means that places must be booked in advance, which in itself\ncan set the office abuzz. Within minutes of the announcement inviting\npeople to register their interest, tools are collectively downed as\npeople race to get a seat in their favourite sessions.

\n\n

Whether it is the strong encouragement to attend, the limited seats in\ntalks, the parties and games held afterwards, or the wide variety of\ntalks (anything from “How I built a grandfather clock out of LEGO” to\n“Diversity in the workplace”, with lots ot engineering and\nscience-related talks in between), their annual event now has a\nstrong reputation within the organisation.

\n\n

\n5.2.1 Making people feel valued

\n\n

Metaswitch have found that investing in their people in this way\nsustains a high level of morale and engagement in the organisation.\nPost-conference surveys record consistently high satisfaction, with over\n95% of participants reporting positive views on the conference, and with\nmany comments singling out the quality of co-workers as the key\nhighlight [3]. The enthusiasm with which the Call for Papers is met\nmeans the reputation of the events is clearly sustained from year to\nyear.

\n\n

The Metaswitch goal of sustaining a high level of engagement is not only\npursued within the conference - they hold twice-yearly hackathons [26]\nand other social events too. Many staff tell them this\nevent is a highlight of their year.

\n\n

\n5.2.2 Side-effects

\n\n

Whilst keeping people engaged and fresh is the goal of the event, when\nasked if Metaswitch had seen anything else change, Loudon identified two things:

\n\n

\n
At the last Eng Conference we had a session on “I am an X”, where various people stood up and related their experience of working at Metaswitch as a woman/trans/non-binary/carer, etc. That I think helped advance a discussion we had been having and led (albeit indirectly) to various initiatives on team cultures and psychological safety.
\n\n
More generally: a significant part of my day job as head of our architecture team is spotting when different teams are addressing similar problems and getting them to talk to each other. I have noticed that since we started running Engineering Conferences teams are better at doing that for themselves, i.e. they are less insular and more prone to asking themselves “Hang on, has anyone else solved this problem already?” rather than doing the traditional heads-down engineer thing of rushing off and building it themselves.
\n

\n\n

\n5.2.3 3 Takeaways

\n\n

There are 3 core threads running through all of the Metaswitch\nEngineering Conferences which are key to their success:

\n\n

Let the people choose

\n\n

Don’t equate internal conferences with education - this is about\ncelebrating your people. This means that (just like Hackathons) the most\nsuccessful conferences can come out of being completely open to any type\nof content - resist the urge to push a particular agenda if you want\nhigh engagement. Hopefully you should get some wonderful surprises and\nuncover creativity in places you would never think to look.

\n\n

Encourage contribution from all

\n\n

Your attendees are not just looking for those people who already talk\nactively at conferences and who will give a polished performance - they\nare looking for a good story. They’re also looking for a reason to stand\nup and talk next year, so make sure that when shortlisting you select a\nvariety of speakers to encourage less confident speakers to join in.

\n\n

Don’t forget the fun

\n\n

All the best conferences “out there” include a party or dinner of some\nkind - this informal part of the event is every bit as important as the\nconference content. In order to really feel like a treat and a genuine\nbreak from work into something different, you need to raise those\nspirits, encourage those connections and give people something to\nremember. Some games, prizes, food and drink will give your event a\nsignificant boost and maximise the returns you will get from it.

\n\n

Calum Louden, Lead Architect and conference organiser at Metaswitch

\n\n\n

\n\n\n

\n5.3 Case study: Klarna

\n\n

Founded in 2005 as an e-commerce startup, Klarna is now one of Europe’s largest banks and provides payment solutions for 60 million consumers across 100,000 merchants in fourteen countries.

