Sunday, September 30, 2012

Speakers Are Important Part of Meeting Industry



Recently I had the honor to deliver the closing keynote address at the Meeting Professionals International (MPI) Chapter Business Summit where close to 250 chapter leaders and meeting industry professionals gathered to explore best practices.

My presentation was my 45th speech of 2012 (well over 300 career presentations to date), so I participate in a lot of meetings (this includes local talks to lunch groups, Rotary Clubs etc.. as well as major keynotes at large conventions).  I see myself (and my profession) as a key part of the meetings business, and believe that the speakers set the tone for the entire conference.  Both keynote speakers and those who conduct workshops must have a powerful mix of useful content and the speaking skills to engage people.  With thousands of meetings worldwide every day there is a lot of responsibility on the shoulders of those who take the stage and talk with audiences.

After my talk the MPI Chairman, Kevin Hinton, thanked me and pointed out that I had hit on many key points as if I had done a lot of research or was perhaps I was already part of the meetings industry?  I appreciated his kind words, but it got me thinking...... aren't all speakers part of the meetings industry?  Shouldn't every speaker be versed in the issues facing the business?

Apparently not.  According to many of the planners I spoke with at the meeting, some speakers (not all) have a reputation of being very separate and intentionally distant from the industry.  One person used the word "snooty" in describing professional speakers.  This lead to a discussion of why some prefer to utilize industry experts or other non-speakers in their meeting agendas instead of those who categorize themselves "speakers".  While it was agreed that a "professional speaker" is often more engaging, they are sometimes too difficult to work with and not seen as a partner in the success of the event.  Worse is they sometimes do not connect their content and message to the needs of the audience or the purpose of the gathering.

Wow.  That was tough to hear.  Of course the definition of what is a "speaker" varies between people (even seasoned professionals), so this was not a broad-brush categorization stereotype.

The meetings industry is more than planners and hoteliers and the entire industry has a larger economic impact in the United States than is the automobile industry (if the politicians understood this they would be talking about meetings all day long!).

At this conference I interacted with people who represented from a variety of business lines - but all who are involved in the mix of ensuring that meetings, conferences, conventions, trade shows, seminars and other gatherings are successful.  But there were very few "Working Professional Speakers" (those who have speaking as a primary focus) who seem to be participating in the greater industry.  The same is true for speakers lack of participation in the other industry organizations that make up the meetings world: MPI, PCMA, ASAE, HSMAI, DMAI, ICCA, EIA, IAEE, SGMP, AMPS, TSEA, NBTA, etc...  (Heck, many do even support the National Speakers Association.... is this because they do not see their speaking role as part of the overall industry?).

Nobody can belong to everything, but do I believe in engagement.  I think that when people come together we are all better for the communal experience.  We learn more and we gain vital understanding.  This is why I always talk to audiences about the importance of belonging to a trade association in their chosen field.  I am active with NSA (but if I was a locksmith I would be active in the National Locksmiths Association).

(Side note rant: I often wonder why membership organizations and associations do not require their vendors to be supporting their own industry groups.  It seems like the right message when you are telling your own peeps to join your group that you expect those you work with to support something in their own backyard!)

I am not saying speakers (or anyone) should join every organization under the sun in their areas of business, nor should associations should expect vendors to join their membership roles.  That is not practical.  Supporting an industry is not the same as joining a group... and everybody knows joining is not worth much without participation.  To give and get real value you must be engaged in the cause.

But are there ways that speakers can be more active in the meetings industry! Should they be seen by planners as important partners (like the hotels and others)? What do you suggest?

Have A Great Day.

thom singer



Friday, September 28, 2012

Cool Things My Friends Do: Perry Campbell - Sales Recruiter Austin, Texas

Each Friday on this blog I enjoy highlighting some of the cool things my friends do in their work and personal lives.

Finding the right sales people can be a rough task for many companies.  Those who have the right mix of skills, personality, drive and proven success are hard to find.  Smart companies get professionals to help them discover the high-level sales people who will impact the bottom line.

Perry Campbell is one of those guys who goes and matches organizations to the right talent for sales.  I have recently gotten to know Perry (he has been in Austin a long time, and we have many mutual friends... but had never met before last month.  Like me, he is also originally from California).  His company C2H Recruiters specializes in sales professionals. Over the past 13 years, Perry and his team have put together the largest professional business to business sales vertical staffing network in the country, with a reach of well over 300,000 high revenue producing sales professionals.

But Perry is more than a headhunter.  He cares about assisting his clients in making the right selections that will be the correct cultural fit and also deliver results.

While he works with organizations of all sizes all around the United States, his home is in Austin.  

Have A Great Day

thom singer

Thursday, September 27, 2012

Fan expression of a different kind

All sorts of fan speech going around today.

The Florida Marlins signed Adam Greenberg to a one-day contract and he will play next week against the Mets (R.A. Dickey on the mound, looking for his 20th win). Greenberg was beaned  in his first Major League at-bat with the Cubs in 2005 (against the Marlins, ironically) and has spent the last seven years trying to overcome post-concussion symptoms. His opportunity came about as a result of the efforts of the One At Bat Foundation, which has been lobbying (and encouraging and helping fans to lobby) MLB and teams to sign Greenberg and allow him to get an official at-bat.

Greenberg is Jewish (he most recently played for Israel in the World Baseball Classic Qualifiers), so there is something appropriate about this happening on the heels of Yom Kippur, where we hope to be inscribed not only for a life, but for a successful and meaningful life.

Ideas in action

Over the summer, Dan Markel (Florida State) and I wrote a short piece for The Atlantic arguing for the creation of "Fan Action Committees" ("FACs"), through which fans could collect and give money to free agent players to lure them to join fans' favorite team. We currently are working, along with Mike, on a longer version of the piece.

As everyone knows, this week's Monday Night Football game between Green Bay and Seattle ended on a touchdown on the final play of the game, in what most people outside Seattle believe was one of the worst calls, and worst-handled calls, in NFL history.* Several Green Bay players took to Twitter to express their dispelasure, notably offensive linement T.J. Lang, who tweeted ""Fine me and use the money to pay the regular refs." Shortly after that, a fan posted on the site Indiegogo (the page has been taken down, unfortunately) encouraging fans to send money to Lang to help him pay the fine that most believed was inevitable, as the NFL routinely fines players, coaches, and executives who criticize officiating. As it turned out, the league announced it would not impose fines for any comments related to Monday's game, no doubt a concession to the egregiousness of the mistake.

