The document outlines the findings from a series of think tank sessions held by the Institute for International Research (IIR) from January to July 2013, aimed at generating innovative ideas and addressing internal value conflicts. Participants identified obstacles such as internal disconnection and inefficiencies while generating numerous solutions, particularly focusing on digital products to enhance customer engagement and internal collaboration. Positive feedback emphasized the need for ongoing discussions and real-time documentation of ideas for potential business opportunities.

1. Think Tank Report
An account of the findings from IIR’s internal initiative
to drive lucritive ideation
presented by
Dan Madinabeitia,
Creative Director
Institute for
International Researchupdated July 17, 2013

2. Goal:
The Think Tanks held periodically since January, 2013 were set in motion to initiate discussion and
to generate ideas within IIR’s internal culture of employees. The fundamental goal of the discus-
sions is to generate ideas through a series of exercises that were designed to result in what can
best be described as ‘rapidly constructed conceptual prototypes’. The ‘prototypes’ that resulted could
also be refered to as sketches or brainstorms. There were five parameters set to maintain a focus
within the process:
1 - Keep efforts low cost and adaptable
2 - Align with present business approach as much as possible (Rely on the proven strength
of IIR’s business)
3 - Utilize existing resources as much as possible
4 - Inject, sustain and create as much value as possible at every step of development
5 - Always keep in mind the fundamental goal is to MAKE and/or SAVE money.
An important note here is that the focus of the dicussions remained around creating a digital ap-
proach or product but participants were not discouraged to discuss ideas that fell outside of this
restriction.
Structure and Times of Sessions:
An outline of the Think Tank process can be found on page 8 of the “Pocket Conference pt 1” docu-
ment that was originally presented to Roxanne John in February of 2013. After this proposal, a
more general “Pocket Conference” outline was presented to Debra Chipman on March 22, 2013.
Shortly after this meeting, approval to move forward with the think tank process came from Rox-
anne John with the understanding that we wanted to see tangible results. This report is designed to
deliver up-to-date information on the ongoing results.
As of this report there have been a total of six think tanks. The original was held on January 10 with
riCardo Crespo. There was then five more held on April 12, June 3, June 17, July 1 and July 17.
Think Tank sessions one and two were exercizes in identifying “value conflicts” that IIR inadver-
tantly presents to its customers. The third and fourth sessions were designed to create a fictitious
product that would directly compete with IIR exploiting her weaknesses. And sessions five and six
looked back at the findings and attempted a deeper dive.
The Think Tank process has been open-ended. It encourages divergent thinking and collaboration.
That said, each think tank discussion is opened by stating two ground rules:
1) Leave your job titles at the door
2) There are no bad ideas and participants are encouraged to play off the ideas of one another to
try to come up with unexpected results
This open-endedness is fundamental to the discussions.

3. “To Date”- July, 18, 2013
1 - No Shortage of Ideas - Results Immediately Produced
The exercizes created for the think tank sessions are proving to be successful because they are iden-
tifying many process gaps and inefficient behavioral trends that were not previously considered. They were
also designed to generate tangible results per each and every meeting. The philosphy that “there are no bad
ideas” was maintained. This allowed all participants to speak freely and without restriction. Also each excer-
cize was fundamentally solution-oriented which proved to pave the way for direction and focus. A progression
has emerged which is accounted for in this document.
2 - Unity and Efficiency -A Look at Recurring Trends in Internal Thinking
In July, 2013 participants in the think tanks were asked to look back at previous discussions and to
identify trends in the thinking that they saw. Several points were repeatedly raised. On July 1 we listed what
we felt were the top 4:
• Breaking silos
• Connection is key
• “Bandwidth” and resources ‘seem’ to be an ongoing obstacle internally
• We (IIR) repeat mistakes too often and could learn from each other more than we do
* Its worth noting that the terms used in these “trends” show a strong overlap between tech and human.
This ‘overlap’ could be the cause of a lot of unintentional confusion.
There is a concensus that the think tank discussions are an example of how we can internally break
silos together. The divisional segments are effective in creating the business focus needed to drive revenue at
the event level. However while they provide this critical focus to run the business, the resultant infrastructure
inadvertantly creates an ongoing decentralized affect on the internal culture. To push this point further, par-
ticipants repeatedly felt that this ‘disconnection’ negatively affected IIR’s customers. Most of the discussions
revolved around innovative ideas for our customers but we often found ourselves returning to these ‘trends’.
Sharing ideas and collaboration are most definitely trendy topics in today’s world as we all find our-
selves persistantly adjusting to the next technological innovation. In an ever-growing, fast paced and com-
plex world, we now find ourselves turning to each other and to group intelligence to achieve tasks. Hope-
fully these sessions can aid in facilitating a constructive offset to the shortcomings that result from our own
efforts to drive revenue generation.
3 - Positive Feedback
Although no formal survey has been taken to date regarding feedback on the think tank sessions
most verbal feedback has been positive. Multiple participants who repeat attendance have asked what the
eventual aim for the meetings are. The idea of this ongoing report was very well received and participants
requested that we make it a “living document” that accounts for what happens in real time at each session.
The group also wanted to have access to the document at all times.
4 -Where is this Going?
The initial purpose of the Think Tank sessions are described on page 2 of this document. However,
the open-endedness of the discussions has raised many side points that could be worth presenting to the
executive team members of IIR.
On June 28, 2013 Dan Madinabeitia and Roxanne John had their first monthly “Think Tank Review”.
Roxanne looked over some of the ideas presented in the first iteration of this report. Roxanne and Dan then
agreed to have monthly meetings to review the concepts and discussion points and to push toward any viable
opportunites that may be worth presenting to Debra Chipman and the Divisional Managers. Roxanne asked
Dan to pull a presentation together by October in the event that the business would want to invest in an
endeavor prior to budgets being submitted for 2014.