\n\n

In 2014, Klarna began to run a yearly internal tech conference called\nKonferenSE (a play on the words “Klarna” and Sweden (“SE”), where\nKlarna is based). A small group of engineers at Klarna realised that an\ninternal tech conference could be a good way to help inspire and educate\ntechnology people whilst also providing an occasion for people to\nnetwork and get to know each other:

\n\n

\n
At Klarna I’ve found the relationships formed at the KonferenSE\nvaluable throughout the year. Chatting to people between sessions and\nlistening to speakers helps me discover ‘local experts’ who I can\napproach for help or advice in their areas of expertise long after the\nevent is over. When I go into a meeting about collaboration or\nintegration with a new team the atmosphere is much more friendly (and\neffective) if I’ve already had a friendly chat with them at the\nKonferenSE. - Ben Maraney, organiser
\n

\n\n

The first few conferences had over 350 participants, with attendance\ngrowing in size each year as Klarna expanded. Klarna now employs over\n2000 staff; at the 2018 conference nearly 700 staff attended, meaning\nthat nearly all the invited attendees were present.

\n\n

At a rapidly-growing technology company - especially one with a banking\nlicense and with offices in several countries like Klarna - coordinating\ntechnical approaches across the organisation becomes increasingly\ndifficult as the company adds more staff. The KonferenSE events have\nevolved over several years to meet this challenge.

\n\n

\n5.3.1 Developing speaker skills

\n\n

One of the most important ingredients of the Klarna conferences has been\nthe focus on developing speaker skills. For the 2018 conference, there\nwere 15 or 16 speaker “mentors” or coaches who worked with people whose\ntalks had been chosen for the conference. Giving a talk at a conference\nrequires skill and practice, and the mentors help the speakers to\nprepare their material, write the slides, and practice the talk itself.\nThe mentors set deadlines for various draft versions of the talk so that\nno speaker leaves things until the last minute to prepare.

\n\n

To help make talks engaging to watch, Klarna pays for professional\ntraining for their speakers. The training helps speakers both to prepare\nthe material and to actually give a presentation. In this way, many\nbasic errors of conference talks are avoided: small text on slides,\nspeakers turning away from the audience, speakers mumbling, too much\nmaterial, and similar problems are caught and avoided early on.

\n\n

The speakers selected for the upcoming conference act as a little\ncommunity that help each other to prepare. Speakers are also encouraged\nto try out their talks with small groups so that problems with the flow\nof ideas can be found and fixed.

\n\n

Slides are important. The Klarna mentors help speakers to design slides\nthat look great and are memorable, avoiding bullet points, standard\nfonts and templates. Good slides actually help the audience to focus on\nwhat the speaker is saying, and help (or force) the speaker to memorise\ntheir talk rather than read from text on the screen.

\n\n

The Klarna team found it useful to have a few backup speakers ready to\ngive a talk if one of the scheduled speakers was ill. The backup speaker\ngot all the care and attention that a scheduled speaker got (training,\nfood, swag, and so on) and even if they could not speak on the day, they\nwere selected to give an internal talk soon after the conference.

\n\n

\n5.3.2 3 Takeaways

\n\n

\n5.3.2.1 Separate the “core organisers” and the “speaker mentors”

\n\n

“One of the best improvements we made was to have separate people for\nthe core organising (including on-the-day operations) and the speaker\nmentoring”, says Kim Öberg, one of the organising team. The activities\nand focus for a speaker mentor is quite different from the things that\nneed to happen on the conference day, and keeping these two groups of\npeople separate (to focus on their role) proved to be very valuable.

\n\n

\n5.3.2.2 Allow time to prepare for each event

\n\n

Preparations for a KonferenSE event begin 9 months beforehand. Nine\nmonths may seem like a long time but it provides plenty of opportunity\nto mentor and train speakers, prepare talks and slides, and ensure that\nthe conference has a friendly but professional feel. With over 700\nattendees, it can be a challenge to find a venue large enough, so early\npreparation helps. With a growing organisation, the extra time helps the\norganisers and mentors to consider multiple viewpoints within\nEngineering, helping to broaden the reach of the event and increase\nawareness of additional aspects of running a major European banking\noperation. A good preparation window also enables the organising team to\nmake changes to the event; for example, for the 2019 event, the\norganising team is considering running dedicated talk tracks with\nspecific themes due to the volume and high quality of the talk\nsubmissions.

