Event owner lens
Use this record to benchmark whether a comparable event makes the work after the room visible. The score is 46/100, so the next move is to benchmark the weakest pillars before repeating the format.
lead or directory source agenda analysis
Strategicmanagement 2026
This lead or directory source in Technology / AI / Startup shows 51 visible agenda rows from strategicmanagement.net and scores 46/100: a moderate design signal with incomplete evidence. The clearest public signals sit in Participation Architecture and Learning Transfer; the main limits are Follow Through and Problem Specificity. Visible mechanisms include Participant work, Feedback, Network design, and Learning transfer. The public record does not show follow-up or tracking, so the score should be read as design... A practical reading: For a reader, this is mainly a warning or source-evidence record: it reads as a lead or directory source, with the strongest visible signal in participation architecture and learning transfer and the biggest open question around follow through and problem specificity. The practical test is whether the published agenda connects the room to post-event continuation and evidence. This page is an original public-evidence analysis, not a copy of the source agenda or an endorsement of the event. The score places the visible agenda in the moderate design signal band. The strongest visible pillars are Participation Architecture, Learning Transfer, and Personalization; the thinnest visible pillars are Follow Through, Problem Specificity, and Evidence Maturity. Visible mechanisms include Participant work, Feedback, Network design, Learning transfer, and Personalization. The extracted agenda preview includes 71 visible rows. The most common formats are Workshop, Panel, and Roundtable; the most common inferred purposes are Co Creation, Deliberation, and Participant Work.
Eight-pillar fingerprint
Hover any pillar to see what it measures and, where it scored low, what the agenda is missing.
Participation Architecture?91
Participation Architecture - 91/100. Participant work, contribution, interaction, and alternatives to passive broadcast.
Follow Through?5
Follow Through - 5/100. Owners, dates, commitments, progress checks, and accountability after the room.Missing: Add named owners, dates, implementation checkpoints, and a visible post-event continuation path.
Problem Specificity?35
Problem Specificity - 35/100. A clear costly problem, objective, decision, or performance target.Missing: Name the costly problem, decision, or performance target the gathering is meant to move.
Personalization?44
Personalization - 44/100. Role, path, goal, preparation, or connection tailoring for participants.
Network Design?44
Network Design - 44/100. Structured weak ties, bridge-building, mixers, and relationship persistence.
Learning Transfer?63
Learning Transfer - 63/100. Applied practice, feedback, workplace use, refreshers, and 30-90 day transfer.
Evidence Maturity?37
Evidence Maturity - 37/100. Baseline, comparison, follow-up, isolation, and attribution confidence.Missing: Add baseline measurement, comparison logic, tracking, or post-event impact reporting so effectiveness is not inferred only from format.
Future-of-Work Fit?41
Future-of-Work Fit - 41/100. Value against time, hybrid reality, accessibility, AI, and meeting load.
Fix the gaps
Field-tested exercises matched to this agenda's weakest pillars, from the exercise library.
Follow Through (5/100)
Exercises that strengthen it: Mental Toughness Workshop • WorkshopBank · 15% Solutions • WorkshopBank · Network Patches
Problem Specificity (35/100)
Exercises that strengthen it: 0 - “Two Person Scene” Theory · Challenge Axis - Knowmium: The Un-Training Consultancy · Fist to Five • WorkshopBank
Personalization (44/100)
Exercises that strengthen it: Journey Mapping • WorkshopBank · Group Energiser & Perspective-Changing Exercise - Paradigm... · Photo Storytelling
Agenda Preview
The actual agenda we captured. Every block is classified by format and purpose. Open any block to see how we read it; the colored edge shows whether it is participant work, broadcast, logistics, or a showcase.
Room vs wrapper
70 percent of the 71 classified blocks put participants to work; the rest broadcast, show, or handle logistics. That mix is what drives the participation score.