4. Think Tank Model A: Create a Digital Product that
addresses and resolves a “habitual value conflict”
Sessions held on January 10 and April 12, 2013
1 - Identify Tools
Participants were first asked to list out as many digital “tools” as they could. A digital
“tool” was loosly defined as literally anything related to the online experience that
would benefit a user’s experience whether it be a platform, an app, a website and so
forth...
2 - Identify“habitual value conflicts”
Participants were then asked to look at IIR’s 5 pillars and to give examples from their
own internal experience of how we habitually come up short on our promise to our
customers to live the experience, take away value, get connected, build community and/
or become enlightened.
3 - Create a Digital Solution
Finally, once the tools and the conflicts were openly discussed each group created
its own digital product and/or process to propose a resolution to the “habitual
value conflict.”

5. Digital “Tool Box”
created during Think Tank Sessions 1 and 2
A
Amazon
Android
Annotary
______________________
B
Behance
Blogger
Bump (business cd app)
______________________
C
Chat 1 Messengers
Cloud
Connection 4G
Cozi Shared grocery App
Crowdvine
______________________
D
Data base
Delicious
Deviant Art
Diaspora
Disqus
______________________
E
Email (gmail, yahoo, aol, etc)
Evernote
______________________
F
Facebook
Facetime
Flickr
Fused180
______________________
G
Gchat/Ychat
Global Meet Mobile Apps
Goodreads
Google Analytics
Google +
Google Search
______________________
H
Hoot Suite
Houzze
______________________
I
Instagram
Instant Messaging
iPad
iPhone
iPod
J
Jujama
______________________
K
Kickstarter
Kindle
Klout
______________________
L
Last FM
LinkedIn
______________________
M
Microsoft Link
Mog
Myspace
______________________
N
9Slides
______________________
P
Pandora
Partnering One
Pinterest
Plancast
Podcast
______________________
R
Reddit
______________________
S
Sales Force Chatter
Skype
Slideshare
Snaps!
Snap Chat
Soundcloud
Spotify
Stack Overflow
Stumble Upon
______________________
T
Task Rabbit
Texting
Tumblr
Twitter
______________________
V
Virtual Assistant
Visually
W
Webinar
What’s Up App!
WOBI
WordPress
______________________
Y
Ychat/ Gchat
Yorn
YouTube
______________________
Z
Zerista

6. Habitual Value Conflicts
Identified During Think Tank Sessions 1 and 2
Live the Experience
• Not connecting dots for the customer
• Many internal employees don’t experience IIR events. How then do we empathize with our customer?
• Product life cycle hits a ‘down time’- breaks - could generate value year round
Take Away Value
• Transactional/generic communication with customers
• We become deadline oriented, not value oriented
• Frequent cost disputes
• Online groups don’t reflect IIR’s history (constantly starting from scratch)
• Products tend to be re-invented every year - need more evolution - consider analytics more
• Post event - we don’t have bandwidth to follow up like we could
Build Community
• Procedural/inauthentic engagement
• Inactive communities online
• Short lived community engagement
• Internal culture is decentralized - no “brand”
• Access to online community is limited or non-existent
• Silos prevent collaboration and/or networking
• Internal teams don’t take advantage of social networks/communication channels - missed opportunity
• We tend to focus much more on selling than building community
Get Connected
• One-sided communication
• Internal disconnected with customer
• IIR employees are siloed from one another -
this can affect customer engagement
• Minimal intimacy with direct market
Be Enlightened
• Defaulting/regurgitating content
• We repeat mistakes alot
• Don’t have any real curistics
• We have many resources but we
constrain ourselves
• Could share thought leaders but don’t
• Content is limited to event only