\n\n

\n5.3.2.3 Continuing success

\n\n

The internal tech conferences at Klarna have been very successful,\nproducing all kinds of advantages that were not initially expected. The\nChief Product Officer (CPO) at Klarna, David Fock, is a huge fan of the\nconference, and gives a 30 minute product vision talk immediately after\nthe morning keynote. The conference is attended by many people outside\nthe technology department, helping to provide cohesion between different\nparts of Klarna.

\n\n

Read more about engineering at Klarna: engineering.klarna.com

\n\n

Ben Maraney, Case Taintor, Kim Öberg, Matthias Feist - current and former organisers of the KonferenSE internal tech conferences at Klarna.

\n\n\n

\n $\"\"$ \n

\n \n

\n\n\n\n

\nToolkit for internal tech conferences

\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n

(This chapter is not available in the sample)

\n\n\n

\nReferences

\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n\n

[1] Internal Tech Conferences - How and Why (Victoria Morgan-Smith & Matthew Skelton) InfoQ, October 10, 2016. https://www.infoq.com/articles/internal-tech-conferences

\n\n

[2] InfoQ. “The InfoQ EMag: Scaling DevOps,” May 10, 2017. https://www.infoq.com/minibooks/emag-scaling-devops

\n\n

[3] Metaswitch blog https://www.Metaswitch.com/blog

\n\n

[4] Learning 3.0 http://www.learning30.co/

\n\n

[5] How Creative Workers Learn - Developer your career and emergent learning and succeed in the creativity age. by Alexandre Magno (Happy Melly Express; 1 Oct 2015)) ASIN: B013K8K1CU

\n\n

[6] Cait O’Riordan https://twitter.com/caitoriordan

\n\n

[7] Engine Room Live internal conference 2016 (Victoria Morgan-Smith / FT) http://engineroom.ft.com/2016/05/03/engine-room-live-internal-conference-2016/

\n\n

[8] Throwable Microphones http://eu.getcatchbox.com/

\n\n

[9] Engineering Day Feb 2013 – WebPerf, Service Versioning, Deployments, Chef, and more (Matthew Skelton / Trainline) https://engineering.thetrainline.com/2012/10/09/engineering-day-lifting-the-bonnet/, https://engineering.thetrainline.com/2013/03/27/engineering-day-feb-2013-webperf-service-versioning-deployments-chef-and-more/

\n\n

[10] Internal Tech Conference Toolkit (Ben Maraney / Klarna) https://engineering.klarna.com/internal-tech-conference-toolkit-79b1ba91bd08

\n\n

[11] DOCCON1 – organising a conference (Rich Haigh / Betfair) https://betsandbits.com/2014/09/23/doccon1-organising-a-conference/

\n\n

[12] ING at DevOpsDays Amsterdam 2014: ITIL and DevOps at War in the Enterprise (Jan Joost-Bouwman) http://www.slideshare.net/JanJoostBouwman/20140620-dev-opsdaysamsterdam-for-publication and The Journey of devops and continuous delivery in a Large Financial Institution (Kris Buytaert) http://www.slideshare.net/KrisBuytaert/velocity2013-mh/17?src=clipshare

\n\n

[13] Diversity in Tech conferences and Meetups - How and Why Matthew Skelton (blog), April 28, 2018. https://blog.matthewskelton.net/2018/04/28/diversity-in-tech-conferences-and-meetups-how-and-why/

\n\n

[14] Is Gender Diversity Profitable? Evidence from a Global Survey, (Is Gender Diversity Profitable? Evidence from a Global Survey, Feb 2016) https://piie.com/publications/wp/wp16-3.pdf

\n\n

[15] PechaKucha https://www.pechakucha.org/faq

\n\n

[16] How to help presenters prepare for your conference (Ben Maraney / Klarna) https://engineering.klarna.com/how-to-help-presenters-prepare-for-your-conference-156d80832caa

\n\n

[17] Accessible Conference Guide (SIG Access) http://www.sigaccess.org/welcome-to-sigaccess/resources/accessible-conference-guide/

