Last week I got the news that none of the four sessions I submitted for this year were accepted. Disappointing for sure, but not cause for despair. Because I’ve been lucky enough to have been accepted to speak many times in the past I don’t get too stressed out about it, I know that there are a lot of abstracts submitted and a lot of good speakers submitting them – now more than ever with the growth of SQLSaturday over the past few years.

The sessions I submitted are listed below. I was really hoping the one on PCI would be accepted. I’ve spent close to two years learning about enterprise security and compliance, and I think it’s a topic that needs for discussion. I was also hoping the half day workshop on professional development would be one picked. For the last few years I’ve taught a lot of people why they need a plan, now I’m working on the how. These sessions are ones that I’m interested in, knowledgeable about, passionate about – ones I want to present, not at all designed to be ones most likely to get picked.

The thing I know is that picking sessions is subjective. You can score them all you want, but in the end you do some juggling to get a diverse (people, topics, levels) yet balanced (people, topics,levels) schedule. It should be subjective,to a point. Use a system to get close, then a committee to fine tune.

Human nature – including me – is to ask “why didn’t I get picked”? It might be that the abstract had a typo, a title that was too cute or too blah, was too short or too long. Maybe it scored equally with someone with a track record of presenting the same topic, or with perceived better speaking experience. Maybe there are 18 people wanting to talk about indexes and we don’t need 18 index presentations. Giving personalized feedback on that in an official way is hard – there is enough work to do just evaluating them and picking the final schedule. I’m not saying it can’t be done, but it’s more work with more complexities because now you’re telling people why they aren’t good enough, and being human, we’re probably going to disagree with the assessment!

Rather than feedback, I’d like to see PASS and the Program Committee do more to educate speakers up front. Do an updated webinar every year that reviews the process, talks about common mistakes and misconceptions, how to find and use peer reviews to increase your chance of being selected, and how to lay the ground work for being perceived as being ready for a national stage. I think that would dispel a lot of frustration. For example I had two sessions rejected as being repeats from a previous year. I didn’t know the focus was on new content (maybe I missed that) or I would have submitted something a bit different.

If you didn’t get selected, I feel your pain. Take a look at the final schedule, read the abstracts, try to be dispassionate while you consider if they had something that your submission didn’t. Reach out to a peer, or find someone that has spoken at the Summit and ask for their feedback. If you think there are changes you could make, go make them now so you’re ready for next year. If you don’t see changes and think it was just luck of the draw, start thinking about what you can do in the next year to increase your chances. Maybe you can present on the topic more often, maybe you can build a second or third presentation, maybe you can work on extending your network. There will be something you can do to increase your odds next time around.

I’ve been a proponent for years of forced rotation of speakers, something along the lines of making them sit out every third year (or something like that) to make sure we get new voices on the schedule. I sat out a year deliberately a couple years back and it was hard at first, but then it was pleasant. I had the freedom to just be an attendee, no practicing, no pressure. I remind myself that I’ll have that freedom again this year!

Congratulations to the 100 or so speakers that were selected. Thanks to all who submitted and weren’t selected this time. A special thanks to the volunteers on the Program Committee who sifted and sorted through a lot of abstracts to build the final schedule. I’m looking forward to seeing you all in Charlotte in a few months, enjoying a great event in an East Coast city!