7. Value Conflict: “Procedural Engagement Not Authentic”
Resolution: The Social Media Brand Ambassador
Idea: create an internal “ambassador”
facilitates brand communication
internally/externally
(needs training with social media)
Step 1:
Write blog post
Original sketch: 1/10/13
Valerie Russo
Misha Shah
Richie Adomako
Step 2:
Feed to Twitter, Linkedin, Facebook, etc.
Step 3:
Brand Ambassador retweets
amplifies the message to their network
They ARE the face
Think Tank Session 1: January 10, 2013

8. Value Conflict: “Not connecting dots for customers”
Resolution: The Social “ABC” (always be closing)
registration
IIR platform
website/app
SYNC
Twitter
LinkedIn
Google +
IIR
ad content
WP, market, etc,
Delegates
1 on 1
meeting
SKYPE
Full engagement
across entire community
Original sketch: 1/10/13
Alex Siegel
Matt Middleton
Maggie Kacicka
Think Tank Session 1: January 10, 2013

9. Value Conflict: Short-lived engagement
Resolution: The peer to peer maintainence - piece to piece with Jujama
• We Deliver Content (facilitate)
video, audio, written, whatever
Original concept: 1/10/13
Joe Librizzi
Elisa Laureano
Katie Coates
• Maintain peer to peer conversation
video, audio, written, whatever
• Talk about it on Jujama -
facilitate endoresement
we will be more exclusive and ‘picky’
Think Tank Session 1: January 10, 2013

10. Value Conflict: General Community Issues
(inactivity/poor engagement/inauthentic)
Resolution: The Permanent Community
• Establish a PERMANENT home for community
create one platform enabling access to digital “tools”
• Figure out how ALL tools can function there
accept many, broadcast to many
• PERMANENT fosters community engagement
• Establish Community more conducive
to new members
social proofing
Original sketch: 1/10/13
Tony Primavera
Jon Saxe
Lauren DeFalco
Think Tank 1: January 10, 2013

11. Think Tank Session 2: April 12, 2013
Value Conflict: Get Connected
• Currently segmented solely for the event vs. keeping people connected all the time
• Current platform isn’t promoted - Database of millions (IIR’s lists over time) to a USER BASE
Resolution:
The Year Round Influencer App
IIR Year Round App
• for delegates and attendees
• integrated into the IIR corporate site
Videos for onsite keynotes year round
• promotion through APP
• goal is to make the online experience a lifestyle
- connections/ratings/endorsements
• IIR influencers and professional repoire
- white papers
- videos
- event based APPS

12. Think Tank Session 2: April 12, 2013
Value Conflict: Get Connected/build community/take away value
• not a very robust digital strategy - results in multiple missed opportunities
Resolution:
self sustaining mobile/online strategy
Original sketch
Valerie Russo
Karina Pena Garcia
????? - refer to video
This prototype presents a strategic approach to IIR’s
overall marketing ecosystem - full consideration is
recommended - inclusive of the ‘advocacy’ area (or
the ‘non-event’ attendees) outside of our usual target
markets for which we have not to date developed a
comprehensive strategy for a number of reasons.
Mobile websites
Central - IIR brand Event
Customer Journey Breakdown
Audit
- define the ideal - satisfy 80% of
population on ALL TOUCHPOINTS
- Use best practices
Implement
time money
tech
ppl
Need neutral
unbiased
outlook
PRESENT
SPECIFICS
Feedback
Loop
Internal/External

13. Think Tank Session 2: April 12, 2013
Original sketch
Greg LaRosa
????? - refer to video
Value Conflict: Get Connected/build community - internally at IIR
missed internal opportunity creates missed opportunity with customers
Resolution:
break down internal silos with quick touchpoint meetings intergrated with Microsoft Linc
online chat and board posting that is readily available (FREE right NOW!)
Simple, Effective and Constructive Breakdown of Silos
• set up 30 minute meetings every 2 weeks
(open to all employees)
• discuss what is and isn’t working in each division
• could be continued/facilitated online as
internal chat board

