| Email your comments
The BGS Scientific meetings are a central pillar of the BGS.
Not only does the surplus income provide some 60% of the Society’s income, they are important in achieving our objectives of encouraging and showcasing research, providing quality CPD to our members, and providing an important forum for networking. The running costs of the meeting (venue hire, catering, etc.) is covered by delegates’ registration fees. The surplus comes out of exhibition income from the pharmaceutical industry.
Number of people to whom the questionnaire was mailed. People were invited to respond either on paper or online. 2,300 (all UK)
No. of responses: 330 (64 online; 266 by post)
No. of people who had NOT attended a BGS meeting in the last two years and who had no intention of attending the BGS Spring meeting this year: 88
Why have you not attended a meeting in the past two years? Too busy: 33
Family/Social reasons: 22
Staffing /cover issues: 32
Abstract rejected: 1
Programme not relevant: 10
No funding: 9
Too costly overall: 16
Get CME elsewhere: 36
Time/Travel inconvenience: 20
Other meetings are more relevant: 26
Other reasons for not attending (open question): Programme disappointing: 2
Workload increasingly Stroke oriented: 1
Dates clash with half terms: 2
Venue (prefer London): 149
What meetings are more relevant to you?BASP : 2
Acute Medicine: 1
European and British Stroke: 5
Meetings on PD and Neurology: 4
RCP meetings: 12
Regional BGS meetings: 2
RCPsychs: 1
BMJ Online learning: 1
Diabetes Update: 1
RSM Section of geriatrics and gerontology: 1
US and European meetings: 1
AMEE, Postgraduate organisers meetings: 1
Anything local (Edinburgh or Glasgow): 1
How do you get your CME?
Journals: 7; Online learning: 2
What would induce you to attend a BGS meeting?
Change of venue: Birmingham or London: 12
Northern Ireland: 1
Alternate meeting days (Mon/Tues): 1
Weekend meetings: 1
Funding for GPs: 1
More clinical topics and common problems discussed: 1
|
For some years now, the BGS Scientific meetings have experienced declining attendances. Depending as we do, on income from the pharmaecutical exhibition, declining numbers of delegates will inevitably be noticed by the trade. From highs of 600 delegates for an Autumn Meeting (in the days when they were held in London), to lows of just over 400, there could be many reasons why people are no longer attending meetings.
In March, the Academic and Research Committee commissioned a survey of BGS members to determine how many did not generally attend BGS Scientific Meetings and why (see summary of results in box below).
Conclusions
The sample of returns was too small and the range of responses too diverse to draw any hard and fast conclusions about what we might do to increase attendances. While the BGS has little control over issues such as department staffing and the social/family reasons for not attending the Society’s scientific meetings, we can try to address such matters as location of meetings (to reduce journey time) and deficiencies in the programme.
One message, coming out of both this survey and hearsay, does seem worth exploring further and that is a return to London for the Autumn meeting. No doubt this is partly owing to the tacit adage that ‘all UK public transport leads to London’.
Attendances of London Autumn meetings varied from 400 to over 600 in its latter days. However, the range of venues which could accommodate 600 people and nearly 40 exhibition stands (both in London and outside) was very small and in 1999 we opted to move to Harrogate. The last London venue was a hotel in Hammersmith. Initially very successful, it became increasingly expensive; the quality of food began to deteriorate markedly; and the customer service (responding to complaints and suggestions) became increasingly poor.
New venues have now sprung up in London. The London Transport system has been extended (the Docklands), and the recession might make venues a little more amenable to negotiation. Certainly, we can lose nothing by investigating the possibilities.
Last year we looked at going back to London (before the recession took hold) but the cost was around £60k more than ex-London venues and if we cannot source the extra funds from elsewhere (e.g. Trade) it would mean doubling the conference registration fees.
Other strategies to attract more delegates
Apart from continuing to make grants available to support SpRs who cannot get funding to attend BGS Scientific meetings, we are exploring the possibility of returning to the practice of publishing the Age & Ageing supplement of abstracts (in hard copy), in addition to continuing to publish them online.
On the issue of venue, we have posted an online survey on the BGS website to determine what the “market will bear” in terms of registration fees, if we are unable to negotiate reasonable venue hire charges in London. For those who would prefer to hold the Autumn meeting in London again, we would be pleased to have your view on this matter. Please visit: www.bgs.org.uk
Joanna Gough
Scientific Officer
BGS Newsletter, July 2009
Issue 22 ISSN 1748-6343 22 |