Still, this is our FAC idea in action--fans paying money as a show of fandom and of support for their favorite players. Although we primarily discussed the idea only in the context of free agency, this shows that fans may support players through money for a number of difference reasons in a number of different contexts. And it shows that fans instinctively understand this as a legitimate way to express support for their favorite players and teams.

    * Which, it turns out, will be the last call ever by the replacement referees, at least in this labor dispute.

Tuesday, September 25, 2012

Law Firm Associate Business Development



Law firm marketing, business development, and sales (yes, I said "sales") are NOT fads.  

Eleven years ago when I went to work for a big firm marketing department there were still many attorneys who were hoping that the whole idea of lawyers "selling" their services would go away.  Not where I worked, but those at other firms lawyers were sickened by the idea of their profession doing anything that resembled the elements of a business.  The preferred to look at the law as a calling that was above the things that plagued normal companies.

But the realities of running a law firm are that it is a business.  Too many firms pretended that the elements of accounting, staffing, marketing, and yes... SALES did not impact their success.  Boom, firms failed... and many struggle.

Today most lawyers realize that their firm is a business.  Yet some still try to pretend they need not do the necessary things to promote their practices.  They hope that doing good work will be enough to make the phone ring.

No lawyer would advise their business client to:  "Fire all your sales and marketing people (since they make a lot of money, and do not have JD's).  Next, get all your senior executives to do the sales when they have free time, if they feel like it, and regardless of if they have any experience".  That would be silly counsel... and yet many lawyers operate their own firms in exactly this manner.

A legal marketing executive recently told me that the associates in their firm skip out on the optional business development classes they offer.  Additionally when partners mandate attendance they all show up with bad attitudes.   If you are an associate in a law firm and your firm is looking to help educate you on the necessary skills to build a practice you should enthusiastically embrace the learning.  There are few firms willing to invest in teaching this stuff, and without it you are doomed in the long run.  

Remember, business development skills and the relationships you build are portable.  This gives you power in the future.  No ability to develop business and your future is at the whim of others.

If you are the eye roller who skips out on training or has a bad attitude for the mandatory classes.... you are an idiot.  Get over yourself or go tell the managing partner that you should be fired at once for not understanding the realities of business.  What partner wants to employ an associate who does not learn to cultivate client relationships? (Answer... one who wants your future to be at their whim!).  Business does not happen without sales.  The business of a law firm is no different.  

Look at the landscape of the last decade.  Thousands of associates and partners have been laid-off from large and small firms.  Some careers have never recovered.  Others are bitter as hell and blame others for their being pushed out. But the real "Rainmakers" still had jobs.  Even if their firms collapsed they were scooped up quickly by other firms who recognize the value in those who can develop new clients in addition to practicing law.  Doing good work is not enough.  Lots of people can do good work.

Law schools do not teach this, and few firms reward young associates for their community involvement... thus many assume it does not matter.  Oh, they eventually find out it is important, when they are passed over for making partner after ten years.  Ouch.

Have A Great Day.

thom

Replay it Again Sam

After watching the end of last night’s Seattle-Green Bay affair at my favorite watering hole, Rick’s CafĂ© in Casablanca, I asked Carl, Rick’s right hand man, whether the game was honest. “Honest?” he repeated, “As honest as the day is long.”

To say the replacement refs have not been up to the level of their striking counterparts the first three games of the season is an understatement. But Monday night was a sight to behold on what still is, in the hearts of many, the NFL showcase game of the week.

In case you missed it, Seattle attempted the proverbial Hail Mary trailing 12 to 7 with 8 seconds remaining. Quarterback Russell Wilson heaved the ball some 60 yards where two of his players jockeyed for position amidst five Packers. The perfectly named Golden Tate pushed the defender in front of him away and leaped to catch the pigskin only to be out leapt by Packer safety M.D. Jennings who made the circus catch falling to the ground, while Tate still had one hand lamely clinging to the ball.

Two replacements stood over the pair looking befuddled, one signaling touchdown, the other making the correct call that the game was over with Green Bay the victor. No review. No discussion. No Mas. Final score: Seattle 14 Green Bay 12.

While my media hero Michael McCann makes a good point that these ne’er do well officials threaten the safety of the players, thus perhaps justifying legal action by the union to demand the league cough up the relative pennies to end the strike, much more is at stake here.

No less a rapscallion than Jimmy Connors said afterwards he no longer would bet on the NFL. Now that is a problem. Estimates vary, but it is safe to say the amount of gambling money flowing through the economy during an NFL season is in the billions of dollars. Recorded wagers in Las Vegas are about $650 million, with $90 million bet on the Super Bowl alone. And that’s legal bets, sure to be just a fraction of actual bets. If betting on an NFL game is like betting on a bout in the World Wrestling League, that free flow of money will soon be reduced to a trickle.

It’s time for the Commissioner to act for the good of gamblers everywhere.

Monday, September 24, 2012

As NASCAR goes, so goes America?

Two years ago, I wrote about a poll showing the general politcal breakdown of sports fans. It found that sports fans overall leaned Republican, with NASCAR fans among the strongest Republican supporters (along with fans of golf and college football). Zogby just published a poll showing Obama with a lead among self-identified NASCAR fans (admittedly small sample size of only about 200 out of an overall sample of 800).

Destination: "Abnormally dangerous conditions"

After watching this weekend’s NFL games, it is obvious that the replacement referees are patently incapable of maintaining order during a game.  Blown calls—made or not—are maddening, inconsistency and human error are part of officiating sports. What is unacceptable is the loss of control on the field, leading to an unsafe environment for the participants.

The caliber of officiating is abysmal, these aren’t even elite Division I referees because those conferences are not letting them work NFL games.   With Division II referees attempting to manage games, the players are responding like the teacher has left the room and they have a poor substitute teacher trying to maintain order—it’s not happening.   Let's be clear, the referees are doing the best they can, but are overmatched by the speed, violence, and intensity of NFL football.

What can be done?

1. The NFL’s CBA has a “no strike clause” which, in theory, would restrict the ability of the players to strike in sympathy with the referees.

2. However, as Michael McCann recently analyzed on Sports Law Blog, clause 29 USC 143 of the NLRB permits a worker from refusing, in good faith, to work under “abnormally dangerous conditions”, and 29 USC 143 is applicable to NFL labor conditions.  Aren’t we there?   Football is a violent sport. Referees who are grossly inexperienced are posing a real and imminent safety risk to the players on the field.

3. The NFLPA could, and at this point I’m arguing should, take action.  Either:

a. The NFLPA could refuse to play under the current conditions, citing the very real fact that the workplace is fret with “abnormally dangerous conditions”…OR

b. Could ask the courts for an immediate injunction, terminating the current lockout by the NFL of the referees. In theory, the referees could go back to work while the parties continue to negotiate or mediate this mess.

