Kernerman Dictionary News • Number 13 • June 2005
|
Conference Organisation: the academic’s
burden
Every two years the EURALEX Congress comes round again, moving
each time to a new venue so that we can explore EURALEX congresses are an important event in the
lexicographical calendar as they offer a rare meeting point for all the
actors in the field, lexicographer to lexicographer, business to business,
academic to academic, and all to all. During four days, members of these
essential sectors of the lexicographical community from throughout the world
are able to meet friends, make friends and exchange views. However, a lot of
planning and unpaid work go into making a successful
congress. The aim of this paper is to show the type of constraints under
which the organiser is working, and consequently how the community can help
make the task easier. Obviously I can only speak for Lorient 2004, but most
of the organisational issues are the same everywhere. Before going into
detail I must elucidate slightly the title. The academic’s burden? It is true that there are plenty of us
in the membership, but the wealth of EURALEX is in the variety of its
members, not just in terms of geographical background and the diversity of
expertise, but also in terms of professional background with practising
lexicographers, in-house or independent, publishing houses, software developers
and just plain lovers of dictionaries, in addition to academics. The task of
congress organisation, though, tends to fall to the academics. This is
probably for a number of reasons. Academics are, in general, relatively
stable, physically if not mentally, staying for the time necessary to
organise events. They generally have a relatively flexible work schedule into
which congress organisation can be fitted as an extra, but handlable task.
Congresses are also an occupational hazard for an academic, if you do not
publish research you do not exist. One way of publishing is through attending
conferences, and if you attend them, why not organise them? The last point is
the nature of their employer, as academics also work for institutions that
welcome congresses as a means of showing off their facilities and affirming
their reputation as a seat of learning. Whilst it may be natural that the
task falls to an academic, it remains useful that others recognise the
immense amount of work that goes into an event. A moveable feast Like the progression of a medieval monarch, EURALEX wends its
way through I started off with two questions; why every two years, and why keep moving? The first will be the subject of the rest of this paper. The
aim is to give a brief overview of the tasks involved and the time schedule
from acceptance to the opening ceremony. The second can be answered more
quickly. We are a European association, so it seems normal that each
country gets the chance to show off its own lexicographical practice. If a
meeting is always held in the same place it tends to become the property of
that place. This is fine for some areas of research where a university seeks
to become a centre of excellence in that field, but EURALEX is not a
university association. It has a more virtual existence, simply using
facilities put at its disposal by member institutions, or the institutions of
its members. By moving, the congress remains on neutral ground, allowing both
business and academic partners to exchange freely. This
mobile-feast syndrome means that since the founding of the association in
1983 and its first meeting in Exeter, EURALEX has been steadily moving around
Europe, each time hosted by a different institution, some big, some small,
but all committed to making everyone welcome. Of course, some places are
easier to get to than others, but everywhere is difficult for someone. Every
country has its own dictionary publishers and institutes, which means that,
in moving, each country can present its own lexical practice. This is vitally
important in terms of membership and European cohesion. Organisation Now we can get down to business. What happens in the two years
between congresses? Acceptance The first stage is that an offer to host the following event
must be accepted by the general assembly, which always meets during the
congress. Prior to this, offers will have been discussed by the board so that
some arbitration can be done if there is a plethora of potential venues; this
also helps planning ahead even if the plans rarely work out. Once the offer has been accepted serious planning can start.
