the Health Tourism Conference Model for the Internet Century
Konstantinos Konstantinidis, M.D., Ph.D.
Director - ExCtu - addressing the Health Tourism Sector "Builder Class" (a.k.a. the "growth makers" and “developers”) with originated T-shaped knowledge for thinking and doing.
…Optimized and Rationalized with regards to Objectives, Design, Scope, Content and Speakers
This is an “ever-evolving” EMVIO document
See: EMVIO Entities - in Health Tourism - https://www.dhirubhai.net/pulse/emvio-entities-health-tourism-constantinides-m-d-ph-d-/ .
NOTE
For the “definition and scope” of Contemporary Health Tourism (a.k.a. Internet Century Health Tourism – with both terms now, represented by ht8) - in bullet point form - see: https://www.dhirubhai.net/pulse/health-tourism-few-bullet-points-constantinides-m-d-ph-d-/ .
Also included is a short reference to the “then” and “now”.
an Impression based on a Fallacy
…and an example of “simplistic thinking and doing”
At many Health Tourism events, a significant number of participants practically ignores the “conference” and focus on the B2B Meetings and Exhibition – because “that is where the business and money is”.
Of course, this is a "fallacious impression" because, the serious business and money springs from insights gained by listening to what the vital few and wise heads have to say.
The Optimized and Rationalized Conference Model (the Model) has been designed to be of such financial and business relevance that some may complain that it overshadows and eclipses the other event components.
a Conference Model reflecting “lessons learned” and “pitfalls avoided”
…dispensing with legacy features which distract from the essence
Like Vanity Publishing (where the author pays for the publication of a book), some conferences have become “vanity plays” – aiming to please (or reward) the speakers rather than the audience.
The Optimized and Rationalized model clearly aims to please and benefit the audience.
The design of the Conference clearly reflects “lessons learned” and “pitfalls avoided”.
The Model has been optimized (made as good and effective as possible) and rationalized (based on reason and logic), with regards to:
It has made a point of dispensing with legacy features which distract from the essence.
In brief, it is associated with:
The model addresses Health Tourism at the Macro and Micro levels:
The model takes into account the fact that Health Tourism, in its full context, is a broad Sector with a diverse stakeholder base whose members may have a differing range of interests and needs – but who still need to be fully aware of the complete picture.
One dilemma was how to ensure that differing interests and needs are adequately addressed – without separating and isolating participants into “special interest groups” (which goes contrary to the need for Sector Integration)?
The solution to this conundrum was to segment the conference program into thematically focused Sessions which provide:
In spite of the segmentation, to obtain maximum benefit, all participants need to, ideally, attend all the Sessions.
For this reason, in the Model, all sessions are plenary.
Breakout Sessions go contrary to the spirit and aim of Integration.
This “much-considered” approach to design ensures that the event comprehensively deals with all relevant aspects of Health Tourism (in terms of “knowledge”, “Understanding” and “policy and strategy”) – and makes certain that the practical interests and concerns of the entire stakeholder base are addressed.
In short, the design of the Event Model reflects “lessons learned” and “pitfalls avoided”.
a Conference associated with a set of OKRs
…the only way to “objectively” consider and determine “success”
It should be obvious that the first thing to consider in designing a conference is its objectives – and aimed for “results”.
All other “features” should follow from this.
“Objectives and Key Results” (OKRs) is a goal-setting system (originated by Andy Grove, of Intel fame) who introduced it as a “tool” for defining and tracking objectives and their outcomes.
The model’s objectives – and aimed for “results” – include:
See LinkedIn article: Events - the objective way to determine Success - ensure they are associated with a set of OKRs - https://www.dhirubhai.net/pulse/events-objective-way-determine-success-constantinides-m-d-ph-d-/ ?.
Resolving
…the issues which impact and shape the ever-evolving Health Tourism Sector
The conference has been designed to consider and resolve the issues which impact and shape the ever-evolving Health Tourism Sector – in an atmosphere free of “fanfare”.
The emphasis is on “resolving”, rather than merely “discussing”.
Conference Structure
…i.e., its “organization”
As already indicated, the event model has made a point of dispensing with legacy features which distract from the essence.
?all Conference Sessions to be Plenary
…Breakout Sessions go contrary to the spirit and aim of Integration
All the conference sessions are plenary.
Health Tourism, in its full context, is a broad Sector with a diverse stakeholder base whose members may have a differing range of interests and needs – but who still need to be fully aware of the complete picture.