\n\n

[18] The Annual New Relic Product Offsite Focuses on the Decade Ahead (Frederic Paul / New Relic) https://blog.newrelic.com/culture/product-offsite-year-of-thinking-big/

\n\n

[19] Fearless Change: patterns for introducing new ideas by Mary Lynn Manns Ph.D & Linda Rising Ph.D (Addison Wesley; 01 edition (4 Oct. 2004)) ISBN 978-0201741575

\n\n

[20] Nudge - Improving decisions about health, wealth and happiness by Richard H. Thaler & Cass R. Sunstein (Penguin Books; 5 Mar 2009) ISBN 978-0141040011

\n\n

[21] - (removed)

\n\n

[22] Pearson https://www.pearson.com/uk/

\n\n

[23] FT’s Engine Room 2015 (Victoria Morgan-Smith / FT) http://engineroom.ft.com/2015/02/25/ft-technology-internal-conference-engine-room-2015/

\n\n

[24] Nikkei http://www.nikkei.co.jp/nikkeiinfo/en/

\n\n

[25] Richard Still, FT https://www.linkedin.com/in/richard-still-bb00989/

\n\n

[26] Hackathons Motivate Metaswitch and Drive Innovation (Calum Loudon / Metaswitch) https://www.Metaswitch.com/blog/hackathons-motivate-Metaswitch-and-drive-innovation

\n\n

[27] Social capital in the growth of science-and-technology-based SMEs by Jukka Partanen, Kristian Möller, Mika Westerlund, Risto Rajala, Arto Rajala http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0019850108000655

\n\n

[28] DOES15 (Re)building an Engineering Culture: DevOps at Target (Heather Mickman & Ross Clanton / Target) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7s-VbB1fG5o

\n\n

[29] A Product Manager’s visit to the Engine Room (Mattijas Larsson / FT) http://engineroom.ft.com/2015/03/05/a-product-managers-visit-to-the-engine-room/

\n\n

[30] Conferences – jumped up classrooms? (Donald Clark) http://donaldclarkplanb.blogspot.co.uk/2008/11/conferences-jumped-up-classrooms.html

\n\n

[31] Better Developer Conferences (Andrew Betts, August 2017) https://trib.tv/2017/08/16/better-developer-conferences/

\n\n

[32] Review legacy code: Waking dragons is risk worth taking, says Trainline ops head (Kat Hall) http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/05/05/trainline_ops_head_review_code_continuous_lifecycle/

\n\n

[33] How TechSmith Rocks Its Internal Developer Conference (Matthew Heusser / TechSmith) http://www.cio.com/article/2380063/continuing-education/how-techsmith-rocks-its-internal-developer-conference.html

\n\n

[34] Principles of Sociotechnical Design Revisited by Albert Cherns, in Human Relations March 1987 vol. 40 no. 3 153-161 http://hum.sagepub.com/content/40/3/153.short

\n\n

[35] How to run an internal unconference (Henrik Kniberg) http://blog.crisp.se/2013/06/30/henrikkniberg/how-to-run-an-internal-unconference

\n\n

[36] Running Internal Events – The Goat Farm – Episode 5 (Michael Ducy / @mfdii) https://goatcan.do/2015/03/25/running-internal-events-the-goat-farm-episode-5/

\n\n

[37] Engineering Day Feb 2013 — WebPerf, Service Versioning, Deployments, Chef, and more (Trainline Engineering blog, March 2013) https://engineering.thetrainline.com/2013/03/27/engineering-day-feb-2013-webperf-service-versioning-deployments-chef-and-more/

\n\n

[38] Reinventing organizations by Frederic Laloux (Nelson Parker, 2014) ISBN 978-2960133509 https://www.amazon.co.uk/Reinventing-Organizations-Creating-Inspired-Consciousness/dp/2960133501

\n\n

[39] The Future of Management Is Teal (Frederic Laloux) http://www.strategy-business.com/article/00344?gko=10921

\n\n

[40] DevOps Handbook by Gene Kim, Jez Humble, Patrick Debois & John Willis (IT Revolution Press, 2016) ISBN

