There’s also another angle of the actual attendees. Whilst the manager gets to sign off on the spend (that’s what we’re all after here, isn’t it?) the attendee needs to have a burning desire to go – how many courses have we all been “sent on” because the manager signed off on the spend without asking if it’s actually ususeful.

All probably similar arguments, just a different approach to the “What’s in it for me?”
e.g., taking Nat’s line of “If you were to pay for your staff to learn all they’ll learn at Webstock, you’d be paying many times more.” could re-framed, “What cost of missing being at the ONE place where you can have all your peers PLUS world experts willing, able and committed to solving your pain?”

And if the (potential) attendees are chomping at the bit they can act as your internal sales people :-)

“Webstock: we bring the superstars, you bring the balls.”

I like it!

The networking angle is interesting. For so many people, it can be the best return they get from a conference. Because there are so many from the industry “aggregated” (in Nat’s term) in the one place, the chances of talking with the right person you need to: solve a problem, hire, partner with, work for, is that much greater. But it’s not something that can be promised as a return.

Still, I think an argument along the lines of, “No where else in New Zealand offers the same chances to meet people in the industry who can help me/us” is one that could bear fruit.

The questions you have to answer are:

* why train my web workers?
* why a conference instead of something cheaper?
* why these courses/sessions?

Why train? Because the half-life of knowledge is ridiculously short on the web, because new best practices emerge every year, and because you don’t want your staff churning out web sites that are the Ladas of the web, do you? Your staff need to know about new technologies, new tools, new ways of thinking, so they can build better web sites faster. Do you think you can survive a recession by falling ever-further behind the technology curve? No, a harsh market means you really have to be able to squeeze more from less and training is the best way to get more from your existing people. Some people are worried about investing in their people and then having them leave. What if you don’t train them and they stay?

Why a conference? Because it’s an aggregator: Webstock brings the best people into one location. If you were to pay for your staff to learn all they’ll learn at Webstock, you’d be paying many times more. Webstock’s history means the talent of the presenters is proven, you’re not taking a punt on an unknown consultant. The chance to get up-close and personal with speakers in workshops and breaks makes for faster, better, more complete, and more personalised learning than you could ever hope to get just from reading a book. Would you rather learn to drive by e-mail or with someone in the passenger’s seat? Webstock gives you the best copilots in the world.

Why these particular workshops? This varies for each workshop, but the descriptions should all be tied back to the skills and knowledge that attendees will be able to take back to their workplaces. For example, in Michael Lopp’s tutorial you will learn the essential technologies for getting the most from the people who work for you–you’ll learn how to avoid common problems, make your staff more productive, increase retention, and lower everyone’s stress levels. It’s a no-brainer, it’s $300 that repays itself the first time you *don’t* have to go to a recruiter to find a replacement for someone who left because you *didn’t* take this course.

I hope this helps. I have done much marketing in my time, a lot of it on conferences. I’m available to help if you need more. My hourly rates are hair-raising but worth it :-)

If your job is quite hands-on, then pointing out the benefits you would get from specific workshops and the skills / experience of specific speakers as they relate to your job would be quite beneficial.

Also pointing out the direct benefits of networking – that you meet a group of people with similar jobs/interests… and those people help you when you need it! How many times, for instance, have I put a question out on twitter, and within two or three minutes have the answer to my question from one or more people! Not that you want to abuse that, but when you really need it, people are there, and so is the good will.

If your job is more managerial or advisory, then you won’t get a better selection of “big picture”, visionary, future-thinking speakers than at Webstock.

@Mike – yes, good point. Please add an example of what might seem less “woolly” if you have time. Would be good to see what wording you use.

Re examples of speakers etc – hard to do that for each one. But if anyone wants information on a specific speaker to help with a business case, let us know and I’m sure we can help.

@Hadyn – yes! That’s the point. Plus, in a sense trying to “crowd-source” a good business case, so that others can pick and choose from this as appropriate.

My view, as a “business case” it felt a little wooly, maybe a touch light … you know what I mean?

For instance, “3) The speakers are some of the best in the world” – maybe give some examples of where else they’ve talked and the feedback they got.
You could also then pop in how much it would’ve cost to go and see that person in, say, the USA and then how much it costs to see everyone in NZ – I assume it’s squillions cheaper :-)

Hope that helps

Now, I need a business case for flights from UK?!