No subject

organiser, quite a lot of things that I would consider absolutely standard
in running a sizeable event either didn't happen, happened only after much
prodding/chasing, or happened so late in the game that it appeared as
though they were afterthoughts that hadn't been incorporated into the
conference plan.

And I guess that an obvious follow-up question is to ask if a team bidding
on running an LCA feels that the only way they can run it is to outsource a
significant amount of the work to a commercial events manager (with the
inevitable overheads that will generate), should the committee award them
the bid? Additional oversight and a supporting sub-committee may not be
enough to offset that fundamental risk.


Cheers,

Jessica

--f46d04426c2cb3e82004fac0bf85
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">Hi Josh,<br><div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=
=3D"gmail_quote">On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 11:49 AM, Joshua Hesketh <span dir=
=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:president at linux.org.au" target=3D"_blank">pr=
esident at linux.org.au</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br>

<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;bor=
der-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">The professional even=
ts manager handled logistics and was not involved<br>
in the financial side of the event management. Without the events<br>
manager it is unlikely there would have been an LCA2014. This was an<br>
added expense (and a fixed one) but not an unexpected one. The council<br>
knew at the time of the bid that this likely meant for a lower return on<br=
>
the conference but was happy to take that risk on the basis that running<br=
>
an LCA that makes less money is better than not running an LCA.<br>
<br>
While an event manager is an added risk that the council will always be<br>
cautious of (and weigh up on a per-bid basis), the loss came about due<br>
to much lower revenue than expected. In fact, the overall expenses for<br>
the event were on par with most other years.<br></blockquote><div>=C2=A0</d=
iv>As part of the post-mortem on LCA2014, will there be an assessment of wh=
ether 1) the event manager contracted discharged their duties as contracted=
 (i.e. no breach of contract for which some or all money paid/owing could b=
e clawed back), and 2) whether their engagement delivered value for money?<=
br>

<br></div><div class=3D"gmail_quote">From the outside-the-tent perspective =
of being a participant and miniconf organiser, quite a lot of things that I=
 would consider absolutely standard in running a sizeable event either didn=
&#39;t happen, happened only after much prodding/chasing, or happened so la=
te in the game that it appeared as though they were afterthoughts that hadn=
&#39;t been incorporated into the conference plan.<br>

<br></div><div class=3D"gmail_quote">And I guess that an obvious follow-up =
question is to ask if a team bidding on running an LCA feels that the only =
way they can run it is to outsource a significant amount of the work to a c=
ommercial events manager (with the inevitable overheads that will generate)=
, should the committee award them the bid? Additional oversight and a suppo=
rting sub-committee may not be enough to offset that fundamental risk.<br>

<br><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_quote">Cheers,<br><br>Jessica<br><br></di=
v></div></div></div>

--f46d04426c2cb3e82004fac0bf85--