14. Think Tank Session 2: April 12, 2013
Some Side Takeaways from session 2:
Session 2 inspired some more exploratory discussion which included the following topics:
• a suggested look at Gartner’s approach - apparently an article was written on $1 billion in revenue com-
ing from white paper downloads
- what if we facilitated a discussion with some of our sister companies that resulted in the pro-
motion and sale of white papers? Is this worth exploring? - Richie Adomako/Corey Dixon/Matt
Middleton
• Microsift Lync - a readily available resource that is not used
- with proper communication and education internal efficiencies could be tapped
- broader relationships could be created with Informa allowing us to utilize their
larger resource pool
- Dan M., Greg L. and Karina P.G. to test - resulted in meeting about improved
Creative Teams’ PM system
• The “Phish” model
- The rock band Phish has ingeniously reinvented music marketing by fully embracing digital. No
show is ever the same but all shows are recorded and re-sold. This band capitalizes on simple
digital principles, syndicating, rapid iteration, repackaging and re-selling every piece of content
that they create.
Side Discussions...

15. Think Tank Model B: Create a Disruptive Digital Product
that puts IIR out of business
Sessions held on June 3 and June 17, 2013
1 -Ask the top level question...
How can we disrupt the competitive landscape of the conference industry by providing
an unexpected solution?
2 - Define what a disruptive product looks like
During the session there was a breif description of what disruptive products look like.
The following examples were given:
• Swiffer Jet - disrupted the idea of the mop by asking,“what if there were a mop
that didn’t use water?’”
• Red Bull - disrupted the cola industry by asking “what if we promoted a cola
with twice the caffine, twice the sugar and a quick burst of energy?”
• Geek Squad - disrupted the idea of tech help by asking,“what if we embraced
the idea of tech’s being “geeks” and made it playful instead of alienating?”
Case Study: Kodak invented the digital camera in 1976. This product eventually
came back and put its inventor into bankruptcy. How and why did this happen?
We discussed how a company can go under by listening to its loyal customers and
briefly correllated it to the conference industry. This idea was inspired by “The
Innovator’s Dilemma” by Clayton Christiansen.
3 - Identify“cliches” and then ask“what if?”
Participants were given three sheets representing the three buckets of
“cliches” that occur according to the book “Disrupt” by Luke Williams (price, interaction
and product). Each sheet had examples of cliches. Participants were then asked to come
up with their own cliche and then to follow up with a “what if?” question.
sample:
cliche type: interaction
cliche: conferences last three days to a week
“What if” a conference lasted one minute or one year?

16. Think Tank Session 3: June 3, 2013
Product
“Choose your
own adventure”
sessions throughout the
city within speakers’
environments around a
centralized “hub”
“72 hour-athon”
Cirriculum;
Immersive Challenges;
INTERACTION
• app to lead attendees
on their path
• organic, based on
choices
• live interaction be-
tween attedees
• real-time commenting
through a feed
No physical presence
required - informal
meetings optional
Speakers = facilitators;
roommates for full
immersion... or
experts COME TO YOU!
PRICING
• all inclusive
travel + hotel +
travel within city
• depends on city -
lots of sponsorship
yearly membership
DISRUPTIVE
PRODUCT
BOARDROOM BLITZ
network in an organic
environment
Choose your own
experience (within
a city)
KnowledgeQuest
How can we disrupt the competitive landscape of
the conference/events industry by providing an
unexpected solution?
The solutions...
GROUP 1
GROUP 2

17. Think Tank Session 4: June 17, 2013
Cliche
Only 1 experi-
ence -
the event
itself
Standard Mail
Brochure
What if?...
...we offered a
membership
model and live
experience
create your own
brochure online
How it works...
program: as a member, choose a la
carte options throughout the year
1-stream event
2-smaller meetings in remote board
rooms/movie theaters (sponsored)
3-go to event
- offer incentives
- reward program (yr rnd)
Model after:
• Shutterfly
• ESAVE
• Photobook
- have brochure covers and footers
standard
- drag and drop your photos
and sessions
DISRUPTIVE PRODUCT
“I LIKE IT”
membership program
‘Business Safari’
-Walk About
How can we disrupt the competitive landscape of
the conference/events industry by providing an
unexpected solution?
The solutions...
GROUP 1
GROUP 2
Attendees
Greg LaRosa
Wayne Davis
Liz Hinkis
Krista Lentini
Areti Fonseca
Kelly Schram
Kacey Anderson
Amanda Ciccatelli
Greg LaRosa
Wayne Davis
Liz Hinkis
Krista Lentini
Areti Fonseca
Kelly Schram
Kacey Anderson
Amanda Ciccatelli