4. We love sports and the tort doctrine "assumption of the risk" is well established because injuries are part of the game.  However, when a football player consents to risk, they do so under the assumption that the game will be managed by professionals, able to maintain safety standards that are paramount to the operation of these contents.  Based on what we have seen in the first three weeks of the 2012 NFL season, that safe work environment is missing.

5. An even bigger issue facing the NFL than the debacle surrounding replacement referees is the concussion litigation.  Here, the NFL is doing everything imaginable to argue that they care about player safety--with potential damages in the $ 1 BILLION range.  Doesn't it make sense to show some legitimate good will regarding player health and safety now?

Sunday, September 23, 2012

Justine's Restaurant in Austin


A few weeks ago we asked a few friends for great restaurant suggestions.  With busy travel schedules, running our own businesses, kids activities, and general "life"-- we do not get out to dinner too often, and with many new places in Austin.... we did not know were to start.

A couple of people recommended Justine's Brasserie in East Austin.  Since Sara is a fan of French Food, we decided to try this bistro on 5th Street.

However, on the day we were going to go to dinner.....our plans changed (as plans will do), so we put Justine's on hold for a nice dinner out (sans kids) for Sara's Birthday.

Last night we had our date night, and Justine's was fantastic.  They do not take reservations for parties under six, so they recommended arriving before 6:30.  We were seated right away (we chose indoors, but in retrospect outside would have been better as the weather was nice and inside was loud).

The food was great, atmosphere nice (except the very loud music, which cause all the people to talk at a high volume) and we had a lot of fun.

Our server, JT, was AMAZING.  She made us feel welcome, and added to the restaurant experience.  Her friendly attitude never made us feel rushed (even as the long wait for tables appeared outside).  She brought our bottle of wine and poured both glasses with the traditional "taste".  I commented that I liked this move, as opposed to just having the man (or host) taste the wine.  I thought it made everyone part of the decision (although I have never remembered sending a bottle back, so it is a bit silly to do anyway).  The Paul Mas Malbec was great, by the way.

We both started with Escargots and French Onion Soup.  Sara had the Bolognaise and I ate the scallops.  There was no room for dessert, but I am sure it was all great.  The food did not disappoint.  It was really good.  A nice choice for a birthday dinner!

I do not often blog about food or restaurants... but this place inspired me (but their website is weird and hard to figure out).

Have A Great Day.

thom singer

Friday, September 21, 2012

Cool Things My Friends Do: PROMPTIVATE - Steve Harper and Drew Bixby Launch New Company.

Each Friday on this blog I enjoy highlighting some of the cool things my friends do in their work and personal lives.


Two of my friends have launched a new business called Promptivate.  The idea of this online tool is that there are many great places online to collect your contacts... but Promptivate™ web-app converts simple connections to valuable relationships.  Promptivate provides a system for you to see all your connections, receive reminders, and most importantly, receive valuable prompts on how to engage with your important connections.

Steve Harper (author of "The Ripple Effect") and Drew Bixby (author of "Why Not Blame Drew? How all your problems originate from him"), along with two other partners, have launched this company and are currently signing up new users.  If you have a digital link to someone but never reach out to them, where is the value in the link?  Their product will remind you when to ping your connections to keep the relationship alive (out of sight is out of mind).

What I love about living in Austin is that there are entrepreneurs everywhere.  Steve and Drew have both launched several ventures, and I am excited to see the success of this project.

Free 30 day trial available on their website!

Have A Great Day.

thom singer


Thursday, September 20, 2012

Floyd Mayweather, Jr.: In trouble again?











Last week, Las Vegas police investigated an alleged verbal altercation between Mayweather and an unidentified woman in a home owned by one of Mayweather's companies. According to records obtained by the Las Vegas Review-Journal, Mayweather apparently argued with the woman, took personal possessions from her, and then later had an associate return the items he took. Although she was not identified as the woman in question, Melissa Brim, the mother of one of Mayweather's daughter, reportedly lives at this address. In 2002, Mayweather pleaded guilty to domestic violence charges stemming from an altercation with Brim.   . . . .
In fairness to Mayweather, police did not uncover evidence of physical violence and he has not been charged with a crime. But that may not matter. The typical test for violating probation would not require Mayweather to be convicted of a crime or even get arrested. Instead, merely spending time with known criminals or traveling to locations deemed off-limits by the terms of probation can be enough. Considering Mayweather's history with Brim, there's reason to believe his probation compels him to avoid conflict with her. Mayweather's alleged dispossession of the woman's personal belongings might also be grounds for violating probation.
To read the rest, click here.

Tuesday, September 18, 2012

"The ABC's of Networking" Now Available in India


A publishing house in India optioned the rights to my book, "The ABC's of Networking" and has recently released the book in both English and Hindi.

This is exciting.  India is the 2nd largest population in the world, and the message of creating business connections that embrace long-term and mutually beneficial relationships is always well received by people I meet who come from any area of the world.  The message of "Connecting With People in a Social Media Crazy World" knows no boarders where generous people are involved!!

I am also exploring speaking opportunities for a seminar tour in India, although this is currently just an "idea" that has been brought to my attention.  There are no plans yet... but I am open to the conversations.  There would be many things that needed to line up, but it is interesting to think about it.

Special "Thanks" to Dave at New Year Publishing for always pushing to try new things.  His open-minded spirit has circumnavigated roadblocks and he understands the give and take of partnering.  This international book deal is just one example. It took a few tries over several years, but his long-term vision helped make it happen (and it is kinda cool -okay, not "kinda"... it is cool!!!).   He is a good friend and business partner!!! ;-)

Have A Great Day.

thom singer


Monday, September 17, 2012

Creative rule changes, injuries, and the nature of football

A few weeks ago, Chuck Klosterman at Grantland proposed three rule changes for the NFL. I want to discuss one of the ideas: Legalize both holding on the offensive line and downfield contact on receivers until the ball is in the air. Klosterman's theory goes as follows:
  1. It's incessantly (and accurately) argued that referees could feasibly call holding on every single pass play; it's really just a matter of whether or not the ref sees the infraction clearly enough (or whether it happens to be especially egregious). This would end that arbitrary judgment call. Phantom holds and missed holds would no longer matter. Moreover, there would be fewer penalties in general (and as a consequence, fewer stoppages of play).  