Participant workBroadcastShowcaseLogistics
all eventSMS Berlin Annual Conference WorkshopsWorkshopParticipant work+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all eventWORKSHOPS AT SMS BerlinWorkshopParticipant work+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all eventMost workshops are presented by the SMS Interest Groups and Communities (IG&Cs).WorkshopParticipant work+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
9:00 AM - 12:00 PMWorkshops are scheduled for three-hour morning ( ) or afternoon ( ) sessions. Conference attendees are welcome to attend workshops both in the morning and afternoon timeslots. For workshops that require applications, we ask that you do not apply for more...WorkshopOrientation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all eventLunch and coffee breaks are provided for all workshop participants.WorkshopParticipant work+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all eventMorning workshopsWorkshopParticipant work+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all eventConfirmed PanelistsPanelDiscussion+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
all event2. Selection of regional roundtable preferencesRoundtableDiscussion+
Format · Participant workRoundtableSmall-group discussion where attendees contribute directly rather than only listening.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all eventGlobal Strategy Journal Paper Development Workshop ExpandWorkshopParticipant work+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all eventSMJ Dissertation Paper Development and Reviewing Workshop ExpandWorkshopParticipant work+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all eventAI for Stakeholder Strategy Research & Paper Development Workshop ExpandWorkshopParticipant work+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all eventApplication required; Walk-ins welcome for panel portionPanelOrientation+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
all eventEach panel will conclude with interactive Q&A sessions with the audience leveraging structured prompts or live polling.PanelDiscussion+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
all eventAfternoon workshopsWorkshopParticipant work+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all eventSRF Grant Writing and Research Funding Workshop ExpandWorkshopParticipant work+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all eventPanelistsPanelDiscussion+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
all eventAn application is required for this workshop. Application RequirementsWorkshopParticipant work+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all eventStrategic Leadership & Governance Paper Development Workshop ExpandWorkshopParticipant work+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all event3. Applicant's top 4 preferences in terms of panelists that the applicant would likePanelDiscussion+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
all eventto be matched with for the roundtable discussions. (We will try our best to takeRoundtableDiscussion+
Format · Participant workRoundtableSmall-group discussion where attendees contribute directly rather than only listening.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all eventSMS Berlin Annual Conference WorkshopsWorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventWORKSHOPS AT SMS BerlinWorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventWorkshops are held on Saturday, October 17, 2026; the first day of the SMS Annual Conference. Workshops are included in the registration for the Annual Conference, therefore participants in workshops must be registered for the Annual Conference.WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventWhile workshops are open to all conference attendees, please note that some workshops have a competitive application process. Review the details for each workshop below for whether an application is required. The deadline for applications is July 27th.WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventMost workshops are presented by the SMS Interest Groups and Communities (IG&Cs).WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
9:00 AM - 12:00 PMWorkshops are scheduled for three-hour morning ( ) or afternoon ( ) sessions. Conference attendees are welcome to attend workshops both in the morning and afternoon timeslots. For workshops that require applications, we ask that you do not apply for more than one workshop per timeslot.Opening RemarksOrientation+
Format · BroadcastOpening RemarksFraming or welcome from the stage. Orients the room, not participatory.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventLunch and coffee breaks are provided for all workshop participants.WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventTo learn about the full-day Annual Doctoral Workshop, click here. Please note that because it runs the entire day, participants cannot attend the IG&C Workshops as well.WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventMORNING WORKSHOPSWorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventThis workshop explores how academic careers unfold across six regions - North America, South America, Europe, Africa, Asia, and Australia - from doctoral training to early-career placement and progression through tenure and promotion. It highlights how institutional structures, expectations, and opportunities vary across contexts, shaping distinct academic pathways and professional experiences.WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventThe session begins with a panel featuring six scholars representing these regions. Panelists will share perspectives on key stages of the academic career and reflect upon regional differences in career development, evaluation criteria, mobility, and professional responsibilities. This will be followed by an open Q&A, allowing participants to engage directly with the speakers on topics of interest.PanelDeliberation+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventIn the second part of the workshop, participants will join small, region-focused roundtables led by experienced scholars. These interactive discussions provide an opportunity for more in-depth exchange around specific questions related to academic careers in different parts of the world. To participate in this portion of the workshop, please register in advance and indicate your preferred regional roundtable.RoundtableDeliberation+
Format · Participant workRoundtableSmall-group discussion where attendees contribute directly rather than only listening.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventConfirmed Panelists:PanelDeliberation+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all event2. Selection of regional roundtable preferencesRoundtableDeliberation+
Format · Participant workRoundtableSmall-group discussion where attendees contribute directly rather than only listening.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventAPPLY NOWUnknownUnknown+
Format · BroadcastUnknownFormat not classified from the source; treated as a broadcast block by default.