This means setting up a local committee and handing out tasks. This more than
takes up the first year as the website and databases are built, the call
written, contacts made with local authorities, including the tourist board,
contacts established with the press, et cetera. Each organiser knows
that the previous organisers can be relied on for assistance, but local needs
generate new problems, which may require local solutions. We took on two
students to help us through this first year, which culminates with the summer
board meeting. Launching the
machine By the time of the board meeting, which always takes place at
the new host institution in the summer preceding the congress, all the infrastructure
must be in place, as by June the first call for papers must go out. The call
should be in at least two languages, we used three, with English and Breton
in addition to French. The inclusion of Breton was important to us, as being
able to include one of As the call goes out in the International Journal of
Lexicography, advance planning is essential as paper-publishing deadlines
are obviously different from those of electronic lists. The journal reaches a
different audience than the electronic lists, and EURALEX members must be
informed first. In addition to the journal, we try to cover all the major
electronic lists, the aim is to widen the circle to all those interested in
lexicography. The call will go out at regular intervals up to the final
deadline for the receipt of papers. There is obviously a limited degree of
flexibility, but the deadlines for the review process are very short. Whereas
in some congresses review is done on short abstracts, EURALEX requires full
abstracts so that a rigorous selection process can be carried out and the
whole proceedings be in print before the event. This
puts a lot of pressure on the organiser. At this point I must reiterate the fact that the organiser is
still doing their fulltime job. It is very unlikely that they will get a
reduced teaching or research load, in fact the opposite generally occurs as
those dynamic enough to organise a major event must be able to take on something
else, n’est ce pas? The review process The reputation of a congress is paramount to success; if the
selection is seen as anything but rigorous then the congress will no longer
fulfil its purpose of disseminating knowledge. It is all too easy for a
congress attached to an association to be seen as a sort of club where it is
sufficient to be a member to speak. Such a situation is clearly disastrous,
as a small group of people would only ever listen to themselves and over time
the circle would inevitably diminish and the debates become sterile. This is
far from the case with EURALEX, as we have a strict process of double-blind
review, which ensures rigorous selection. For those who do not know the
process I shall explain. As can be seen from the call, every EURALEX congress has a
programme committee, these are the people who will make the final selection,
but on the basis of reports supplied by the review panel. The review panel
consists of experts in different fields of lexicography who agree to read and
comment on a maximum of 5 proposals. The organiser has of course the lists
from previous congresses, but will also add in more reviewers from their own
circle of professional acquaintances, as a new venue will require a greater
weight in some language combinations. Management of this panel is complex, as
unlike many congresses that only have English as their working language,
EURALEX is very multilingual. This means taking into account both speciality
and language combinations; a far from easy task as it is all too easy to have
a wealth of reviewers for one speciality or combination and a dearth
elsewhere. This was very much the case for EURALEX 2004 as we had a much
larger number of proposals in French than at previous meetings; the situation
will probably be the same for TURINLEX in 2006. Bringing in new members on a review panel also leads to
complications. EURALEX standards are rightfully high. This means that time
must be taken to explain the review procedure to new reviewers. All the
reviewers are heavily committed professionals who are taking on the task for
free, which means that the time available is also a factor. For EURALEX we
use a standard review form with fixed criteria, and also have a space for
comments to help decision-making and others that are passed on to the authors
who will expect feedback When a proposal is received it is given a number and filed
ready for review. Proposals must be classified by theme and language. In some
cases authors will have ticked a number of themes, in which case the
organiser will have to exercise judgement as no paper can be reviewed by 6
reviewers, which would be the case if 3 categories had been ticked. For the
smooth running of the review process, discipline and realism on behalf of the
authors is essential, but cannot always be counted on. Deadlines must be respected and late papers cannot normally be
considered. The organiser can have well over 200 proposals to manage and
cannot send them out until after the deadline has passed, as otherwise
managing a review panel is impossible. Proposals that do not satisfy the
presentation format cannot be reviewed. Time is another factor. However much
you might have to say, the reviewer only has a limited time to read it. A
proposal that is too short cannot be properly judged; one that is too long
may indicate someone who will not respect speaking times either. In all
cases, electronic submission must be preferred so as to reduce handling costs
and speed up operations. Once the proposals have been safely gathered in and rendered
anonymous, the review procedure can begin. In normal circumstances, a
reviewer will receive a maximum of 5 proposals, although given the number of
proposals received some reviewers will accept more. Review is anonymous and
each paper will be read by two persons independently. This is double blind
review. The review procedure is not without its problems. There are
anguishing cases where the reviewer fails to deliver; in this case another
reviewer has to be found at short notice. The same may apply if a paper is
deemed highly acceptable by one but is rubbished by another. We aim to be
rigorous but fair, and double blind review ensures this. Upon receipt of the review forms, numerical values are fed
into the database so as to give an initial sorting by clear acceptance and
clear refusal. The former do not pose a problem, but the latter do receive
individual attention, as all refusals must be justified. At this stage the
proposals are still anonymous. Programme
committee meeting The review process up to this point will have been carried out
by the organiser with in-house assistants, all working under great pressure.