\n\n

[41] Organising the Engine room Conference (Sarah Wells / FT) http://engineroom.ft.com/2015/03/09/organising-the-engine-room-conference/

\n\n

[42] The power of an internal conference - How you can leverage internal experts to build employee engagement (Thansha Sadacharam) https://medium.com/bridgeable/the-power-of-an-internal-conference-34f9ce6f7dcd

\n\n

[43] Conference Code of Conduct http://confcodeofconduct.com/

\n\n

[44] How to run a good tech conference by Matthew Skelton https://blog.matthewskelton.net/2018/06/07/how-to-run-a-good-tech-conference/

\n\n

[45] Skelton, Matthew, and Manuel Pais. Team Topologies. IT Revolution Press, 2019.http://teamtopologies.com/

\n\n

[46] DORA. “DevOps Research and Assessment.” Accessed January 8, 2019.https://devops-research.com/research.html

\n\n

[47] Rozovsky, Julia. “Re:Work - The Five Keys to a Successful Google Team,” November 17, 2015. https://rework.withgoogle.com/blog/five-keys-to-a-successful-google-team/

\n\n

[48] Forsgren, Nicole, and Jez Humble. Accelerate: The Science of Lean Software and Devops: Building and Scaling High Performing Technology Organizations. Portland, Oregon: Trade Select, 2018. pp.101-109

\n\n\n

[50] Maraney, Ben. “The Best Developer Conference? Your Own.” Klarna Engineering (blog), December 5, 2016. https://engineering.klarna.com/the-best-developer-conference-your-own-ef68f2831b67

\n\n

[51] Webber, Emily. “The Realtime Retrospective” (blog), November 5, 2016 https://emilywebber.co.uk/the-realtime-retrospective/

\n\n

[52] British Dyslexia Association, https://www.bdadyslexia.org.uk/dyslexic/eyes-and-dyslexia

\n\n

[53] Why Do We Save the Best for Last?, by Ben Y Hayden Ph.D., Psychology Today (Oct 24, 2012) https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/the-decision-tree/201210/why-do-we-save-the-best-last

\n\n

[54] Pink, Daniel H. Drive. Main edition. Edinburgh: Canongate Books Ltd, 2011.

\n\n

[55] Kniberg, Henrik. “Crisp’s Blog » What Is an Unconference?” Crisp’s Blog (blog), August 30, 2016. https://blog.crisp.se/2016/08/30/henrikkniberg/what-is-an-unconference

\n\n

[56] Doing Presentations https://www.doingpresentations.com/

\n\n\n

\n $\"\"$ \n

\n \n

\n\n\n

\nTerminology

\n\n

AV - Audio Visual
Active Voice - specifically referencing an ation eg “John said that”, rather than the more passive “it has been said”
Bootcamp - a short duration working with a software team to gain experience
CfP - Call for Papers
Death march - a software project that stretches on at an unsustainable pace and feels destined to fail
DevOps - an approach to building and running software systems that emphasises close collaboration, flow, long-term team ownership, automation, and metrics
Diversity and Inclusion - a movement to acknowledge that having a diverse group is insufficient, so inclusion means making it a welcome space for all, not merely a tolerant one
Echo chamber - a space where a person only encounters views and beliefs similar to their own - likened to a physical echo chamber which is an enclosed space where sound reverberates
Emergent leadership - leadership being demonstrated by people taking the initiative, rather than be being given a leadership title
Emergent learning - new knowledge being acquired through experience rather than from formal training courses
Guild - a cross-team group who meet to share knowledge and experience within a given discipline / competency
Hack Day - a short, intense period (often a day) for engineers and other disciplines to work together to create a functioning product by the end of the event
IoT - Internet of Things
Lightning talk - a short talk of 5 - 10 minutes
Live captioning - a service that will capture words spoken on a plain text screen as they are said
NPS - Net Promoter Score
Open Spaces - self-organised and lightly facilitated discussions
PechaKucha 20x20 - a lightning talk consisting of 20 slides which autoplay for 20 seconds each
Psychological Safety - the ability to be oneself with one’s team without fear of negative consequence
Q&A - Questions and Answers
Rhetorical questions - a figure of speech in the form of a question that is asked to make a point rather than to elicit an answer
Social capital - a form of currency that is built up through positive social interaction, and which then gets spent in more challenging times. Like any other budget, it needs topped up from time to time.
Straw Man Proposal - a draft proposal designed to stimulate debate - may be deliberately provocative
Team stand-ups - a short, usually daily, team meeting to set the focus for the day