Evidence basisLowRead from source
all eventGlobal Strategy Journal Paper Development Workshop ExpandWorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventThis workshop is designed to provide participants with developmental feedback on current projects, with a focus on contemporary issues in global strategy. The GSJ editorial team will address topics around what it takes to publish in GSJ. The session will then break into small groups where GSJ editorial team members will provide detailed feedback to the authors in a roundtable discussion format. The workshop will also invite peer feedback from other participants to provide a rich developmental experience for the authors. Attendance will be capped at 20 to 25 participants to ensure a high-quality, interactive, and constructive discussion.RoundtableDeliberation+
Format · Participant workRoundtableSmall-group discussion where attendees contribute directly rather than only listening.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventSMJ Dissertation Paper Development and Reviewing Workshop ExpandWorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventThis workshop is intended for PhD students who are close to completing their dissertation or junior faculty who have a paper from their dissertation that they are interested in developing further for submission to the Strategic Management Journal. The focus of the three-hour workshop will be engaging with members of the SMJ editorial team to get one-on-one feedback on your paper. In addition, participants will get an opportunity to engage in a panel discussion with the SMJ Associate and Co-Editors to discuss reviewing for SMJ as well as any other questions related to the publication process. Mentors will read your paper in advance and provide you with personalized feedback along with answers to questions you have about submitting papers to SMJ.PanelDeliberation+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventApplying for the workshop requires submitting a current working paper from your dissertation with your application. If you are accepted, we will assign your paper to one or two mentors who are either current or recent SMJ Associate Editors or experienced members of the SMJ Editorial Board.WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventThe SMJ Paper Development Workshop is open to advanced PhD students and untenured faculty members (including postdocs, assistant professors, and lecturers) who have a current working paper from a dissertation.WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventAI for Stakeholder Strategy Research & Paper Development Workshop ExpandWorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventApplication required; Walk-ins welcome for panel portionOpening RemarksOrientation+
Format · BroadcastOpening RemarksFraming or welcome from the stage. Orients the room, not participatory.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventArtificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly expanding the methodological toolkit available to scholars, including creating new opportunities to study firms’ stakeholder strategies and relationships. Yet some scholars may be uncertain about how to use AI-based methods rigorously, transparently, and in ways that can support publication in leading strategy and management journals. This workshop is designed to help stakeholder strategy scholars build that capacity while also advancing their own research projects.WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventThe workshop will have two complementary parts. The first half will feature a panel of scholars who have published research using AI methods relevant to stakeholder strategy research. Panelists will focus on the practicalities of implementation: how AI methods can be used to collect, classify, and analyze complex stakeholder-related data; how researchers can make defensible methodological choices; and how AI-enabled approaches can be positioned for high-quality scholarly contribution. This portion of the workshop is open to all SMS attendees interested in learning how AI tools can strengthen their research toolkit.PanelDeliberation+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventAfter the break, the workshop will shift to small-group developmental feedback sessions for accepted participants who submit papers or research proposals in advance. These sessions will be facilitated by senior scholars with expertise across stakeholder strategy domains. Participants will receive focused feedback on their research questions, theory development, empirical strategy, contribution, and paper positioning. To make the sessions more generative, participants are encouraged to use AI tools before the workshop to obtain first-order feedback on their projects, then bring those reflections into the discussion groups for deeper, more tailored scholarly engagement. While the paper feedback sessions are open to all attendees interested in applying, preference will be given to doctoral students and early- to mid-career academics.WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventAt the SMS 46th Annual Conference in Berlin, the strategic management research community will engage with pressing questions about strategy in an evolving global environment, including challenges related to competition, innovation, and the management of knowledge and human capital. Through an interactive panel and Q&A discussion followed by in-depth paper feedback sessions, this junior faculty development workshop aims to bring together a variety of perspectives across diverse strategy communities. The workshop is open to interested scholars at all levels, with priority given to submissions from junior faculty. Applications will be required for this workshop.PanelDeliberation+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventEach panel will conclude with interactive Q&A sessions with the audience leveraging structured prompts or live polling.PanelDeliberation+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventThe workshop comprises two parts. Part one is a moderated conversation in which panelists reflect on how strategic issues related to digital transformation and change are framed and enacted across contexts, and what these differences reveal about the study of these topics. Part two is a roundtable discussion, in which attendees can join groups to discuss questions and issues of interest. The workshop aims to open up new questions, empirical sites, and collaborative possibilities for advancing research on strategizing in the digital era and in times of fragmentation.PanelDeliberation+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventWe bring together practitioners implementing AI and strategy scholars studying design, incentives, and partnerships. The session has two segments. In the first segment, each panelist gets to make a 15-minute pitch on their ideas. These presentations will be followed by a panel discussion (30 minutes + 5 minutes for closing). The second segment includes round table discussions among participants to generate research ideas/sub-themes to explore (30 minutes). Each roundtable will present its ideas as a 5-minute pitch. The session will close with summary remarks by the session chair.PanelDeliberation+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventAFTERNOON WORKSHOPSWorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventSRF Grant Writing and Research Funding Workshop ExpandWorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventSecuring external funding is a critical milestone for advancing research projects. Yet, for many scholars, navigating the complex world of grants and funding opportunities can feel unfamiliar. The Strategy Research Foundation (SRF) is