  2. If holding were legal, quarterbacks would be able to stand in the pocket much, much longer. But this advantage would be mitigated by the way cornerbacks could now cover wide receivers. The Mel Blount Rule was implemented in 1978 to open up the passing game; essentially, it limits the contact on WRs to one chuck within five yards of the line of scrimmage. But if a defensive back could essentially hand-check a receiver as he runs his route, the ability of that receiver to get separation would drastically decrease. In other words, it would be easier for the quarterback to accurately throw the ball downfield, but much more difficult for any receiver to break open. I suspect the impact on passing statistics would be negligible; the numbers might decrease a little, but that's OK. It's become too easy to throw for 4,000 yards in a season.

  3. Obviously, concussions can happen at any time. But when do they happen most dramatically? It's usually when a wideout is sprinting unencumbered on a crossing route and a strong safety blows him apart when the ball arrives late. If cornerbacks could keep their hands on a receiver for most of the play, this kind of hyper-violent collision would happen more rarely (because WRs simply could not run free over the middle of the field). Meanwhile, letting offensive linemen hold would also decrease the likelihood of quarterbacks absorbing death blows from unblocked edge blitzers (because linemen could at least reach out and get a hand on the guy as he flies into the backfield). Changing these two rules might be the easiest way to decrease the number (and the severity) of concussions without totally changing the nature of the sport; in fact, it might make the game simultaneously safer and more physical. Football would still look like football.
One more thing as to # 3: It might also change the nature of line play, possibly reducing injuries to linemen. By allowing offensive linemen to use their hands, they can play more upright, perhaps reducing drive-blocking and the constant collisions at the line, which likely account for a lot of the injuries to linemen (one proposal I have seen is to eliminate the three-point stance and have all lineman start upright). Obviously, this change does not eliminate concussions or injuries; just as obviously, lots of pre-1978 players are suffering from brain trauma, so players were getting hit really hard and really often even when corners could grab and hold.

Still, it strikes me as an interesting idea and not one that contradicts our understanding of what "really" constitutes football or the way football should be played. Of course, even if the game is still football, would it be an enjoyable game to watch if everyone is able to hold or hand-check off the ball.

Thoughts?

ASU Sports Law Symposium

The Sports & Entertainment Law Student Association at the Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law is hosting its 3rd Annual Conference on Sports and Entertainment Law on Saturday October 27, 2012 on the Arizona State University campus in Tempe, Arizona. Complete conference details can be found at this link. Here are the scheduled speakers:

Panel Session I: Amateurism Moderator: Chuck Schmidt
Panelists: Stephen Webb, Tim Epstein, Darren Heitner, Mark Mignella and Marc Isenberg

Panel Session II: CBA Moderator: Caleb Jay
Panelists: Tim Epstein, Gregg Clifton and Travis Leach

Panel Session III: Concussions & Sports Litigation Moderator: Jason Belzer
Panelists: Travis Leach, Paul Anderson, David Dodick and Scott Peters

Keynote Address: Jared Bartie
Honored Guest Speaker: Jerry Colangelo

Panel Session IV: Entertainment & Right of Publicity Moderator: Caleb Jay
Panelists: Connie Mableson, James Marovich, Leonard Aragon and Mark Conrad

Panel Session V: Future of Gambling & Gaming Moderator: Dana Hooper
Panelists: Bill Squadron, Mark Brnovich and Marc Isenberg

Ethics Presentation: Steven Adelman

Panel Session VI: Business of Sports & Entertainment Moderator: Jason Belzer
Panelists: Woodie Dixon Jr., Jeffrey Benz, Don Gibson and Deborah Spander

Town Hall: Current Issues in Sports Law Moderator: Sam Renaut
Panelists: Lester Munson, Tim Epstein and Darren Heitner

Sunday, September 16, 2012

Brief History of Pro Hockey Work Stoppages


Year: 1992
Type: Strike
Duration: 10 days: between April 1st and April 11th, 1992. 30 regular season games were cancelled, but ultimately made up.
Result: Fundamentally altered the relationship between the NHL and NHLPA. The owners finally realized that they needed to take the players seriously. The players won major concessions in marketing rights, an increased revenue share from the playoffs, and changes to the free agency system. In order to generate additional revenue the regular season was expanded from 80 to 84 games.

Year: 1994
Type: Lockout
Duration: From October 1, 1994 to January 11, 1995. In the end, a total of 468 games, including the All-Star game, were lost.
Result: There was growing concern about the viability of the small market teams. The league wanted to implement a luxury tax, which the players saw as a salary cap—something they were vehemently against. The players, recognizing the struggles of small market teams, argued for revenue sharing—transferring money from large market to small market teams.

Ultimately, the lockout ended when several large market teams relinquised the luxury tax as an ultimatum. Salary caps for rookies and two-way contracts were implemented. The season was cut from 84 to 82 games. Several teams moved as a result of this work stoppage—Quebec to Colorado, Winnipeg to Phoenix, and Hartford to Carolina.

Year: 2004
Type: Lockout
Duration: The entire 2004-05 season was cancelled.
Result: Real financial issues forced the owners to demand, and ultimately obtain, a salary cap. Players gave up significant financial benefits, including a 24% rollback of salaries. However, the players did receive a guaranteed fixed percentage of league revenues each season. As a result, a new financial structure for the business of hockey was created. Successful? League revenue has grown from $2 billion in 2003-04 to $3.3 billion in 2011-12.

Year: 2012
Type: Lockout
Duration: TBD
Result: The fourth major work stoppage in professional hockey in the past 20 years.

Saturday, September 15, 2012

Conference Speeches Are Not Always TED Talks



There was chatter on Twitter recently about conference speaking.  Julius Solaris (Founder of the Event Manager Blog) said "Seems that most advice on giving speeches is focused on short time slots.  What about longer 1 hour + slots?"

Great question.

Over the past few years there has been a lot of focus on the short presentation.  The explosive success of TED and TEDx talks (in person and online) has mistakenly lead many to believe that "short is better".  Many event planners profess they want to "be like TED" and thus are going to limit their event's speaking times to 18 minutes and having more speakers.  The problem with this is that more presentations does NOT mean the speakers will be any good.  A byproduct could be more talks that are blah (or suck).

As a professional speaker I believe a shorter talk is harder to prepare.  There is less room for stories (which is interesting with all the discussion in the events world about "alternative learning styles"... as stories are one way people learn and retain information).  Additionally, since most conference talks are not delivered by "professional speakers" it can take the speakers a while to get in their comfort zone.  This means that most of their talk will be spent trying to get in the groove.  I have heard that TED speakers will invest upwards of 45-60 hours of preparation time for their talk.  Most business presentations I have seen do not come close to that level of the speaker's pre-planning attention.

