A Case for Keeping Vendors Out

As one of the vendors allowed to participate, I'm really thankful to Jeff, Cindy and EA for the opportunity to participate. I even had the pleasure of co-facilitating a track on "Process Excellence" with Nancy Gray-Starkebaum. (Thanks, again Nancy) I'm sure EA is proud of Jeff's and Cindy's vision and how it was realized. (Can you imaging how this was spun at LucasArts?) But.....

As much as I loved the event (and would jump at the chance to participate again!), I think the Un-conference has too high  a calling to include vendors. In a perfect world, we could all come together as a big happy family and rally around key issues (tracks) - "everybody teaches and everybody learns" - right? But vendors bring an agenda, and more often than not that agenda hopes to influence the people around the table.

That's not to say vendors don't have worthwhile things to offer. I think vendors can be a big part of the solution, but in the absence on rules one self serving vendor can suppress the exchange and leave a bad taste in everyone's mouth.

Some quick ideas -

• If vendors do participate, maybe they are governed by basic ground rules
• Perhaps vendors allowed to participate are chosen by a panel of Un-conference vet's
• Force vendors to apply for admission stating what tracks they hope to participate in and what specific value they can offer

Access to something like this is a privelage...one that should not be taken lightly.

In any event, I think Jeff is on to something. I hope the momentum continues and this is the first of many such events.

Comments

[Martin Snyder]

Scott- I'm a vendor and frankly, I don't think you made much of a case.

Why not name some names here? Apparently someone (or two, or three) dropped a turd in the punchbowl, so lets honor the spirit of openness and talk about it.... I don't think it was me, but who knows? I'm always saying dumb stuff and maybe I was an offender.

Speaking for myself, my participation in the recruiting blogosphere is not about moving product- we have far more able people who do that everyday, and since I’m a golden rule kind of guy, why would I want to read a bunch of self-serving frames from other people? Obviously nobody is so pure that they will not try to show themselves and their organizations in the best light- but the idea that vendor opinions are somehow automatically suspect is obnoxious. Maybe we learn a thing or two helping thousands of people solve similar problems?

I freakin hate identity politics and what kind of un-conference would engage in them? We need to deal with protected classes in discrimination situations because of historic injustice- and there are giant moral, legal, and practical issues in doing so. We only do it because the magnitude of the wrong demands it. Why go down the group label road for such a trivial reason? If some vendor shows no self-control, fine, give em the boot- no objections here.

Finally, are you proposing that you be excluded yourself, because if you are not a vendor, what the heck are you?