AIVC - Air Infiltration and Ventilation Centre

Search form

EBC

You are here

Home  |  EU

35th AIVC Conference evaluation report now available

05-12-2014 | EU

The analysis of the 35th AIVC- 4th TightVent- 2nd venticool Conference  evaluation survey has been finalized.

The evaluation questionnaire of the 35th AIVC conference: “Ventilation and airtightness in transforming the building stock to high performance” was sent out to 124 attendees of the event. The summary report is the result of the feedback from 64 of the participants who filled in the evaluation form.

According to the evaluation questionnaire responses, the large majority of the conference participants attended the conference as a result of a personal recommendation. Altogether, attendees learnt about the conference mostly through personal recommendation as well as partnership or membership in a group closely related to the conference. Among the other means, the website and newsletter seem to have a reasonable impact while the newsflash or flyer have little or no impact. Maybe one reason could be that people only learn more about the conference through these means although they are already aware of it. The main reasons for attending the conference in a bottom top hierarchy were networking, programme content, personal growth and development, and speakers.

The conference managed to meet the expectations of 78% of the audience while another 14% rated the event as “average” and the remaining 5% as “poor”. Additionally, the conference’s organization and registration process were also reported as satisfactory for the majority (90% and 74% of the attendees respectively). As regards the publicity of the event, 67% of the attendees stated rather or very satisfied with it while a 31% were undecided and another 2% rather dissatisfied.

The conference venue as well as the food and beverages were reported as very or rather satisfying for the big majority (92% and 89% of the attendees respectively). As regards the conference handouts material, a 78% of the participants were very or rather satisfied with it while the remaining 17% and 5 % was neutral.

The content of the conference sessions was reported as appropriate and informative for the big majority (92%) while the quality of information presented was considered satisfactory or excellent for the 84% of the attendees. In addition, 86% of the attendees stated that their skills/knowledge increased as a result of participating in this conference. Furthermore, the length of the sessions as well as the number of participants was just about right for the big majority of the audience. In respect to the registration fee, 56% of the attendees found it neutral while the remaining considered it to be “(very) attractive” (17%) or “rather/very high” (21%).

The large majority of the participants stated that they would recommend the conference to others and rated the conference as “very good” or “good” compared to other conferences of this type that they have attended. 

Suggestions for improvements based on the analysis of the questionnaires can be summarized as follows:

  • Better understand the impact of the flyer & newsflash (targeted questions in next questionnaire?)
  • Better time management of speakers by the sessions chairs
  • Ensure correct function of audio visual equipment before sessions
  • More “discussion” sessions
  • Increase length of “SOPs”
  • Reduce commercial presentations
  • Earlier release of (draft) programme
  • Schedule the conference dinner for the 1st day of the conference