Once the reviews have been received and classified; the selection can then be
carried out by the programme committee. The programme committee consists of the organiser assisted by
a team of four other persons, usually members or ex-members of the board and
the previous organiser. This means a team of people who have already
experience of organising EURALEX congresses. The committee meets on a
Saturday, and has one day in which to go through all the proposals from clear
acceptance to absolute rejection and to choose those that will go onto the
programme. In other words, they must reject a minimum of 50% of the papers,
many of which would be quite worthy of acceptance. This is done anonymously,
only after do we reveal names and see who we have offended. Once the meeting
is over it is the job of the organiser to send out letters of acceptance or
refusal, and wait for the flack to arrive. The higher the number of proposals, the higher the level of
rejection. Having too many parallel sessions is to be avoided and nobody
would be satisfied by having an over-rich programme. The event cannot be
lengthened either as it would greatly increase costs. This means that the
review process is a gruelling one for the committee, and especially the
organiser who can expect angry recriminations. However, the high level of
selection ensures the reputation of the congress, as participants know they
can expect a very high standard of papers. This is important for any
congress, especially when the participants are paying a fee and travelling
long distances to attend. There remains the problem of doctoral students. Papers from
doctoral students are not given any preferential treatment, some high quality
papers will be accepted, others rejected on the same basis as any other
proposal. However, I firmly believe in the necessity of opening the congress
to a maximum of young researchers who would not be able to attend if not given
the possibility of presenting a paper. Because of this we used the database
to find papers that had been rejected and offered the possibility of
presenting at a pre-congress work-in-progress session, following a new
selection process. These short papers would be published in a separate
section of the proceedings. I am pleased to say that this formula worked, and
was well attended. Invited
Speakers Another task of the programme committee is to invite the
plenary speakers. The organiser will draw up a list based on his or her own
wishes, but balancing the requirements of international speakers and speakers
from the host country. The list is discussed by the programme committee and
advice may be sought from the board. The next problem is one of availability,
which means beginning negotiations well ahead. We were lucky in The last laps before the event Publishing the
proceedings Review process over, final papers safely, including those of the
invited speakers gathered in, so now we can go to press. Not so quick. In addition to guidelines, we provide an electronic style
sheet, but not everyone knows how to use one. Failure to follow the
guidelines means an enormous job of standardising the texts, which can come
in a variety of formats. Some insist on sending pdf files, and have to be
informed politely that we may not be equipped to transform these. Some may
have adapted the style sheet to their own format, forgetting that we might in
turn need to adapt the style sheet to suit our printer. Some still produce
overlong texts, and have to be reminded that size adds to cost. Many will
have complex diagrams and space-consuming image files which do not always
transfer easily between systems. Our two students worked solidly on the
files, updating the style sheets until the printer was satisfied and a
print-ready pdf file could be prepared. This quite literally means sleepless
nights, as the printer cannot and will not wait. Drawing up the
programme Whilst all this is going on, the pre-programme is being drawn
up and circulated electronically. This too is no easy task, as managing
parallel sessions must be done in such a way that people can easily change
rooms whilst ensuring that thematic areas do not clash. Facilities and
audience numbers also have to be taken into account. Not all rooms are
equally as equipped, some papers will attract more
audiences than others and therefore need a bigger room. Then come the cancellations, inevitable with over a hundred
speakers. Added to this will be those who cannot arrive on a given day and
need to change time slot, or who may have arrived but wish to listen to
someone who is speaking when they are. Sometimes individual needs can be
accommodated, but not always as this is a very delicate balancing act. The point here is not to shoot the piano player, your unpaid
and overstressed organiser is juggling with a multitude of problems, and
yours is but one of them. One of the problems with which your happy organiser is trying
to cope is the chairing of the individual sessions. Choosing a chair means
finding someone who is knowledgeable on the subject area, who can listen and
not intervene unless needed, and who can impose discipline when either the
speaker or the audience get carried away. Being invited to chair a session is
both an honour and a burden. Accepting the honour of a chair means reading
the texts beforehand and preparing questions. No paper must go without at
least one question, and often this first question will set off a discussion
that the chair must then bring to a close when the time runs out. Timing is
essential if people are to be able to change rooms without disturbing a paper
that has already started. The chair is also stuck for at least one session
unable to go and listen to other papers that might be of interest. Of course
they get to hear the papers in their session, but they are never really
relaxed as they are also note taking and keeping an eye on the clock. Chairs
are precious volunteers. The Congress The last minute preparations are traumatic. Not only are you
wondering what you have forgotten, but there are also practical aspects like
preparing the congress bags. The proceedings will have to go in, so will the
tourist publicity and other goodies. You know there will be a rush on the day
so the bags must be distributed in alphabetical order. All this takes time.
