Why I Will not Be Speaking At Subsequent Year’s National Safety Council Conference and Expo

by Phil La Duke

These days I received a type e-mail inviting me to submit abstracts for subsequent year’s National Security Council’s Conference and Expo in Indianapolis.  The topic line study “we require your expertise”  The body of the e mail extolled the advantages of speaking at the NTC  and completed with:

“You play a vital role and as a result far more injuries can be prevented and lives saved, Submit a presentation and unleash your possible to influence m ore than 14,0000 security, overall health, and environmental experts from the US, Canada, and far more than 60 other countries.”

As numerous of you know I have spoken at the NSC ahead of eight occasions to be precise. So why you may ask would I so resolutely refuse to even submit an abstract.  Have been the last eight instances so horrible? No.  In truth, regardless of from delivering on none of the promises in the quote above (if you consider you are going to be speaking to an audience of 14,000 you are delusional, and “60 other countries” seemed like a stretch, I enjoyed speaking at the NTC and in spite of possessing not a single piece of company come from speaking there, it did afford me the chance to meet and reconnect with several of you. So if I enjoyed doing the shows, and 8 consecutive years of them accepting me as a speaker, one particular would feel that they at least at 1 point thought I was a speaker worthy of a slot, why don’t I do it any longer?

It wasn’t a lack of attendance at my sessions, some had been so complete that they were standing room only. Nor was it simply because individuals were unhappy with me as a speaker.  My presentation skills, understanding of the subject…in fact all queries related to me as presenter have been, as very best as I can recollect, scored either very good or excellent.  So why do not I submit abstracts? The 1 location of my testimonials that consistently hovered around neutral was the topic matter.  This is puzzling to me, I imply, these aren’t SURPRISE topics.  They are, after all, featured in the system and advertised on the web site.  I have never ever after proposed one topic and then delivered another nor have I ever utilised the NSC pulpit as the setting for a pitch for my services.

I was told by Hilda Koskiewicz, (Conference System Manager, National Security Council
hilda.koskiewicz@nsc.org  Phone: (630) 775-2037 drop her a line, I’m certain she would adore to hear from you, no matter whether you support them blackballing me or oppose it) that they have a new way of deciding on speakers.  Right after aggregating the scores they dropped the half of the speakers with the lowest scores, then they divided the group in half once again and gave preference to these who scored in the highest quadrant.  She even produced a snide comment that maybe I ought to operate on my presentation capabilities.

The choice process seems suspect, but given that I came proper out and asked Hilda why year following year they had Scott Geller and Charlie Morecraft as keynote speakers when so several individuals at the conference rolled their eyes at the mere mention of the truth.  Do not get me incorrect, I have recognized Charlie for decades and I believe he has a compelling and crucial message, and Lord knows Somebody has to hold promoting Scott Geller’s books, but every year on primarily the same subject as a keynote?

And it can be rightfully mentioned that soon after eight years I also had turn out to be passé and people didn’t want to hear me, so how can I condemn the NSC for placing them on the docket each and every year and then complain (for the record I am not complaining, I’m explaining, but it is a small point) that I get left out? I can not.  Like so much in safety you just have to walk away from fights you can’t win.

Maybe it has practically nothing to do with my open contempt for Scott Geller’s work and has far more to do with the NSC’s ferocious defense of Behavior Primarily based Security.  The NSC has numerous publications, solutions, and other offerings that still cling to what numerous think about antiquated thinking in security, and obtaining a person like me who openly and vociferously opposes the thought that we must concentrate exclusively on behaviors in favor of a much more holistic strategy.

So what will I do rather, well for starters I am going to make more of a concerted work to write this blog with far more regularity, even though I choose not to post something than to post one thing just for the sake of doing so.  I will continue writing for Entrepreneur twice a week (if you missed the initial 57 stories they can be identified right here: https://www.entrepreneur.com/author/phil-la-duke I would sure appreciate you helping get the word out that these stories are out there by sharing from inside the post.  Since this is how they decide who to hold and who to ditch your voice tends to make a big difference.  I could also use your support spreading the word on this weblog, since LinkedIn has auto-kicked me out of a number of groups simply because I post from right here to the groups to which I belong.  Beyond that, I am open for ideas.  I’d love to do more speaking en-gagements but well…I require your aid in obtaining venues that are not easily spooked.

Irrespective as to no matter whether I fade off into the sunset, a security rabble rouser has been or if I continue to create an audience by way of my articles I’m nevertheless out here, flying the flags of discontent, and ignoring spelling and grammar just to get below the skin of the uptight security goofballs a voice crying out in the wilderness of security.





Phil La Duke’s Weblog

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *