Nexus Conference Planning Meeting, 2/28/01, SF

Nexus Planning Meeting
2/28/01, San Francisco, SFSU Downtown Center

The purpose of this meeting was to expand upon the initial planning from the New York meeting of 2/15, and to frame a more coherent vision, mission, and audience for the next Nexus EQ Conference. This "transcript" is a re-creation from my notes, and not an accurate recording of the participants' actual words. - Josh Freedman

Participants:

- Claude Steiner, Emotional Literacy
- Lauren Vanett, SFSU College of Extended Learning
- Todd Everett, Performance Edge
- Anabel Jensen, Six Seconds
- Josh Freedman, Six Seconds
- Bob Reese, Institute of HeartMath
- Bruce Cryer, HeartMath
- Howard Martin, HeartMath
- Esther Orioli, Qmetrics (by phone and in person)
- Mike Walsh, Mike Walsh & Associates (by phone)
- Nan Summers, Disney Institute (by phone)

I. Features of Nexus

Josh F: I'd like to start our discussion by asking you to think about the best features of the last conference. What did it feel like to be at the first conference, and what were some of the mechanisms that created those feelings?

Claude S: To make it simple -- it felt good! I appreciated the opportunities to talk, teach, learn, and network; I felt taken care of, and guilty because too much money was spent on me… maybe it was too plush… but that was part of what felt good, so it is a bit of a conflict.

Josh F: I appreciated the feeling of connection, validation, support; one mechanism that helped that was the opportunities for dialogue and interaction.

Todd E: For me the first Nexus conference was an opportunity to experience EQ in relationships in the way the conference demonstrated EQ. I left with a new sense of myself and how I could connect and relate with other people in an EQ way.

Anabel J: I felt exhilaration from people, presenters, connections, networks -- and people really practicing their EQ skills. At the same time knew our little organization was losing a lot of money, so I felt depressed and anxious about that.

Mike W: For me it was warm, supportive, energizing; I got that from the diverse group of people - a mixture of education, community/mental health, business that does not usually come together, and people were able to take advantage of that cross functional forum.

Nan S: In contrast to other professional conferences, my experience of the conference was that it was about learning and collaboration rather than about commercialism and people selling their stuff.

Todd E: Another mechanism that really established the feelings was how conference was introduced; and the way moderators set a tone.

Claude S: I valued the in-between times and the way they were structured to bring people together; people might tend to not interact, and the questions and topics in transition times engaged people to interact.

Anabel J: Part of that was the sharing of "fun" -- like passing out cartoons, flowers, sharing jokes.

Todd E: Another mechanism was that moderators had a personal connection to the topics and to each other, so there was a spark, and not just usual "probing questions…"

Claude S: I'd say a big factor was the risk taking on part of organizers – they started our sharing, even being "silly" and not being embarrassed, talking about "real stuff." That certainly led me to feel more open to talk about love and serious things.

Mike W: In addition to good structures, we had a breadth of topics that appealed to wide range of people, so they could engage in a variety of ways.

II. For Whom the Bell Tolls

Josh F: To frame the rest of the discussion, I'd like for us to recognize that while we can be informed by the last conference, we are now planning a new conference. Ideally, from my perspective, it will truly become a shared creation. In New York, we talked about the vision of the conference and its purpose. Another way to look at that is to consider who really needs to be at this event -- who we want it to serve. We can define that very broadly -- so however you define it, who do you want to bring to the table?

Claude S: Before I can think about who, I want to know that it will pay for itself – I want this to be long-term, so it needs to sustain.

Josh F: Yes -- and I hope that by clearly identifying our audience, we can do an even better job of pulling them in.

Bob R: Who came last time?

Josh F: An extraordinarily diverse group. About 1/2 from some kind of education, 1/4 from business, mostly either internal or external consultants, and then another 1/4 from healthcare, wellness, and community organizations.

Howard M: In my own session it seemed that there were a lot of people who were there as professionals – is there also a market for people who would come for their own personal benefit?

Anabel J: Maybe -- our experience at Six Seconds is that most of the people who show up to our certification courses are there as professionals; and a few come specifically for personal growth.

Bob: If we want to target that audience, we can market to them.

Howard: So last time was more the practitioners, and we might think about expanding that.

Lauren V: Within the three major groups Mike identified, there are many people who manage groups and want to learn these skills to do a better job "on the line."

Bruce C: I agree that last time the vast majority of business people were trainers – so do we want to bring in different group?

Mike W: My experience is that "line managers" tend to be attracted to "name recognition," like Linkage, because it is easier to show their supervisors and get approval.

Nan S: As someone in that position, for me the practicality is, where there is return on investment? My experience was at Linkage the focus was on theory and overview, and only a couple of presentations were about the practical applications. If we focus on the practical ways we implement this, then we can capture that audience.

Mike W: I agree, so we need to frame the conference as practical, applied, and how to bring this back to whatever groups you work with.

Esther O: I'd also point out that right now Linkage is not going to do conferences just on EQ, so Nexus has the opportunity to capture that audience.

Mike W: Can we use their mailing list?

Josh F: Yes, we have a reciprocal agreement as sponsors of their last conference.

Bob R: Perhaps "who do you want" comes after "what do we want the conference to accomplish?"

Josh F: Yes, and we can talk further about that.

Todd E: My understanding is that this is about supporting and expanding the EQ movement; about getting people involved and providing them more tools and resources of how to do this work. One group we talked about are the practitioners, or change agents. We can also think about the more "general public" group as the beneficiaries of this work. Another point about sustainability is that financially, educators do not have the same funding level that others do…

Claude S: If we did teach the skills to the "end user," would they come?

Todd E: Probably if we did that, we would use a different delivery mechanism – probably not a national conference

Bob R; or use 1 day of conference for practitioners, and 2nd day for public; people from 1st day could facilitate the 2nd.

Anabel J: My passion is about prevention – every day there are 12 kids killed by gunshot wounds – every 15 seconds a woman is battered in the US… I could go on – but the point is I want people there who are out there doing the prevention. And I would like more teachers there who can bring this message to those who need to hear it.

Howard M: So we could talk about keeping the focus on change agents, but move "down to the street" for practical application – and price accordingly. Following on Bob’s point, the 2nd day could be regional and very practical, for example sessions where parents could bring their kids.

Lauren V: We also could have tiers, where some people could come specifically for some kinds of sessions, and whole group come together around keynote speakers.

Bruce C: I've recently been to several systems thinking conferences where there are introductory, middle, and advanced tracks – an opportunity to bring in new people and also not "slow down" experience practitioners. In the advanced track, a small group stayed together, almost a retreat within conference.

Bob R: Are there other groups we did not reach who are dealing with these kinds of problems – law enforcement, community organizations, faith based groups – people interested in prevention

Lauren V: If we could get a strong group of businesses, perhaps for every employee they send they can sponsor one teacher.

Bob R: If there was some segment of conference that was emotional intelligence for families, there may be more people attracted to that. The family is in crisis in our society partly because few families have been taught these tools and principles.

Nan S: I agree! And that seems like something where Disney could get involved…

Claude S: And we need to be unique as a conference. This family day could become a part of the project of the larger conference – very personal, meaningful.

Bob R; If we had enough time we could connect with companies like Imaginarium to create a learning structure to follow up on the conference -- so people could continue to learn and practice these skills.

Nan S: And that kind of infrastructure is what I am working on, and a big part of the work we are doing at the Disney Institute.

Bob R: Another idea is to get someone like Jerry Brown in Oakland, or another leader, who might get behind creating a center within a school district or city -- the goal would be to create a model and ongoing project.

Josh F: One need expressed by many attendees at the last event was to see the practice in action -- to see how the experts actually do the work. So these kinds of models, follow-ups, and practical days would meet that need.

Howard M: That's true -- how many conferences do we need in the world where we talk about it – the practitioners in our field have already heard from the experts, and now want to do the "how to."

Mike W: I am really energized by the idea of going from talking to doing. Practical tools!

Esther O: So to summarize so far -- we seem to be learning toward the practical application side of this work. We do not have to explain so much what EQ is – people want to know, "do I have any?" and "How do I get more?"
If Nexus could be the "practical application" conference with a track for personal development, one for families, one for managers, and maybe even a day for teens…
Then how do we allow the region to support the conference? Perhaps there would also be a resources exposition where participants could see what resources are available, vendors can show and demonstrate tools and resources, and also have ongoing hands on learning opportunities.

Mike W: At the same time, I want to hold onto the internationalism, it was a major part of the richness of the first conference that there were something like 40 countries represented. So I advocate for both looking for leverage on how to do EQ, and also maintaining the international flavor.

Anabel J: Would being practical drive international away?

Mike W: Not as long as the focus was not solely regional

Nan S: There is also the opportunity for bringing in international press, which would help further all of our work as well.

Bob R: Going back – I am interested in the questions: "As a parent or a teacher, can you teach me how to get this into my school?" "Into my organization?" "What tools, resources, and connections will allow me to extend this conference back home…" -- and if we address those questions, then we could connect with other organizations that already have large networks, such as national PTA, who will be interested in these tools.

Todd E: I want to echo that point -- that in order to make a larger difference, we need to capture people’s attention and help them see that these tools will help them solve their own pressing needs. Some people do not see the linkage between the tool and the problem, and then our change agents go home and wonder, "Why don’t other people see the wisdom of this EQ work?"
So one track might be empowering people to go and make these changes.

Anabel J: When I was at the New York meeting, I sat in a cab with a riot organizer – who ran around the country teaching people these practical skills of how to create riots -- we can do the opposite!

Lauren V: It sounds like this track is about creating a grass roots movement – creating affinity groups, and using the other techniques we know of to bring people together around making change.

Nan S: Another wording for this theme: Integration into community

Claude S: That was a part of the last conference, and while there was a lot of positive energy, that effort started on last day – maybe it was too late? In terms of practitioners, I would like to see them share in creating a "best of what we do" collaborative teaching – basically we work together one day to create the next day conference for the general public audience.

III. Creating a Bandwagon

Josh F: We are already on this topic, so I would like to pause and transition to the question of how we bring people into this EQ work and keep our bandwagon rolling. Part of that, for me, is that we recognize that there are a lot of different groups and entities on our bandwagon now, and I'd like to see a way for them all to participate. So -- the question is, how do we make the conference something that serves the larger movement.

Bob R: One effective mechanism is to create model programs, centers – and these would be developed before conference, and highlighted or announced at the conference – and then to take the success and energy of those models and feed them into the conference. It also addresses the practical questions of how to make this all work.
Then there can become a network of these centers and models growing up and rippling out… By using organizations and governments we tie into existing structures and resources, which may be underutilized. If we do this, we'd want to get high visibility and success in 2002, and then the next time around it grows and expands. In other words, we collaborate with cities and institutions to institutionalize the practices of EQ.

Claude S: Oakland would be great city for that.
Bob R: And I can see Jerry Brown helping to get funding for the Oakland Center for Emotional Intelligence.

Lauren V: It occurs to me that this might be an interesting adjunct to the kinds of offerings that SFSU (San Francisco State University) is already putting forward with our media learning programs -- we are in the process of negotiating with Oakland right now, and looking for a facility; all that might support an autonomous entity of an EQ Center which could also tie into those programs.

Bob R: And by doing this with a University, you open the possibility that you can bring this work into the teacher education.

Mike W: So there might be a theme here of building community capacity for creating emotional intelligence – part of challenge is identifying themes where people will be attracted and engaged into the conference.

Nan S: Here in Orlando, there are the resources in the Disney community, Celebration, which would allow this kind of partnership Bob describes to occur and be well supported.

Josh F: Would Disney allow such a center to be created without being totally controlled by Disney?

Nan S: I hope so! And perhaps as a starting point, it would help to have the structures in place that we have here.

Todd E: To get to another underlying problem -- what about the lack of emotional intelligence in organizations? Most of us spend most of our time in organizations, and the way people work together often does involve our EQ, and so there is a great loss personally and professionally. To clarify, there are all kinds of organizations -- schools, nonprofits, businesses – and something like the city center project could be for individuals, but it also could be for organizations. What if, for example, the Oakland Center for Emotional Intelligence started with a focus on putting emotionally intelligent practices into place in the city government? There would great long term benefits.

Josh F: Again within Six Seconds' clientele, we have been seeing more and more organizations of one kind and another interested in developing EQ within their own practice.

Claude S: Backing up for a minute, the term "emotional intelligence" may be waning now -- but to build this movement and the conference, I see that we have three real needs: we need to be financially sustaining so this can keep going. We need to keep cross-fertilizing so we do not focus on one idea or person being the "right" point of viewith And we need the real world practical work to make this happen.

Nan S: There are also new waves coming – for example I just heard Robert Cooper taking about his new book, and it seems to me that the issues of maximizing potential, getting the most from people at work, are going to be pressing.

Bob R: One strategy for conference would be to get people who have done this work who can come talk about their success stories – what worked, what did not… and this will generate models and also interest. So we could see at least some examples of people doing this with results they can report.

Mike W: That's a powerful idea -- I am working with an organization in Canada focused on addressing issues of homelessness. In their national conference, they brought in local people who really talked about what works.

Josh F: That reminds me about the upcoming World Research Group conference on EQ for Human Resource Directors -- the organizers really are not interested in expert opinion as much as they are in peer-to-peer examples of what is working.

Howard M: As Claude said, maybe the emotional intelligence movement as we know it may be on the way out, but the need for managing and using emotions and better experience positive emotion is a societal skill that we will need more and more. Our new book is about mastering emotions, and the increasing speed of change tells me that these skills will be even more critical.

Anabel J : Another example is Tara Goleman’s new book is also about using emotion to create healing.

Bob R: So this is a bit out there -- but what if one of the merit badges you could get in boy scouts was "emotional intelligence"? We particularly need these prevention skills for males – so can we get into athletic teams, boys clubs, and other places where boys learn social skills?

Claude S: I want to keep focus on specific, high level skills that are broadly applicable -- I am concerned that "emotional intelligence" is coming to mean "nice" or "anything good." If we focus on skills, such as empathy, I think we can get further.

Lauren V: It sounds like you are saying it might be time for some new language – maybe people are saying, "yeah, I got the book, I know about that" and not really paying attention to the core.

Bruce C: So there is a balance between the outcomes – having good relations, preventing all kinds of abuse, holding onto the core skills, and also looking at the applications.
I like the piece about model programs because each program brings their own network along with the project.
I want to emphasize that we can model these behaviors for each other – the spirit that I want to capture from Nexus is that we use and practice these skills to create our work.

Todd E: Another question to address is, how do we get people interested in putting their energy in this? Into the conference first, and then into the ongoing work we see tied to the conference.

Howard M: It has to benefit driven.

Todd E: So if we are doing this kind of center project, how do we sustain that given our experience with the projects from the last conference, which petered out.

Josh F; And how can we do that for people internationally, not just regionally

Todd E: To answer my own question, for me it comes down to emotional attachment and personal connection – finding people you feel like working with them for mutual gain. At the last conference there were individuals I met and we made commitments to each other that led us to keep putting in work.

Lauren V: If we do have pilot projects, and they are successful, then people are attracted to it and they see a mechanism to be involved.
In terms of the conference itself, by having experiential sessions, we can include processes which help people quickly feel connected.

Bob R: I agree that success is very contagious. Todd's question also reminded me of a story about a city manager who liked to watch trains going by -- he said, "I like to see something that is moving by itself!" So, for example, if there is a company in this space who is successful with this work, we can tap into a "train that is already moving" so we do not have to do all the pushing.