\n\n

\nIndex

\n\n

accessibility, 46
\naudio visual (AV), 47-48

\n\n

capital, social, 10

\n\n

budget, 25, 44, 100-101

\n\n

emergent leadership, 8
\nemergent learning, 8

\n\n

FT (case study), 14, 72

\n\n

hack day, 67

\n\n

internal tech conference (definition), 2

\n\n

Klarna (case study), 8, 15, 86

\n\n

leadership, emergent, 8
\nLearning 3.0, 8
\nlearning, emergent, 8
\nlightning talks, 14, 17, 30

\n\n

Metaswitch (case study), 15, 37, 82

\n\n

nudge theory, 68, 74

\n\n

open spaces, 10, 14, 30

\n\n

panel discussions, 31, 77, 98
\npsychological safety, 4, 73, 84

\n\n

realtime retrospective, 61, 116

\n\n

safety, psychological, 4, 73, 84
\nsocial capital, 10

\n\n

\n\n","tocStructure",[205,206,207,208,209,210,211,212,213,214,215,216,217,218,219,220,221,222,223,224,225,226,227,228,229,230,231],{"_79":80,"_43":81,"_74":-5,"_82":83,"_75":84,"_100":-5,"_101":-5,"_87":-5},{"_79":80,"_43":89,"_74":-5,"_82":90,"_75":84,"_100":-5,"_101":-5,"_87":-5},{"_79":80,"_43":93,"_74":-5,"_82":94,"_75":84,"_100":-5,"_101":-5,"_87":-5},{"_79":97,"_43":98,"_74":-5,"_82":99,"_75":84,"_100":-5,"_101":-5,"_87":-5},{"_79":97,"_43":103,"_74":-5,"_82":104,"_75":84,"_100":-5,"_101":-5,"_87":-5},{"_79":97,"_43":106,"_74":-5,"_82":107,"_75":84,"_100":-5,"_101":-5,"_87":-5},{"_79":80,"_43":109,"_74":-5,"_82":110,"_75":84,"_100":-5,"_101":-5,"_87":-5},{"_79":97,"_43":113,"_74":-5,"_82":114,"_75":84,"_100":-5,"_101":-5,"_87":-5},{"_79":97,"_43":116,"_74":-5,"_82":117,"_75":84,"_100":-5,"_101":-5,"_87":-5},{"_79":97,"_43":119,"_74":-5,"_82":120,"_75":84,"_100":-5,"_101":-5,"_87":-5},{"_79":97,"_43":122,"_74":-5,"_82":123,"_75":84,"_100":-5,"_101":-5,"_87":-5},{"_79":97,"_43":125,"_74":-5,"_82":126,"_75":84,"_100":-5,"_101":-5,"_87":-5},{"_79":97,"_43":128,"_74":-5,"_82":129,"_75":84,"_100":-5,"_101":-5,"_87":-5},{"_79":97,"_43":131,"_74":-5,"_82":132,"_75":84,"_100":-5,"_101":-5,"_87":-5},{"_79":97,"_43":134,"_74":-5,"_82":135,"_75":84,"_100":-5,"_101":-5,"_87":-5},{"_79":97,"_43":137,"_74":-5,"_82":138,"_75":84,"_100":-5,"_101":-5,"_87":-5},{"_79":80,"_43":140,"_74":-5,"_82":141,"_75":84,"_100":-5,"_101":-5,"_87":-5},{"_79":80,"_43":144,"_74":-5,"_82":145,"_75":84,"_100":-5,"_101":-5,"_87":-5},{"_79":80,"_43":148,"_74":-5,"_82":149,"_75":84,"_100":-5,"_101":-5,"_87":-5},{"_79":80,"_43":152,"_74":-5,"_82":153,"_75":84,"_100":-5,"_101":-5,"_87":-5},{"_79":97,"_43":156,"_74":-5,"_82":157,"_75":84,"_100":-5,"_101":-5,"_87":-5},{"_79":97,"_43":159,"_74":-5,"_82":160,"_75":84,"_100":-5,"_101":-5,"_87":-5},{"_79":97,"_43":162,"_74":-5,"_82":163,"_75":84,"_100":-5,"_101":-5,"_87":-5},{"_79":80,"_43":165,"_74":-5,"_82":166,"_75":84,"_100":-5,"_101":-5,"_87":-5},{"_79":80,"_43":169,"_74":-5,"_82":170,"_75":84,"_100":-5,"_101":-5,"_87":-5},{"_79":80,"_43":173,"_74":-5,"_82":174,"_75":84,"_100":-5,"_101":-5,"_87":-5},{"_79":80,"_43":177,"_74":-5,"_82":178,"_75":84,"_100":-5,"_101":-5,"_87":-5},"publicChapterContent","nextChapter","sections",[],"routes/_store+/_layout","routes/_store+/_readers+/_layout","actionData","errors"]