18. Think Tank Model C: Think Tank Review
Sessions held on July 1, 2013
1 - Review Think Tank prototypes
The newly created “Think Tank Report” was presented to participants. The group
reviewed the ideas from past meetings and selected one to develop further.
2 - Deeper Dive
A “deeper dive” ensued furthering the discussion and building on the initial concept.

19. Think Tank Session 5: July 1, 2013
First Think Tank Review Talk:
The group reviewed previous think tank notes,
selected the prototype called “Social ABC” from
the Jan. 10 session and pushed the concept further.
Below is the white board and the points discussed.
Post Sale Efficiency
IIR Portal?
(Not always event
driven not central)
Div - Sponsor central
- Speaker central
best practices
Connect dots internally
reflect to customer
(extranet??)
Centralize BIG HELP
Post sale portal (has EDB info)
80/20 internal repeating practices
TRENDS FROM PAST THINK TANKS
• Breaking silos
• Connection is key
• Bandwidth/resources
• Repeat mistakes (huristics)
How do we take IIR’s success
and repeat offerings within
digital?
1 - Make it work ‘post sale’
2 - Then look at upselling
3 - Sophistication? content curation?
We pick“Social ABC”
- Supported by internal IM (Microsoft Lync)
- create a “real” resource center
- EDB partnering * newest development
make iterative
- Greg - CDW extranet
-“My IIR” must build as extension to
“your FEI experience” for example
portal
register
my event
sales
speakersattendees
Results in publisher (or ‘centralized’) model
- streamlined user journey
- ongoing, year round engagement
1) NOW 2) TRANSITIONING TO
CENTRALIZED MODEL
3) FULLY
INTEGRATED
IIR
DIVISIONS
U,P,M
IIR
introduce an ongoing and
separate digital revenue stream
IIR offerings
are centralized and
ongoing around digital
Attendees:
Greg LaRosa
Karina Pena Garcia
Kacey Anderson
Richie Adomako
Stephanie Friedlander
Amanda Ciccatelli

20. Think Tank Model D: Think Tank Mission
Session held on July 17, 2013
1 - Review think tank prototypes
The newly created “Think Tank Report” was presented to participants. All but one of the
participants in the room had attended a previous session. The group reviewed the ideas
from past meetings and discussed what brought them back to the think tanks sessions
specifically.
2 - Mission Statement Exersize
After reviewing prototypes from earlier sessions and discussing the motivation of why
they attend the sessions the group was then asked to go through a word association
process of what they connect to the purpose of the sessions.
They were then asked to define the purpose of the sessions themselves and come up
with a mission statement that really focussed in on what they felt the purpose of the
meetings should be.
3 - Create Drafts
Participants were sent the notes from the meeting and photos of the whiteboard to go
write their own draft of a mission statement that best defined the purpose of the think
tank meetings. This occured after the meeting and on the participants’ own time.

21. Think Tank Session 6: July 17, 2013
Think Tank Mission Discussion:
Like the previous discussion on July 1 the group reviewed previous think tank notes and
prototypes. Five of the six present were repeat attendees. The aim of this exersize is to
further the focus of the group.
Attendees:
Greg LaRosa
Richie Adomako
Jenny Pereira
Katie Coates
Jeneane Smith
Krista Lentini
What is our purpose here?
• to rebuild
• to launch a great product
• disrupt to succeed
• to stay relevant
• positive change
• create relevance and meaning
• Identify a foundation to build upon
• to simplify things - come up with easy
solutions that make sense
• to make more money
• to make every day a learning experience
• we all build upon each other’s success
• to share across all disciplines
Creating a draft? - Make it...
short
memorable
inspiring
market focused
something to remember us by
What are terms that relate to our purpose?
• enlighten
• person to person sharing
• mind-share
• experience
• most beneficial experience
• disrupt
• effective recognition
• simplify
• share
• collaborate
• synergy
• integrate
• engagement
• Cross cultural (divisional)
• central
• connect
• utilization
• opportunity machine
Mission Statement Drafts to come...