That's a post I've been meaning to write for a while.<p>Back before I had a reputation as a fairly decent (tech conference) speaker, I had a proposal which was accepted at the Business of Software, which was a bit of a reach for me honestly. I'll find the exact text if anyone is interested, but it hit three bullet points:<p>1) Social proof that I had something interesting to say (I run a blog, somebody you the conference organizer knows has cited me favorably before)<p>2) A one-sentence pitch for why my topic would be interesting and topical for the attendees<p>3) The (accurate) prediction that people would talk about my talk even after the conference was over, because (for a for-profit conference) this helps accomplish their #1 business goal, which is selling more tickets for next year (n.b. point #1 also speaks to selling tickets if you can claim an audience which will follow you to the conference)
Hmmm... I'm not sure I'd agree here. At 44Con[1] we get an average of between 100-150 talk submissions a year. Just reviewing all the talks once as part of the CFP panel is a herculean effort. If everyone had a 2 minute intro to their talk I guarantee that after the first few none of them would be watched by anyone on the panel simply because you're looking at adding 5 hours to each scan through the submissions.<p>The enthusiasm is a strong and valid point. People who are keen to come always score higher than people who can't be bothered putting the effort in.<p>I would suggest that anyone who wants to get a talk accepted needs to:<p>* Structure their submission properly<p>* Make sure they provide sufficient detail for reviewers to identify what the talk is about<p>* Provide enough detail for the reviewer not to have to google obscure terms<p>* Have somewhere on the Internet (e.g. a blog, github etc.) that allows reviewers to easily work out where the speaker's skills lie<p>* Have video or slides from the speaker available - e.g. on Youtube so reviewers can see how they speak. If you haven't spoken at a conference before, make a video of a howto describing something related to what you're talking about<p>[1] - <a href="http://44con.com/" rel="nofollow">http://44con.com/</a>
This applies to everything you do which depends on review.<p>Want a particular job? Put in more effort than everyone else. Create a ‘I want to work for you’ website. Be prepared at the interview. Understand everything about the organisation. Quote its founders.<p>Want to have your paper accepted? Do a little research about what they are looking for. Contact the reviewers directly and ask for help. Get your article reviewed by people who have been accepted previously.<p>Want to have your RFQ response win? Read the requirements carefully. Make the reviewers jobs very easy. Address criteria directly and clearly. Ask questions.<p>I am consistently surprised by how little effort the average person puts in to any reviewed endeavour. It really doesn’t take that much effort to stand out.