It’s no big news that I don’t like speaker panels in conferences. Often it’s a way to fit several people on stage and almost always a big waste of time for the attendees, as hardly any real content or interesting discussion comes out of them.
What do you get when you combine 7 panelist plus one moderator on to a stage for 30 minutes to talk about a serious topic? Answer: Not much. And that was evident on today’s Angel vs. VC panel. It’s a shame. There are real changes in the venture capital industry and it would have been fun to talk about them. I said almost nothing in the 30 minutes.
I totally agree with him as almost always panels are a conference-killer. As an event organizer you should avoid them whenever possible or focus on setting up debates with two speakers that have an opposite view on one issue, making them engage in a real (and honest) discussion. Otherwise, it’s better to give the stage for 10 minutes to each of the speakers individually, or have them interviewed by an outstanding moderator, that should enforce the “good health” of the show.
The worse panels? Those that transform into a never ending marketing pitch or a friendly conversation by a bunch of people that agree and compliment with each other…