Since the shorter TED format is trendy, I believe this is why so many articles are dedicated to giving the shorter talk.  But the long format presentation (one hour, ninety minutes, or more) is not dead.  There will always be a place for conferences, trade shows, conventions, seminars, and other gatherings to utilize presentations that go beyond 20 minutes.  Both keynotes and workshops cannot get deep without more time on the schedule.

When thinking about a long format talk (as the organizer or the speaker) here are three things you should remember:

1.  Content is NOT king.  Yes, I know, I know.... everyone says "content is king" - BUT if we only wanted your content you could email the audience a White Paper.  There needs to be some level of experience speaking, style, and ability to inspire an audience.  Some call this "Presentation Skills".

Occasionally organizers will tell me they are not interested in "motivational speakers", but all speakers should be motivational.  What is the opposite of "motivation"?  Un-motivating?  Demoralizing?  or "Sucks The Energy Out Of The Room".  Without some call to action and purpose a speaker can get lost in the data-dump.

If we say "content is king" we are implying that everything else does not matter.  Speaking is not a kingdom.  It is a democracy (and the constituency votes with their attention, their feet, and what they say in social media).  There should be no king.  Think of it more like the city council:  Content is Mayor, but there is more to it than just one "king".  You need content, stories, style, experience, purpose, preparation, engagement, and a relevant topic.

2.  Just because someone is smart or has done something cool - it does NOT mean they belong on stage.  Too often the opening keynote or high-profile breakout sessions are built around a celebrity or industry icon.  While some of these people are good speakers, not all of them have the experience level to carry a longer format presentation.  An hour or more with a blah speaker can be painful.

A person's career resume is not proof that they have the ability to give a speech.  We live in a polite world where unless someone is awful we often tell them after their talk "nice speech", which leads many executives to believe they are much better than they are on the platform.

It can take as many as 300 professional level presentations before people get the level of experience that will allow them to shine on stage.  While some pick it up faster, it is similar to Malcolm Gladwell's 10,000 hour theory.  There is not shortcuts in becoming great at any skill.

Never forget: The speakers set the tone for the whole meeting!!!

3.  Get the audience involved.  There was a time when a speaker was automatically seen as the expert and the audience was eager to hang on each word.  The presentation was expected to be Moses coming off the mountain and handing down the tablets.  Today people expect a conversation.  This may or may not mean "interactive" (which is also a trendy topic for presentations).  Conversational is about talking with the audience, not to the audience.

Audiences have a short attention span and if there are not shifts in the presentation along the way... they will be lost.  If you expect them to sit on banquet room chairs and listen to a speech for 90 minutes without any engagement, then you will find an audience full of people counting ceiling tiles or reading Facebook posts. Telling people to put phones away is wrong (and they wont do it anyway).  If the speaker cannot hold the audiences attention then people should go surf the net instead of have their time wasted.

There are many ways to engage an audience, but it must not be forced into a traditional talk.  Dropping an exercise into your old presentation to check the "interactive" box will not have an impact.  You must purposefully be drawing the audience into the conversation.

Along the way the style has changed... and no longer is a presentation about a teacher educating novice students, but instead it is peer to peer chats where people can take the info out into the hallways and keep talking with each other about the topics that punch their brains.  The problem is that most speakers (and some audience members) did not get the memo.

Have A Great Day.

thom singer

Friday, September 14, 2012

Cool Things My Friends Do - "Short Term Massive Action" by Honoree Corder

Each Friday on this blog I enjoy highlighting some of the cool things my friends do in their work and personal lives.


Honoree Corder is a strong personality.  She is a successful business woman and executive coach who moved to Austin a couple of years ago.  She began her coaching and consulting business in Hawaii, then lived in Las Vegas and now calls Central Texas home.  That must be because everything is bigger in Texas!

She is now launching an exciting new coaching program called "Short-Term Massive Action", a100-day combination of small group and individual coaching for people who are looking to make big changes in their lives.

The STMA 100-day coaching program takes place in three stages; daily group coaching calls for the first three weeks, weekly group coaching calls for the remainder of the program, and 1-on-1 custom coaching calls for deeper work and targeted strategies.

She has kicked-off the new program and is actively seeking action driven clients as well as coaches to be part of her team.  If you fit into either (or both) of those categories, check out her website:    http://www.coachhonoree.com/   (you need not live in Austin as all coaching is virtual).

Have A Great Day.

thom singer

Foul Ball? New "Moneyball" Rankings of Most Relevant Law Professors

It was only a matter of time until the ubiquitous worlds of law school-related rankings and Moneyball collided. I didn't expect the convergence, however, to be found by Berkeley Law Professor John Yoo, a controversial figure based on his authoring of "torture memos" during the presidency of George W. Bush.

In a new study, Yoo and a co-author claim to have a list of the 50 most relevant law professors. The ranking is based entirely on citations in law review articles. And only professors at the so-called "top 16" law schools are eligible for ranking. Yoo, who according to his own study is the 24th most relevant law professor, blogs about his study on Richochet in a post he titles "Moneyball Comes to the Ivory Tower".

I don't think Billy Beane (or, if you prefer, Paul DePodesta or Daryl Morey or Mike Zarren or Dean Oliver) would be proud. What about teaching? Or helping students learn how to actually practice law? Or helping students get an internship or, better yet, a job? Law students are largely footing the bill of legal education and I suspect what's most "relevant" to them is getting a job out of a law school, or at least real-world experience while in school. It's true some of those qualities may be difficult to quantify, but if a so-called "Moneyball" study alleges to measure "relevance" it should do just that.

In fairness to Yoo, he acknowledges the study's limitations and he recognizes that teaching is important: "Finally, faculty also teach and have other responsibilities within and without law schools, and citation studies can never measure these important professional functions". But the tone of "faculty also teach" to me, at least, does not signal that Yoo views teaching as important of a priority. Which it should be. He also doesn't seem to address the crucial role of faculty in helping students obtain real world experiences and employment.

Also, as noted in a Facebook comment by Jacob Gottlieb, having many citations is not necessarily a good thing, especially if you are frequently cited in rebuke. And this may be true of Yoo, who is often cited by other law professors in a negative way.

And there's the argument against a study like this on grounds that law review articles do not influence judges or law makers, and may just be an overweening form of currency for law professors to make and keep tenure. I don't endorse that view, but I also believe that other qualities are probably more important, and teaching and helping students with internships and jobs are among those qualities.

