The event is over. The tables are being cleared, the lights go off, everyone is tired but satisfied. And then? At most organisations, silence follows. Maybe a brief look back at the next meeting. "It was a success" or "differently next time". But nobody knows exactly what worked and what didn't. And that's exactly what event evaluation is for.
That's a shame. Because evaluating an event isn't something you do afterwards. It begins before the event, when you set your goals. No clear goal, no benchmark. No benchmark, no evaluation, and so no improvement.
Ask yourself three questions before you start organising: what do we want participants to feel afterwards, what do we want them to know, and what do we want them to do? Those three questions are your yardstick. Everything you get back after the event in data and feedback, you measure against that yardstick.
A kick-off with the goal of "getting employees excited about the new strategy" is measured differently from a conference with the goal of "establishing thought leadership in the market". With the kick-off you want to know whether people understand the strategy and are behind it. With the conference you want to know whether visitors associate your brand with expertise.
Those goals don't have to be complicated. But they do have to be on paper. Because when you ask afterwards "was it a success?", you want to be able to say more than "the atmosphere was good". You want to say: "85 per cent of participants say they understand the new strategy, compared with 40 per cent before the event."
That is evaluation. Not a feeling, but a fact.