The congress starts on Tuesday, but you can expect visitors on Monday who
would like to have their bag immediately and cannot understand why it is not
possible and why you may not have time to chat. You keep a smile and carry on
rushing. The big day arrives. What can go wrong? Plenty and mostly the
unexpected. In Day to day management requires a good team; keen student
helpers and wonderful staff do help greatly. In Neither the organiser nor the team can be said to “enjoy” the
congress in the same way as the other participants. They never stand still,
they rarely finish on time, they never get to listen
to a paper all the way through. They must be everywhere at the same time.
Thank heavens for mobile phones. And yet, the congress is the climax of two
years hard work, so with the adrenaline running high their enjoyment will be
there. There is nothing quite as thrilling as the buzz of conversation. In
July 2004, from Tuesday to Saturday, our faculty buzzed and everyone could
feel the satisfaction. Conference organisers and their team are enablers, and
enabling is exciting. Come Saturday lunchtime the pressure should begin to drop.
Saturday afternoon is for excursions, and if the planning has been done the
coaches and guides will be there and a new holiday atmosphere will reign. The
team can then relax… until Monday morning when the tidying, paying bills, sorting out cancellations et cetera begins. Financial aspects Now that we have looked at the organisational problems and
their happy outcome, we need to look at the financial side of things.
Congresses require time, and time may be money, but other factors also have
their costs. Running a
congress ain’t cheap In the introduction I said that it might seem natural that the
task of congress organisation fall to an academic.
This is of course not really so. There are many large conventions, much
larger and more expensive, but less friendly, than EURALEX that are organised
by professional bodies and set up by professional organisers. So why go to an
amateur? The answer is, of course, cost. Many see EURALEX as an expensive congress. Compared to some it
is, compared to others it is not. If the money is coming from your pocket
attending a congress is a pricey thing, especially once you add in the cost
of travel and accommodation. On the other hand, food is included and you walk
away with a couple of volumes of proceedings that reflect what is best in
lexicography at the time. The cost aspect is also a cultural one. In Keeping cost very low works for small events, as grants will
cover the basic costs, but as soon as an event goes beyond a critical size,
costs inevitably rocket. Whilst not being of the size of the vast impersonal
conventions, EURALEX congresses do bring together an average 300
participants, which means that some sort of infrastructure is essential. This
means that relatively high fees are requested. However, I hold that EURALEX
congresses do offer tremendous value for money. Some professional help may be
called in, but the vast majority of the workload is undertaken by people
working for free. To explain the cost factors involved I shall outline the
main sources of income and outgoings. Income Fee structure Fee structure must take into account the ability of people to
pay, which is why we have a variety of fees and deadlines. In building a fee
structure a number of factures have to be taken into account: job status,
geographical origin, membership and date of payment. The first, job status, is relatively straightforward as we
differentiate between students and non-students. It is obvious that students
have a lower income than the fully employed; they are also the lifeblood of
the discipline as they represent new ideas and future full members of the
association. There is thus a much lower fee in this case. However,
increasingly, institutions will only pay a fee if a communication is accepted.
This is particularly problematic as the doctoral student gets no preferential
treatment in the review process and is up against established researchers in
the selection process. This is another reason why student fees must be kept
low so as to allow self-financing students to attend, and also why we set up
a special pre-congress work-in-progress session at EURALEX 2004 so that
students would have a greater chance of getting a paper accepted. Geographical origin is slightly more complex. Originally this
was put in to assist with people coming from behind the iron curtain, or to
economies that were gradually adapting to the western European economy. In
this case we would offer a low fee, and in many cases participants would be
assisted with a grant from the Hornby Trust. This low fee category only
concerned European countries, as we are a European association, and is also
one that is being phased out as the candidate countries are now full members
of the EU. Membership is the third factor. There is no point in having an
association if everyone, members and non-members pay the same fees. Lower
fees are a privilege of membership and may even incite some to join. There is
more to EURALEX than just the congresses and the more we are, the more we can
do to promote all aspects of our discipline. The final factor is one of time, and that is one that many
have trouble understanding. Congress organisation costs, EURALEX does have
seed money to help get congress organisation going, but many outlays come
before the event so money must come in from somewhere. In addition, the
organiser has to have an idea as to numbers involved. Lunches and receptions
are included in the fee, so the restaurant must have advance notice. Food
wastage increases costs, and in a hungry world is also immoral. The only way
of covering initial costs and calculating numbers is to give a variable fee
structure based on date of payment. Sponsors and
grants Fees may seem high, but they do not cover overheads. Other
sources of financing are required. A considerable amount of time can go into
this. National, regional and local authorities may help, either in cash or in
kind. Conference bags and contents have a cost, so when someone gives them,
it helps greatly. The EU may be a source of funding, but we found that the
weight of bureaucracy was enormous and then we got a refusal. So much wasted
time for no result is depressing, but then a sponsor comes along. Some give
for general funds, others for more precise areas. We were extremely lucky to
have the assistance of at least one major sponsor. The money was important,
and their presence throughout the week also added to the event. The great
generosity of the Hornby Trust enables many from central and eastern Sponsorship also comes in through the exhibition, though the
fees are ridiculously low for the service provided. During a whole week, some
300 people representing all aspects of the
lexicographical world will see a stand. This is the time to compare what
other companies are doing, to show off products, and make contacts.