pleased to organize a “Grant Writing and Research Funding” workshop that is designed to equip strategic management researchers with knowledge and practical tips to develop competitive grant proposals.WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventThe first section of the workshop will highlight the growing importance of grants for academic success. Panelists will explore different types of funding sources and how to identify opportunities that align with researchers’ goals. The panel discussion will also cover the key elements of a strong funding proposal, including interpreting grant calls, crafting a compelling executive summary, articulating the motivation behind a project, and developing realistic financial plans and responsible budgets. Further, the workshop will feature success stories, highlighting lessons learned from experienced grant recipients and common pitfalls to avoid.PanelDeliberation+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventThe second section of the workshop will provide interactive discussions with participants and roundtable leaders about specific funding proposals, budgeting practices, and experiential activities. By the end of the workshop, attendees will be better prepared to transform their research ideas into funded projects.RoundtableDeliberation+
Format · Participant workRoundtableSmall-group discussion where attendees contribute directly rather than only listening.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventConsistent with SRF’s mission, that is, creating funding initiatives that support strategy scholars in conducting rigorous and business relevant research, the workshop aims to inspire and enable participants to navigate the grant-writing process with greater confidence and success. However, the discussions will extend beyond SRF funding opportunities, focusing instead on strategies to secure external funding from a wide range of sources.WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventPanelists:PanelDeliberation+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventAn application is required for this workshop. Application Requirements:WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventThis workshop examines how these forces are transforming markets for technology and explores the implications for core theories of strategy, innovation, and the firm. As global innovation systems become increasingly segmented, firms face new constraints on cross-border transactions, from heightened scrutiny of foreign acquisitions to tightening export controls and politicized technology standards. These changes are not only reshaping firm behavior, but also raising fundamental questions about innovation incentives, entrepreneurial activity, and the efficiency of technology transfer mechanisms.WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventThe workshop is designed as an interactive experience combining a panel discussion with small-group research roundtables. The session begins with short perspectives that frame the emerging research agenda, followed by an open discussion with attendees. In the second part, participants engage in focused roundtable conversations, where they can develop new ideas or receive structured feedback on ongoing research.PanelDeliberation+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventStrategic Leadership & Governance Paper Development Workshop ExpandWorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventThe Strategic Leadership & Governance PDW is divided into two segments. The first segment is a paper development workshop targeted at doctoral students and junior scholars. An application (including a 5-page research proposal) and pre-registration are required. Authors will participate in small roundtable discussions led by senior scholars with shared interests, who will provide feedback on the authors' research.RoundtableDeliberation+
Format · Participant workRoundtableSmall-group discussion where attendees contribute directly rather than only listening.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventThe second segment, starting after the Coffee Break, is open to accepted participants and walk-ins. It will center on a highly interactive “Iron Chef” paper development exercise. Participants are placed in teams and work together to craft a paper proposal (including a research question, theoretical model, and data collection/testing strategy) using a set of theoretical and empirical “ingredients.” The teams then present their proposals, get real-time feedback on their ideas, and compete for a variety of light-hearted awards. This segment concludes with senior scholars offering reflections on various strategies for generating paper ideas.BreakWellbeing+
Format · LogisticsBreakA pacing or recovery block between sessions.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventWhen business schools evaluate a junior professor for tenure, the school typically seeks letters from several prominent individuals in the junior scholar’s area of research. This half-day workshop is intended to help assistant professors and post-doctoral candidates understand and prepare for the tenure letter process.WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventThe first half of the workshop will feature presentations by prominent senior faculty who have written tenure letters or have gone through the tenure process multiple times. They will describe the letter-writing process, explain how they evaluate a tenure case, and provide advice for junior scholars.WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventThe second half of the workshop will feature small round-table discussions where junior scholars will describe their intended research program and receive feedback and advice from the senior scholars.WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all event3. Applicant's top 4 preferences in terms of panelists that the applicant would likePanelDeliberation+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventto be matched with for the roundtable discussions. (We will try our best to takeRoundtableDeliberation+
Format · Participant workRoundtableSmall-group discussion where attendees contribute directly rather than only listening.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventThis workshop treats fragmentation not as a background condition, but as a direct driver of partner selection, governance design, learning, and termination. It is designed as a conversation across theoretical mechanisms, empirical patterns, and emerging research frontiers. We aim to connect classic theories of cooperative strategy with global strategy perspectives on political risk and institutions, while also surfacing new forms and dynamics of collaboration that arise under fragmented geopolitical conditions.WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventWhile AI is a rapidly evolving and widely discussed topic, conversations often remain siloed within specific domains. This workshop is designed to create a shared space where participants can “compare notes” across research, teaching, and practice, gaining insights into how others are experimenting with and applying these tools. It is organized into two parts that combine conceptual discussion with hands-on exploration.WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventThe workshop will conclude with brief reflections from station leads summarizing key insights and potential implications for research, teaching, and practice.WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
The Full Reading
Why It Ranks This Way +
Calibrated from GES design 45/100 and verified 45/100, then capped for source appears to be a guide, directory, calendar, or ancillary page rather than a source agenda.