\n2. Preparing for the conference

Table of Contents

\nConflux Books

\nAcknowledgements

\nIntroduction

\nHow to use this book

\nWhy we wrote this book

\nAbout the authors

\n1. Benefits - why run an internal tech conference

\n1.1 What is an internal tech conference?

\n1.2 The business case

\n1.3 Measurable benefits

\n1.4 Empowerment, Learning, Connection

\n1.4.1 Empowerment

\n1.4.2 Learning

\n1.4.3 Connection

\n1.5 Define what speakers gain

\n1.5.1 Celebrate unsung heroes

\n1.5.2 Personal growth

\n1.5.3 Confidence

\n1.6 Define what attendees gain

\n1.6.1 Engagement with the organisation

\n1.6.2 Feeling valued

\n1.6.3 Learning and validation

\n1.7 What types of events work?

\n1.7.1 Financial Times: 1-day annual event with internal speakers only

\n1.7.2 Metaswitch: 2-day annual event with internal speakers and “friends”

\n1.7.3 Klarna: 1-day internal off-site event for all in engineering

\n1.7.4 Paddy Power Betfair: off-site, with some external speakers

\n1.7.5 ING: internal and external speakers, with a specific theme

\n1.7.6 UK-based ticket retailer: 6 monthly half-day event, all staff invited

\n1.7.7 Permission to pause

\n1.8 Learn from external events

\n1.8.1 Tickets

\n1.8.2 Sponsorship

\n1.8.3 Marketing

\n1.8.4 Publicity

\n1.9 Chapter Review

\n2. Preparing for the conference

\n3. Running the conference

\n4. Follow-up

\n5. Case studies

\n5.1 Case study: The Financial Times

\n5.1.1 How it all began

\n5.1.2 2015 - it began with a vision

\n5.1.3 2016 - change is in the air

\n5.1.4 2017 - getting into the groove

\n5.1.5 2018 - change is Business As Usual

\n5.1.5.1 Pushing the boundaries

\n5.1.5.2 A new type of conference

\n5.1.6 What’s next for Engine Room Live?

\n5.1.7 3 Takeaways

\n5.2 Case study: Metaswitch

\n5.2.1 Making people feel valued

\n5.2.2 Side-effects

\n5.2.3 3 Takeaways

\n5.3 Case study: Klarna

\n5.3.1 Developing speaker skills

\n5.3.2 3 Takeaways

\n5.3.2.1 Separate the “core organisers” and the “speaker mentors”

\n5.3.2.2 Allow time to prepare for each event

\n5.3.2.3 Continuing success

\nToolkit for internal tech conferences

\nReferences

\nTerminology

\nIndex