PASS Summit 2015 Feedback

We are part of an awesome community. The SQL Server Community or SQL Family, as many call it, is astounding. Our annual Big family reunion is the PASS Summit. I received feedback from attendee evaluations the other day and I would like to share some of the feedback for one reason: Many people spoke at the PASS Summit 2015 for the very first time in October 2015. Presenting at the largest SQL Server conference on the planet is daunting. Speaking there the first time is flat-out intimidating.

My primary audience for this post is presenters, especially that handful of people who spoke for the first time at the PASS Summit 2015. But I think a broader audience of speakers with limited experience or people who desire to become speakers may also benefit from these words (that’s why I decided to blog about it!).

“How’d You Do at the PASS Summit 2015, Andy?”

I’m glad you asked. I had a great time presenting! Why is that my first response? Who cares about how I felt, for goodness sake? I was there to do a job, right? Well, yes and no. In exchange for presenting, I am allowed to attend the PASS Summit for free. Paying attendees are there to listen to me deliver my presentation, so I am working for them. As a Data Philosopher at Andy Leonard Consulting, part of my job is to find gainful employment in the form of training or consulting gigs. In that sense, presenting at the PASS Summit 2015 (or anywhere) is at least partially work-related.

But work is not why I present.

I present because I love learning. I get excited about learning new stuff, whether it’s technology or something else. I always have. I suspect I always will. Why? I don’t know. But there’s no denying I thoroughly enjoy learning new stuff.

Presenting is one way to share this love with others. And sharing the love is why I present.

What makes for a great time presenting?

1. I know the material.
2. I enjoy the material.
3. I have a story to tell.
4. I have “a good story-telling day.”

That last one is tricky so I will explain. I suffer from have ADHD. Sometimes ADHD is a blessing. When presenting, though, I need to be as focused as possible. ADHD does not promote focus.

“What Feedback Did You Receive From Summit Attendees, Andy?”

Ah, you’ve learned well. It’s always best to ask Data Philosophers with ADHD specific questions. I feel the ratings and feedback were perhaps the highest and best I have ever received from attendees of the PASS Summit.

I’m a huge fan of the 3-point rating system employed by the PASS Program Committee for evaluations this year. There were only four questions on the evaluation. I admire those decisions greatly. Kudos to the PASS Summit Program Committee!

The questions asked were:

1. Overall Session – Did the title, abstract, and session level align to what was presented?
2. Session Content – Was the content useful and relevant?
3. Presentation – Was the speaker articulate, prepared, and knowledgeable on the subject matter?
4. Promotions – Did the session contain blatant sales material or self-promotion such as blogs, company, or services?

My “nummers” (a Hazzard-ism):

Use Biml to Automate SSIS Design Patterns

• Overall Session: 2.96
• Session Content: 2.85
• Presentation: 2.92
• Promotions: 1.23

A sample of comments:

• Speaker was good.  Not a level 400 session.
• Very good content but a little bit hard to follow at times.  The concepts did get through though.
• I enjoy sessions with Andy.  That said, he treads a fine line with promoting BIML the product versus the usefulness of using BIML. 
• Lots of info efficiently presented, straight to the point. Great brewing of ideas to automate package creation using patterns, possibilities through the roof when you follow standards and guidelines.
• This is the best session I have seen Andy do; SQL Server conferences are awash with introductory material on BIML, but very few presenters are addressing the complexities that arise in non-trivial BIML projects.
• Best session so far. Fantastic information and presentation.
• Loved it. Very excited to use moving forward. He did say, "Tough", though.

My thoughts:

I’m not as good as the positive comments indicate. The first clue is the negative comments. I’m always fascinated by comments on the level of a session. Paul Randal and Adam Machanic touch on the topic of Level in their excellent posts (click the links and read if you’re a presenter or want to be a presenter). Peeves make lousy pets. That said, comments about level are a pet peeve. Why?

<vent>

Three points…

Every single session I deliver is going to contain material that is below the session level. Every. single. one. I was an instructor before I started working with database technology. Instruction always involves ramping up to a topic – starting with the familiar and working into the unfamiliar. Unless you’re marketing. I don’t do marketing – at least not intentionally.

I’m not sure how to fix the complaint in the comment. I’m not even sure what the complaint is. Is the issue that the session was really a 500-level? a 300-level? I’m going to assume the complaint is that the session didn’t rise to the advertised level of 400, which brings me to…

Your “400” is different from the “400” of others. In addition (pun intended), my “400” on SSIS and Biml is different from my “400” on C#. The session level is not static. Questions from attendees can impact the overall level of the material delivered. Each time I’ve followed up on similar comments, I’ve learned the person is communicating, “I expected to learn more than you shared.” Now that’s a useful comment! I either need to deliver more or do a better job communicating my intentions in the abstract (see Adam’s awesome post). As a data professional, I have way too much respect for numbers to see them bandied about in this manner. It bugs me. (Can you tell?)

</vent>

The last comment is a light-hearted jab. You will have to listen to the session recording to get the inside joke.

Hacking the SSIS Catalog

• Overall Session: 2.90
• Session Content: 2.87
• Presentation: 3.00
• Promotions: 1.14

A sample of comments:

• I did pick up a couple interesting things, but I left the session feeling frustrated.  This felt more like a 200 level session instead of 400 level that I was expecting.
• My only issue was that the session built on a previous (biml) session that Andy had done previously. It wasn’t needed to understand the content but it would have been nice to list that as a helpful pre-requisite, since he used content from that previous… (comment was truncated)
• Andy had a couple of issues with his demo, but handled it like the professional that he is.  He moved on and continued presenting the next point in his presentation.  He even poked fun at himself which I feel was a good add for the attendees.
• I barely understood most of what this was explaining, but it was one of my favorite sessions!  The style and pacing was just right to keep me caught up on a subject I know very little about.
• I thoroughly enjoyed the presentation and especially the speaker. Easily gets my vote for the best speaker of the week!  That was fun learning. Thank you so much!
• Andy seems like a "mad genius"! His presentation was my favorite of the whole conference. The material was truly one-of-a-kind and extremely useful. Andy’s delivery of the material was both confident and hilarious. I won’t miss the chance to attend another
• Andy does what he wants and did an outstanding job on how simply add some custom tables, procedures, and views to easily look and manage dw load

My thoughts:

The comment on session level is actionable. (I’ve beat that horse enough for one blog post.) The comment about connecting material from the two sessions is very fair. The truth is, I made the decision to connect them after delivering the first session. As the commenter points out, it didn’t matter which SSIS packages I used to demonstrate customizing SSIS package execution within the SSIS Catalog. But it’s fair to point out that I didn’t disclose I would be using SSIS packages from the other session demos prior to the beginning of this presentation. I had issues with a demo because I built something on-stage in front of everyone without rehearsing it first. My friends who are fantastic presenters tell me I should not do this. I respectfully disagree. I am sharing about software development (Biml and SSIS are software development). I will continue to build ad hoc demos in front of people during presentations – and fail – because I want everyone in the room to understand that failure is a normal (and good) part of software development.

Again, the last comment contains an inside joke from the session that will make more sense if you listen to the recording.

Conclusion

It is always an honor to present. I sincerely appreciate good feedback because it helps me improve. Thanks to everyone who attended my sessions and to everyone who will listen to the recordings when they become available!

:{>