The conference ensures that differing interests and needs are adequately addressed – without separating and isolating participants into “special interest groups” (which goes contrary to the need for Sector Integration)?
With this in mind, the conference program is “segmented” into thematically focused Sessions which provide:
In spite of the segmentation, to obtain maximum benefit, all participants need to, ideally, attend all the Sessions.
领英推荐
Which is why all sessions are plenary.
Breakout Sessions go contrary to the spirit and aim of Integration.
option of dispensing with the Panel Discussions
…because, like Talk Shows, they have entertainment value – but do not resolve issues
The conference places more emphasis on presentations rather than on panel discussions.
In fact, in the Event Model, for reasons explained, the inclusion of panel discussions is optional.
Basically:
During a “panel” an issue is considered - in a “presentation” it is resolved – or, should be resolved.
A panel session is a specific format that involves a group of people who exchange insights and views at a meeting or conference.
Stated a little differently, a panel discussion is: talking about something (conversation) in order to exchange ideas.
According to Wikipedia, a panel discussion involves a group of people gathered to discuss a topic in front of an audience, with the goal of being informative and entertaining.
In other words, like Talk Shows, Panel Discussions are expected to have entertainment value.
If I want to be entertained, I go to the cinema or theatre – or better still, a Rock Concert.
One feature I particularly dislike about panel discussions, is that the participants are chosen for their prominence, controversial views and, even, celebrity status - and (like participants in a debate) they aim to score points.
In fact, as in a debate, panel participants actually spar (unless they want to appear condescending and amenable, by agreeing with - and even congratulating - one or more of the co-panelists).
Panel Discussions are designed to “discuss” rather than to “resolve” issues.
And, again, as with debates (which likewise, have entertainment value), one hears views (albeit, based on arguments) but at the end, one does not go home having conclusively decided about the “issue” – one way or the other.
On the other hand, during a presentation, the speaker is expected to be incisive and resolute - clearly and unambiguously stating the view and position held and supported.
In fact, speakers commit themselves, with regards to the issue in question.
They make a commitment.
See related LinkedIn article:?https://www.dhirubhai.net/pulse/presentation-vs-panel-discussion-constantinides-m-d-ph-d-/ ?.
dispensing with the Session Chairs
…a redundant “convention”
At some events (e.g., the International Management Research Academy Conference), “qualified and interested” individuals apply to be Chair of a Paper Presentation Session, by filling in a form.
Some conferences even keep up the tradition of also including a co-chair.
I consider the role of chairperson (and worse still, that of a co-chair) to be redundant.
Conference organizers (or designers) perpetuate the “convention” to reward or please the chairperson – rather than serve the needs of the audience.
Instead, bring in the “dual role” Session Coordinator (preferably a presentable one) who “stands aside” during a presentation.
Scope and Subject Matter Coverage
…a Conference Model designed to include Sessions at the Macro and Micro levels
The Conference Model has been designed to include Sessions at the Macro and Micro levels.
Specifically:
See related LinkedIn articles:
The Conference will aim to address such issues as:
Conference Speakers
…Subject Matter Experts with established “pedigree & credentials” in their field of expertise
The conference model foresees speakers in the following “categories”:
BTW, I will elaborate of the issue of “speaker categories” in a separate – dedicated article on the subject.
Furthermore, the conference model prescribes that speakers should be subject matter experts, with established “pedigree & credentials” in their field of expertise.
Having said this, if it was my decision to make, I would certainly not invite someone to speak if, in their LinkedIn profile or CV, they described themselves as an “expert”, “specialist”, “professional; speaker”, “influencer” – or worse still, a “motivational” or “inspirational” speaker.
And I would not invite those who insinuated themselves into the Sector - but who lack the corresponding sector-specific Pedigree and Credentials (something I have written about).
I want speakers who “have done” something original or innovative.
More about having made an “impact” instead of an “impression” (not speakers chosen because of their “Halo Effect”).
They should bring “to the table” original – speaker originated – “word” – related to one or more of the “issues” to be addressed (as listed in this document).
The model also mandates that Invited and Hosted Speakers, in addition to having their costs covered, should also be paid a respectable fee – to demonstrate that their contribution has value and is valued.
Something is of value only if those it addresses are prepared to pay for it.
And the emphasis is on “respectable fee”, because, if you pay peanuts – you get monkeys (Peter Economides).