Lastly, there's a powerful point raised by Ken Houghton in the comments section below. Moneyball is based on identifying efficiencies to obtain a competitive advantage over other teams. For many years, baseball teams undervalued on base percentage and runs scored; Beane, with good counsel, was among the first general managers to correctly value those metrics and that gave him an advantage over other teams in evaluating players. Evaluating law professors based on their legal scholarship and how often they are cited in legal scholarship, in contrast, has been around forever. Yoo seems to have developed a new method of evaluating citations, but that is different from identifying undervalued efficiencies in evaluating faculty. A true "Moneyball professor", in other words, is probably one undervalued by the very metric Yoo proposes.

For another take on Yoo's study, see David Lat's post on Above the Law.

The Impending NHL Lockout

A few comments on the impending NHL lockout of the players:

1. Unlike the last CBA negotiations, the players are unified and active. Here is a list of the 283 players that were in New York City on Thursday for the NHLPA’s Executive Board and Negotiation Committee meetings. [Editor’s note: tremendously proud to see twelve former Boston College hockey players attend. Not only does Coach Jerry York and his staff bring talent to Chestnut Hill he brings individuals who understand the big picture.]

2. Labour law in Canada is different than labor law in the United States. This will impact the lockout on the margins. A brief overview of the nuances, and how it pertains to professional hockey, can be found here.

3. Once the lockout begins, one of the most important parts of the previously negotiated CBA will be the “exemptions to regular waivers” definition. Why? Because this will trigger which players the NHL teams will be able to control (i.e. send to the minors) after a lockout and which ones they can’t—who will be free to go overseas or forced to sit out. In general, younger players can be assigned to the AHL or ECHL as many times as a team wishes without the need for the player to clear waivers. And make no mistake, once there is a lockout the AHL and ECHL will be flooded with these players.

To see the actual parameters of which players the NHL teams control, refer to the following chart.

Veteran players who have played in a sufficient number of NHL games would have to clear waivers, making them susceptible to having another NHL team select them, before being assigned to the minors. Thus, most veterans are unlikely to be put through waivers and thus have the ability to decide whether or not to play overseas.

[Editor's note: the waiver process has already started, here's an update.]

4. Regardless of your opinion as to which side—the NHL or NHLPA—is right, please remember that many, inside and outside of hockey, will be affected negatively by this entire episode. Additionally, and this may show my bias, only four percent of NHL players play 1,000 games—meaning these players typically have short careers and, more importantly, a small window in which to be compensated for being the best athletes in the world for their sport.

5. Here is a link to my thoughts a few weeks ago on “The Unique Nature of the Business of Hockey” that appeared in the Huffington Post.

Thursday, September 13, 2012

Introverts Are Awesome



My recent post "The Week of Living Introvert" has prompted a few interesting conversations with both introverts and extroverts.   My attempt to be less of an extrovert for one week (Monday - Friday) was very educational, and the deep thoughts that have been shared since are having a meaningful impact on how I view people.  While I have always professed the value in the differences amongst people, this post has prompted many to openly share with me how they feel in different social situations.

The most common comment was about how I "missed the boat" on my social media activity during my efforts to understand introverts.  I pulled back on "Liking" posts or Tweeting my thoughts on a variety of things, as I thought that may have been my inner extrovert trying to escape.  Most introverts called me out on this saying I had it backwards, and that social media is a great place for introverts, and that by not engaging I was clearly not on the right track.

The post received a large number of views.  Several hundred hits came from a Facebook page called "Introverts Are Awesome".  I jumped over to see what that was all about and found a community that was started in May 2012 an is over 3200 strong.  The curator of the page champions the introvert and seems to have created a welcoming home for many.

There were some comments on the link back to my post.  Most applauded my attempt at discovering what introverts go through being asked to act more extroverted (although comments noticed where I obviously had not gone far enough), while a few clearly thought me a fool (it's okay, it is not the first time!!!).

What was not evident from my original post was that I have always championed in my training programs that "introverts are better networkers", as they are more selective... thus when they connect it is often a deeper relationship. I also know the value of the introverted person as I have been married to one for over twenty years.  She and I have found that there is meaning to "opposites attract", as we are both better for where we are balanced by the other.  We have come to respect how each of us "recharges our batteries", and respect that there is a difference (not better or worse).

I also found power in my more "private" time.  I do not think I did a good job in the original post in expressing this positive byproduct.  In a group or alone I took time to observe and contemplate.  One person thought I must have been bored, but it was really the opposite.  While this was not a natural energizer for me.... it was beneficial and helped spawn a couple of ideas that could have a lasting impact.  I need to make a point to schedule more of this "down time" into my week.  (W.W.I.D.?)

The unexpected awesomeness of my experiment and the resulting blog post is how many people are talking to me about this topic.  After my presentation for a software company "Users Conference" in St. Louis this week an audience member came and shared her experiences as an introvert living in an extroverted company.  The discussion was raw and real.  She understood what I was trying to do by behaving counter to my natural state, and gave me some great insight into how she "feels" in social situations.

If you have a point of view... leave a comment or send me an email (or let's have a call on the phone or skype).  I want to "get it" (some on Introverts Are Awesome said I still do not "get it"... so I want to find better understanding).  I believe I am of better service to others when I try to understand what I am and what I am not.

Have A Great Day.

thom singer

Wednesday, September 12, 2012

Sonny Vaccaro on whether NCAA will punish Duke and UNC

In the last week, Sonny Vaccaro has spoken at two academic events -- Santa Clara Law School's sports law symposium on the proper role for sports in higher education and an event at Southern Methodist University related to Vaccaro's arguments for student-athletes and compensation.  He also found time to speak with Eric Prisbell of USA Today about alleged wrongdoing at Duke and UNC.  Vaccaro says the NCAA lacks the guts to punish these schools.  Here's an excerpt:
"Pull back the curtain and the wizard is not there," Vaccaro said of the schools over lunch Monday. "They are all the same . . . The NCAA does not have the guts to do the right thing for everyone. They do it for a chosen few. The rules are made according to them, for them."  .....   If wrongdoing is found at North Carolina and Duke, Vaccaro said, "You've got to impose whatever the right penalty is. It has got to be done. If you gave the eye test to the American public -- like Notre Dame and some other anointed schools -- they will get a pass. And that's not right."
The NCAA disagrees:
Said the NCAA's Stacey Osburn in an email Monday to USA TODAY Sports: "Sonny is wrong. Member institutions make the rules and expect that all schools abide by them. When they don't, there are consequences, regardless of who is involved."
For more on the allegations against Duke and UNC, see Prisbell's story.