Exhibitors may even find new staff. This is what the exhibitor gets, but sponsorship is a two-way
thing. EURALEX congresses are run by academics who are training the next
generation of lexicographers, the EURALEX
association is promoting good lexicographical practice and bringing awareness
of dictionaries to a wider public. Sponsorship is thus putting back a little
of what the publishing industry takes back. Coming forward spontaneously, as
our sponsors did, saves time for the organisers and clearly shows a
commitment to the event, and to the discipline itself. Outgoings Staff Very many hours of unpaid labour go into organising a
congress, but inevitably some paid staff are
necessary. Everything depends on the individual institution, some may charge
for secretarial assistance, others not. If the assistance is not available,
outside staff will have to be brought in. In Staff are needed both during and
before an event. In our case we chose to employ students from the applied
languages department who would help with organisational tasks as part of
their mandatory work placement. This meant that I could rely on students who
were not only motivated, but had good language and organisational skills. The permanent staff took on the extra workload as part of
their work, but put in much more time than they were ever paid for. In our
faculty we have a research centre with secretarial staff who
are there to help manage research projects and meetings. Throughout the week
Valerie Sauvaire and Danielle Guyomard were always available, as they
were during preparatory meetings, weekends and evenings included. To these I
must add the many other members of university staff who were around to help,
up front and behind the scenes. In our case a special mention must be made of
co-organiser Sandra Vessier. She is not an academic, her job is international
relations, but she was with us from the outset facilitating and organising.
This is a privileged situation, and one which cannot be counted on
everywhere, for us it meant major budget savings. Premises Again the university provided these for free, and even
arranged for a complete refurbishing of the audio-visual material in the
amphitheatres. Hiring premises can be a very expensive, but necessary,
option. We had originally budgeted for hiring a hall for the welcome session,
it would have greatly added to costs. Catering costs EURALEX 2004 took place after the closure of the university
restaurant for the summer. However, the staff came back and produced
excellent food with a very friendly service. Catering is an important extra
cost, but not one where you can cut corners as a congress marches on its
stomach, important business takes place during the coffee breaks and at
lunch. Publication Although we managed to keep most of our costs under control,
publication costs are a very big outlay. Programmes and proceedings can only
be printed at the very last minute, this means respecting very tight
schedules and finding a printer who would respect them too. Traditionally the EURALEX proceedings are always in the
conference bag. This means that from receipt of final copy to printing there
is only a matter of weeks. Few university printing facilities can cope with
the number of copies to be produced in such a short space of time and to a
high standard. It is thus necessary to use an outside contractor, and as it
will be a one-off contract you cannot expect favours. In our case the tough
bargaining was carried out by our communications department, but the price
was still high. Congress organisation: the
academic’s privilege By way of conclusion I shall revisit the title. Burden? In
some ways, yes, as it generates a tremendous amount of work that cuts into a
busy teaching schedule and virtually writes off any research activity.
Privilege? Indeed. Research is nothing if not done within a community.
EURALEX is more than just an special interest group.
Getting involved leads to meetings with remarkable people, it brings
challenges, and meeting challenges is what carries us forward. Organising a
congress is indeed a privilege. This paper only touches the tip of a lexicographical iceberg
in terms of the time taken to organise an event. The time it took me to type
up these notes is nothing compared to the time spent preparing the congress.
The workload is tremendous, but the satisfaction great. I did not hear any
papers, I always had something to do, but I could feel the exchange of
debate, the constant buzz of debate. The staff at UBS enjoyed the week, the
students enjoyed it. But we would not tackle anything so big for a while yet. One of the great privileges of an organiser is to hand
on the flame to someone else. I have handed onto Carla Marello who will be
bringing us TURINLEX in 2006. She has now had a busy year,
she has a busier one ahead. The result will be a very different event from
EURALEX 2004, which was different from
K Dictionaries Ltd |