Reader Takeaway. For a reader, this is mainly a warning or source-evidence record: it reads as a lead or directory source, with the strongest visible signal in participation architecture and learning transfer and the biggest open question around follow through and problem specificity. The practical test is whether the published agenda connects the room to post-event continuation and evidence.
Strongest signals: Participation Architecture, Learning Transfer, and Personalization. Weakest signals: Follow Through, Problem Specificity, and Evidence Maturity.
How This Agenda Could Improve +
- Add named owners, dates, implementation checkpoints, and a visible post-event continuation path.
- Name the costly problem, decision, or performance target the gathering is meant to move.
- Add baseline measurement, comparison logic, tracking, or post-event impact reporting so effectiveness is not inferred only from format.
Fastest next move: Add named owners, dated next steps, and a visible continuation path before treating the event as outcome-ready.
Role-Specific Reading +
Sponsor lens
Look beyond exposure. Strong sponsor value would show qualified interaction, problem work, buyer learning, customer evidence, or follow-up. The practical sponsor move is to look for structured introductions, buyer-seller fit, and relationship persistence.
Designer lens
The agenda is useful as a pattern sample from strategicmanagement.net. Redesign attention should go first to the lowest-scoring pillars; in practice, turn the thinnest agenda blocks into participant work.
Executive lens
Treat the visible agenda as an operating plan. The executive move is to require owners, dates, and evidence before treating the event as strategic. If owners, proof, and follow-through are not visible, the public record does not yet prove strategic movement.
Aggregator lens
Treat the source URL as evidence, not decoration. The data-product move is to keep it as lead evidence unless a direct agenda source is also available before ranking or syndicating the record.
What GES Means Here +
The Gathering Effectiveness Score is a strict 0-100 public-evidence reading of the agenda across eight pillars. It rewards visible participant work, follow-through, transfer, network design, and proof mechanisms more than polish, speaker fame, attendance, or satisfaction.
Visible mechanisms: Participant work, Feedback, Network design, Learning transfer, Personalization.
Evidence boundary: Scores reflect visible agenda/source evidence and should not be read as proof of causal event impact.
Limitations, Score Caps, and Review Flags +
Limitations
- No visible follow-up, progress monitoring, or longitudinal tracking.
- No baseline measurement is visible.
Score caps
- 28: Source appears to be a guide, directory, calendar, or ancillary page rather than a source agenda.
Review flags
- Fourth-loop score cap: Source appears to be a guide, directory, calendar, or ancillary page rather than a source agenda.
- Source appears to be an ancillary commercial/registration page rather than an agenda.
- Agenda is useful as a source record but weak as evidence of gathering effectiveness.
- No source-backed follow-up, validation, baseline, tracking, or impact evidence.
- No tracking, validation, feedback, or impact measurement found in the visible source text.
- High cleanup rate: many extracted rows were hidden or merged as fragments.
- Original category was unknown; publication category is inferred.
Is this proof the event worked? +
No. This is a strict public-evidence reading of the agenda. Proof would require baseline, comparison, follow-up, attribution, and impact evidence beyond the listing.
What should a reader inspect first? +
Start with the source URL, then compare the eight pillar scores against the agenda rows. The biggest opportunities usually sit in follow-through, evidence maturity, and participant work.
Why publish weak records? +
Weak records are part of the map. They show where public agendas still describe sessions and speakers more often than outcomes, commitments, transfer, or proof.
How should I use the rows? +
Read the agenda rows as the visible design trace: formats, purposes, and evidence labels show what the public source made inspectable, not everything that happened in the room. This is a source-grounded interpretation of the public agenda record, not a copy of the source, and not an endorsement of the event.
Where To Go Next
Compare this agenda against other Technology / AI / Startup events scored on the same eight pillars.