Tuesday, September 11, 2012

The Week of Living Introvert



There is much in the news lately about introverts and extroverts.  It seems that people on either side often look down on those on the other end of the spectrum.  Extroverts do not understand the issue, as they like people and crowds.  Introverts feel our society unfairly celebrates the extrovert.

Susan Cain's best selling book, Quiet, has gotten a lot of attention, as has her TED talk.  She is smart, and I read the book with much interest.  It is well written and full of understandable research.  But a bit snarky.  As an extrovert her examples of the "Culture of Personality" (of which I do not disagree with her points) is clearly written in a way to subtlety make introverts feel better while kicking the extroverts in the shin.  That said, I am happy to have read the book, as it has helped me better grasp this issue.

I have been presenting on the topic of business relationships for several years, and I have always contended that introverts are better at networking if they really understood what it was to network.  I do not have Cain's academic research - but after meeting close to ten of thousand people at business events over the years I have observed how folks interact.

While teaching a staff development class on "Connecting People in a Social Media Crazy World" a participant shared with me how much pain it causes her to go to business events.  Since I find them naturally fun, I spent time with this woman trying to understand.  In the end, I realize that no matter who we are, it is hard to push out of our comfort zone.

Thus I was inspired to spend a work week living as an introvert.  I challenged myself behave counter to my natural extrovert manner.  The purpose was to see what it is like to be asked to be something that is your default demeanor.  I know that some of my decisions were "stereotypical", and the whole experiment was not perfect, but I discovered a fresh perspective and am hopefully more empathetic towards others who find the extroverted world harder to navigate.

Day 1.  Monday.

I started off by scanning my social media accounts.  A friend said something interesting and I immediately hit the "like" button.  But should I have done that?  To instantly like his post lets him know I am reading it and possibly engages this person and others.  Certainly it draws attention.  It was only 7:00 AM and I wondered if I have already failed in my attempt to live more like an introvert.  I decided to close out social media and read a book for a half hour.

Later I had to meet with a coaching client.  I decided while working with a paying client I should not be involved in an experiment, thus I behaved in my normal ways.

Day 2.  Tuesday.

I decided to not post on Twitter or Facebook during this time, other than Birthday wishes.  But I found that I naturally want to click the "like" button as a way to show support for things others share.  But I figured many introverts would not do that, so I resisted the urge.  (What do you think?  Do introverts hit the "like" button less than extroverts?).  I did comment on a thread on the National Speakers Association Facebook page, but was not sure an introvert would have jumped into the conversation (old habits die hard).

I had planned to attend a MeetUp Happy Hour, but at the end of the day I was very tired.  It was a group of 100% strangers and normally I would have enjoyed meeting new people, but I decided not to attend.  Instead I chose a quiet night at home reading and watching TV with my family.

Day 3.  Wednesday.

I was on a panel for a meeting of the Austin Chapter of the National Speakers Association. I worked on being a little less "out front" as I normally might be while on a panel.  I went to the table and ate my breakfast while others were networking.  Interestingly, nobody comes and talks to the person eating alone.  Once the panel started I tried to let my fellow panelists answer first on each question.

Later I went to lunch alone and read my book in the corner of the restaurant.  I put my ear-buds in, although I was not listening to music.  I have found that people leave you alone when you have head-phones on and are not making eye contact.

Spent the night at home finishing some work and hanging out with the family.

Day 4.  Thursday.

Started the day at the "Social Media Breakfast".  I kept asking myself "W.W.I.D.?" (What would and introvert do?).  I arrived and talked to some people I knew, then sat alone at a table.  Interestingly nobody I did not already know came and spoke with me (I usually would start conversations with others).  Eventually a couple of folks I know well joined me at the table.  The experience made me appreciate extroverts who will come up and talk.... but I wonder if introverts hate that as much as I enjoyed it?

I did Tweet out a bit at this meeting... as it was "The Social Media Breakfast".

I worked from home the rest of the day.  I had a lot to do, but I usually enjoy the busy flow of people walking past when I work at a Starbucks.  Not this day.

Day 5.  Friday.

I had breakfast with a friend who is a very big and bold personality.  I decided this was not the time to be introverted.

Later that day I attended a high school football game (my daughter is on the dance team).  I do not know many of the other parents, and did not attempt to talk to strangers.  I sat close to my wife and watched the game.

***********

I am happy that I spent this week living more as an introvert.  I discovered that it is not easy to push yourself outside of your comfort zone, and thus understand the difficulties that introverts face when being more social at business events than they may prefer.  The experience of the "Week of Living Introvert" is already finding its way into my presentations and is sparking some good discussion with the audiences.

Have A Great Day

thom singer





Monday, September 10, 2012

Gee, that's big of you

Maryland Delegate Emmitt C. Burns, Jr., after a few days as a national punchline, has had some time for "reflect[ion]":
"Upon reflection, he has his First Amendment rights," Del. Emmett C. Burns Jr., a Baltimore County Democrat, said in a telephone interview. "And I have my First Amendment rights. … Each of us has the right to speak our opinions. The football player and I have a right to speak our minds."
Glad we got that straight. Still, it is frightening that it took "reflection" for a public official to realize that "the football player" has First Amendment rights and the same right as him to speak his opinion.

Saturday, September 8, 2012

Activist athletes, tone-deaf politicians

Now here's a fun free-speech controversy.

On Thursday, the story got out that Emmett C. Burns, Jr., a member of the Maryland House of Delegates, had sent a letter to the principal owner of the Baltimore Ravens, expressing horror that a member of the Ravens, Brendan Ayanbadejo, had spoken in support of a pending ballot initiative that would establish marriage equality in Maryland. Burns asked the team to "take the necessary action . . . to inhibit such expressions from your employee and that he be ordered to cease and desist such injurious actions." Ayanbadejo responded on Twitter by saying "Football is just my job it's not who I am. I am an American before anything. And just like every American I have the right to speak!!!" (wow, maybe you can make good points in 140 characters). Vikings punter Chris Kluwe defended Ayanbadejo on Deadspin and has been getting some attention for his response, which mostly hits (in an inimitable style) the key points.

Burns obviously should not be taken seriously or given too much credit for having put any real thought or principle into the letter.  What I find disturbing is the stated belief that, as a football player, Ayanbadejo has less of a right to speak out on public issues--that it is wrong for him to "try to sway public opinion one way or another" simply because he is a professional athlete. I haven't heard of Burns sending letters to other employers in the state (such as Johns Hopkins University, the largest employer in Maryland) asking them to tell their employees to concentrate on their jobs. Modern athletes are frequently criticized for not being political and not taking a stand on public issues (recall Michael Jordan's infamous comment that "Republicans buy shoes, too"). Now, when an athlete is willing to take a stand, a public official insists that he is engaging in "injurious behavior" and should be silenced.

