Lift09 Asia Feedback Survey Results

Results of feedback survey of LIFT Asia 09 December 2009 Glenn O’Neil – oneil@owlre.com Owl RE

Introduction – Following the LIFT Asia 2009 conference (South Korea) of September 2009 an email invitation was sent to all participants (some 450) – The survey was available in English and Korean – 61 participants responded to the survey (45 in Korean and 16 in English) – This is a response rate of 14% - on the lower end but still enough to learn from the results 2

Overall rating Comparison between LIFT Asia 08 & LIFT Asia 09: LIFT Asia 08 LIFT Asia 09 Very poor 4% (1) 2% (1) Poor -- -- 7% (4) Satisfactory 4% (1) 21%(13) Good 48% (12) 41%(25) Excellent 44% (11) 3 30%(18)

Influence Lift Asia 09 provided me with interesting Lift Asia 09 Conference was relevant to my information on the usage of emerging interests technologies Strongly disagree 1 (2 %) Strongly disagree 1 (2 %) Disagree 2 (3 %) Disagree 5 (8 %) Neither agree nor 13 (21 %) Neither agree nor 15 (25 %) disagree disagree Agree 31 (51 %) Agree 28 (46 %) Strongly agree 14 (23 %) Strongly agree 12 (20 %) Lift Asia 09 was suitable for my Lift Asia 09 has influenced what I think background and experience about the usage of emerging technologies Strongly disagree 2 (3 %) Strongly disagree 1 (2 %) Disagree 6 (10 %) Disagree 5 (8 %) Neither agree nor 15 (25 %) disagree Neither agree nor 18 (30 %) disagree Agree 24 (39 %) Agree 23 (38 %) Strongly agree 14 (23 %) Strongly agree 14 (23 %) More participants selected “Neither agree nor disagree” 4 compared to other LIFT conferences

Key factors Venue quality rated higher compared to other LIFT conferences Networking possibilities rated lower compared to other LIFT conferences 5

Key formats All formats rated lower than other LIFT conferences Open stage ranked higher than other LIFT conferences 6

Attend / recommend LIFT 10 LIFT Asia 08 LIFT Asia 09 Attend next LIFT? Yes 80%(20) 82% (50) No 20% (5) 18% (11) Recommend to a friend? Yes 92% (23) 84% (51) No 8% (2) 16% (10) 7

Number of contacts made 8

Input & influence over LIFT For LIFT Asia 08, the “Lobby break” provided the most influence More “Don’t know” compared to other LIFT conferences 9

Value for money LIFT Asia participants rated higher value (~10%) for money compared to other LIFT conferences 10

Payment for LIFT Participants fee for LIFT Asia funded more by companies than at other LIFT conferences (~20%) 11

Profile of participants What type of work do you do? IT Services (including web services) 25 (41 %) Marketing / Communications 11 (18 %) Journalism/editing 1 (2 %) General management 1 (2 %) Company owner 1 (2 %) Consultant 5 (8 %) Research & Development 3 (5 %) Manufacturing/Production 0 (0 %) Other services (e.g. legal, finance, administration, 0 (0 %) purchasing) Teaching/lecturing 1 (2 %) Student 6 (10 %) Unemployed 0 (0 %) Other, please specify 7 (11 %) More IT services (+20%) and less teachers (-7%), company owners (-6%) and other services (-3%) compared to LIFT Geneva 09 12

Profile of participants What is the principal activity of your company or organization? Government agency / department 1 (2 %) Educational institution 8 (13 %) International organisation/NGO 3 (5 %) Professional association 0 (0 %) Private sector (large company) 11 (18 %) Private sector (small-medium company) 20 (33 %) Private sector (consulting firm) 9 (15 %) Media 6 (10 %) Other, please specify 3 (5 %) More small-medium companies (+10%) compared to LIFT Geneva 09 13

Profile of participants 14

Transport & carbon offset 10% of participants did something to compensate carbon emissions of their transport to the conference compared to 7% of LIFT Geneva 09 participants 15

Lift09 Asia Feedback Survey Results

by goneil on Dec 07, 2009

Accessibility

Categories

Tags

Upload Details

Usage Rights

2 Embeds 18

Statistics

Lift09 Asia Feedback Survey Results — Presentation Transcript

http://liftconference.com	17
http://feeds.feedburner.com	1