Anabel J: My answer is in terms of the brain: we want to prevent pain, does this work solve problems? Our brains want to create pleasure, so how does the work fit in with our desires? And our brains want to build new connections and growth, so how does the work connect us to our larger purposes?

Claude S: What drives me personally is the mixture of teaching and learning. When I can learn, and I can teach, I feel motivated.

Bob R: I'd also add "I can do."

IV. Conclusions and Actions

Josh F: I'd like to know what you would like to do next, and what you would like done next. I want to be clear that there are not resources to have work done -- my mandate from Six Seconds really ends with this process of exploration, and so from here out we are all using our personal time and energy. So it would help me to know what you personally will do nowith

Nan S: I have two specific items. First, Anabel & I will meet when she comes to Florida later this month. Second, I will work with Josh to create an outline of a proposal, and bring that to my Disney constituents, and then feed their reactions and ideas back to Josh. Bob R: How much money do we need, and what are some of the sources?

Josh F: The last conference had about a $50,000 deficit. So, if we can generate that much in advance, I will feel very comfortable going forward; and I think we might be able to then borrow the rest of the advance capital from our operating budget.

Esther O: If we are providing value for the corporate sector, then we can look for corporate sponsorships, $10-$20 k, and I would be willing to work on that.

Bob R: What about foundations?

Esther O: That's not my area..

Anabel J: What we've been hearing is that foundation funds maybe a little flat right now…

Claude S: And in any case might take too long for this initial funding.

Nan S: I would like to compliment Six Seconds that the financial struggle did not show at all at the conference

JF: Thank you. Getting back Bob's question about sources, I want to reiterate that from the outset we have wanted this conference to have shared ownership -- it was deliberate that we did not call it the "Six Seconds EQ Conference." So one mechanism for moving forward is for the partners interested in the work to share the financial commitment -- and share the potential reward. This partnership could be as simple as committing to sell a certain number of seats, and taking a profit of some part of those tickets.
In terms of who, we've invited everyone we could think of to be a part of the project, and a few organizations have stepped forward wanting to be real partners. Off the top of my head, those are HeartMath and the Heartmath Institute, QMetrics, CSEE, and the Disney Institute. There are also individuals who are highly committed, and other organizations who want to be a part but not necessarily a partner -- such as the Committee for Children and the Consortium for Emotional Intelligence in Organizations.

Bob R: There may be universities who would be interested in being a partner, and who have some financial resources.

Esther O: The location will also affect how some partners are involved -- for example, does it have to be in Bay Area?

Nan S: And if not, then organizations can support the conference in different ways. For example, if we consider Orlando, we have Disney Institute facilitators who might be able to help do the work of the conference.

Claude S: Another big question here is about the cost of the conference. It was expensive last time.

Josh F: The price ranged from $295 for student to $895 for full fare. I would like to see that kind of system in place, and maybe an even wider spread.

Howard M: For comparison, HeartMath's general public 2-day seminars are $395, and 20+% are spending an additional $395 for Freeze Framer software – so maybe price is not such an issue.

Josh F: There seems to be a big range, for example Linkage was closer to $1200 plus.

Nan: From my perspective, the last conference was actually surprisingly low priced and provided more value for that money.

Josh F: I heard that feedback from almost everyone from the business world -- that considering what they got, the price was a bargain. On the other hand, school counselors found it too high.

Bruce C: This is another place where sponsorship and foundations might come in – a corporation could subsidize $200 of the teacher’s fee, and that cost is peanuts to them but would provide great opportunities.

Nan S: It also occurs to me that the college student population is another potential target market – these students can get academic credit for the work they do, and then this become part their college curriculum

Lauren V: SFSU and others might be able to provide promotional space, for example ad in catalog, instead of money…

Claude S: Did the conference provide CEU's?

Josh F: Yes, for teachers and for California MFTs. We do not have accreditation for nurses, and we would also like to get a national accreditation from someone like the APA so counselors and therapists from around the country can use the units.

Bruce C: HeartMath can help with providing CEUs for nurses/doctors.

Claude S: So what is the timeline for getting financial commitments?