We have not heard any response from Burns since the story became public and my guess is we won't. As an unknown and not influential state legislator, he no doubt is basking in the attention, even if it all makes him look like a complete fool.

If Oprah and Michael Jordan Can Find Success.... So Can The Rest of Us



RT (from twitter) @DavisHillAustin- Never let anyone tell you that you "Can't". Go get the training and figure out a plan - so you can prove to the world that you "CAN".

My 8th grade English teacher (Mrs. Nicholidas) told me I did not belong in the advanced class because she did not feel I fully grasped the nuances of grammar. When I said I wanted to write books in my future... she told me it would not happen for me.

Well, she was wrong... I have penned 9 non-fiction books (with a 10th in the works and a contributed chapter in the National Speakers Associations new book "Speak More").  While I never claim to be the world's greatest writer on the planet, people seem to find value in some of my words.  And hundreds read my blog each week.  Maybe I am not a "great" writer... but she was wrong... I am "good enough"!!!  Plus, an editor and a proof reader come in handy when finishing a book. 

Her words were hurtful, really, as I spent 20+ years wishing and not doing ...when it came to writing.  And because of her I have never yet tried my hand at writing fiction.

I think of all the kids out there who have teachers with their own issues (chips on their shoulders?) who make them feel bad or discouraged..... and I hope they can prove them wrong by finding their own way to shine.  

We can't have a "do-over".... and I while I wish I could go back and kick my own butt a little to get some direction earlier, we have to work from where we are now.  I cannot change that teacher's words, but I can prove her wrong.  

Author John Assaraf posted a visual graphic online the other day that talked about "Famous Failures"...
  • Michael Jordan was cut from his high school basketball team
  • Walt Disney was let go from a newspaper for lacking imagination
  • The Beatles were rejected by Decca Recording Studio and told they had no future in the business
  • Steve Jobs was fired from Apple
and my favorite... 
  • Oprah Winfrey was demoted from her job as a TV anchor because "she wasn't fit for television"
Ha.... These reminded me of how some who should be "experts" often have opinions that are so wrong it is just silly.  Can you imagine being at a dinner party with the guy who told Oprah she would not cut it in TV?  I assume that is not how he kicks off his elevator pitch.  

Never let those who want to kill your dreams win!!!!

Have A Great Day.

thom singer  

Friday, September 7, 2012

New Sports Illustrated column: What today's bounty gate decision means for Goodell, Vilma, Payton and others

Probably not what Roger Goodell wanted to hear on the eve of the 2012 NFL season: Arbitration panel lifts suspensions of Vilma and others. My take for Sports Illustrated. Here's an excerpt:

* * *

4) Does today's ruling mean that Sean Payton and the other suspended coaches can return to work?

No. Today's ruling does not legally benefit Payton -- or, for that matter, Gregg Williams and Joe Vitt -- because they are coaches, and do not enjoy collectively bargained protections as do Vilma and other players. Players enjoy these protections because they are members of a union, the NFLPA, which collectively bargains with the NFL for rules impacting players' wages, hours and other working conditions. In contrast, Payton's relationship with the NFL is governed by an employment contract with the Saints and which, like all coaches' contracts, contains stipulations he must accept NFL judgments.

That said, today's ruling could motivate former Saints defensive coordinator Gregg Williams, who has been suspended indefinitely and whose NFL coaching career may be over, to more seriously consider suing Goodell and the NFL. While a lawsuit would be challenging, Williams could argue the NFL and its teams have essentially boycotted him on exaggerated or fictitious grounds. Given their continued employment, it is less likely Payton, Vitt and Saints general manager Mickey Loomis would seek litigation against the league.

* * *

To read the rest, click here.

Update 9/8/2012: I was on NPR's Only a Game Show this morning to discuss the ruling.

Corruption, Gambling, and Manipulation in Sports



With my research devoted to the legality and efficacy of minimum age rules winding down (recent examples here and here), I am looking forward to moving into a new research line - (non-)gambling corruption and manipulation in sports. It is a topic that blends my interest in doctrinal sports law and quantitative methods. With a few working papers on the topic in the queue (here and here), I was fortunate to receive a small grant that enabled me to organize a panel with a number of subject matter experts. The panel will take place October 12, 2012 and will be hosted by Florida State University's Department of Sport Management as part of the department's annual conference. The panel title, speakers, and abstract are below.



Corruption, Gambling, and Manipulation in Sports

Ryan Rodenberg (moderator)
Florida State University

Rick Borghesi (panelist)
University of South Florida
Author, Widespread Corruption inSports Gambling: Fact or Fiction?

Sean Patrick Griffin (panelist)
Penn State Abington
Author, Gaming the Game: The InsideStory of the NBA Betting Scandal and the Gambler who Made it Happen

Katarina Pijetlovic (panelist)
Tallinn Law School, Estonia
Author, European Union SportsPolicy Update

Jeff Reel
Associate General Counsel
ATP World Tour

Brian Tuohy (panelist)
Author, The Fix is In: The ShowbizManipulation of the NFL, MLB, NBA, NHL, and NASCAR
Author, Larceny Games: SportsGambling, Game Fixing, and the FBI

ABSTRACT

Twenty years ago, U.S. President George H.W. Bush signed into law theProfessional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (“PASPA”), a federal statutebanning sports gambling in all but four states (Nevada, Delaware, Montana, andOregon). PASPA, dubbed the Bradley Actafter its main Senatorial proponent and former NBA player Bill Bradley (D-NJ),drew strong support from professional and amateur sports leaguesnationwide. Competitive integrity preservation and theprevention of corruption in sporting contests were major tenets in furtheranceof PASPA’s enactment two decades ago. With the impetus for PASPA as a backdrop, the foci of this panel aretwo-fold. First, each panelist willprovide a primer on how competitive sports can (and are) being corrupted bygambling-related game fixing and non-gambling commercial interests. Second, panelists will discuss specificaspects of corruption and manipulation of sports. Borghesi will explain how he tested the so-called“widespread point shaving hypothesis” in college basketball. Griffin will provide an overview of the NBAbetting scandal and detail his statistical analysis of point spread movementsin the recent NBA betting scandal. Pijetlovic willexplain emerging corruption trends in Europe and the state of investigative journalismin the sports industry. Reel willoutline anti-corruption policy from a global sports league’s perspective. Tuohy will posit on how commercial interestsaugment sports and introduce his findings from over 400 FBI files pertaining tosports bribery and related issues. Thepanel will conclude with predictions and remedies for the future.