Josh F: Basically, we need to schedule the conference a year in advance. So, if we are looking at Spring 2002, I think May 1 is a reasonable deadline for us to have some financial commitments and some clear potentials.

Lauren V: I will talk to people doing SFSU project in Oakland and discuss adding in EQ Center component, but I will need some help!

Anabel J: I will join you in that.

Josh F: I will come to HeartMath to discuss further with the guys there, and contact each person individually to get feedback. I will take responsibility for sharing the notes so far with this group and the larger invitee group. I'd like to continue to get input and feedback, and work to synthesize this thinking into a shared vision. If we can do some more work via email that might be easier, then we can schedule another meeting if we want to.

Howard M: I will do some analysis of costs and benefits of doing a conference versus some other mechanism to do this work, and take the time to step back and consider what we've talked about today to give my best thinking about what will give us what we want, because maybe we don't actually want to do a major conference?

Esther O: There are many options to do this -- another model is creating several smaller one-day events.

Nan S: And/or adding regional satellite feeds so people can participate around the world.

Lauren V: We do some work with Wycom, they do teleconferencing, so it might be worth asking them about what they are learning.

Josh F: The is a group in Georgia called Fastkids looking at teaching EQ through distance and alternative learning methods, and maybe they could help with distance learning.

Esther O: Another resource for that is the University of Oklahoma which also does a lot of distance learning work.

Bruce C: I also want to think further about what the structures would help us create a movement. The model of trying to fill a three day conference may be harder than it needs to be. I will also talk to Wyncom about what they are learning about satellite events.
My goal is to look at a range of models and options.

Nan: Another mechanism might be to also produce a video demonstrating success stories, and then share that with satellite or regional conferences -- or even use the conference as a starting point for creating a video.

Bob R: Just to get out of either/or, we might look at starting with smaller events and grassroots action, then building up to a bigger event in 2003.

Howard: I agree that I'd like us to look at all the options -- in HeartMath we are building less 2 days and more 1 days, tied to more individual sponsors.

Josh: I agree that we should start by looking at our goals and find mechanisms to meet those. So I have two key goals I would like to hold onto: The first is for us to maintain and increase the collaboration and the idea that we can all be workers in the movement together. I'd like a mechanism where we can extend an open invitation where our "competitors" are all equally invited. Second, I want us to connect and support people around the globe who want to be a part of this work; that people who are isolated in this work around the world feel belonging, support, and connection.

Claude S: I really like the feeling of having a conference. I am not exactly sure what my motivation is, but it is appealing to -- and the "face time" for all these people to get together is valuable. The idea that we can use the time at the conference to really work together and collaborate has great appeal to me.

Esther O: The conference can be like an "EQ Skunkworks" – where we really think and plan together. I'd like to talk more about we are going to do next – what is the action plan? How are we going to develop the theme, the parameters, what the conference will look like?

Howard M: If we take Josh’s notes from this meeting and the New York meeting, and all agree to feed back ideas to him to synthesize, I think we would get progress on those.

Claude S: It seems to me that at this point Josh is the "sparkplug" and we need to provide him the perspectives; if he is not pushing this it will not happen. I hope that later, though, some of the work of the conference can be shared and owned by other people too.

Lauren V: I am not clear yet that there is there a commitment to do a conference…so we need to think through that question pretty soon.

Todd E: My area of concern is how to create the organizational elements we need, such as a steering committee, who will sponsor, who will participate. Part of my concern about this is making sure that Josh has the support he needs. From an EQ leadership model, I see it as critical that the vision be shared – and I have confidence in Josh’s ability to synthesize the vision so that it is shared.

Bruce: I am stimulated by all these ideas – and I want to sort through this. I am committed to looking further and finding the most appropriate roles for HeartMath and/or the HeartMath Institute in the process. I also see a lot of coherence in this meeting, and I perceive that to be the case in New York -- and in my experience when people are using their highest and best intelligences, there are great results. So I am convinced that what will unfold will have that integrity.

2/13/03