Noor Chen· Head of Reward, Silverline Media
Posted in Total Rewards 2027 Program Committee ·
The first batch is out. We received 212 proposals by the deadline and I have assigned 15 to each of you, with every proposal going to two reviewers. Please check your list today and tell me if you have a conflict, such as a proposal from your own employer or a close colleague.
Scores are due by the 24th. Use the four criteria on the form, each scored 1 to 5, and write at least two sentences of comment, since speakers ask for feedback. Where two reviewers' totals differ by more than 6 points, I will ask you both to talk before the November meeting.
0 reactions · 4 replies · 2 views
Director of Benefits, Bellwether Consulting
Two conflicts on my list: numbers 47 and 113 are both from my employer, and one is from my own team. Could they be swapped? I am happy to take any two from the benefits track in return, where I gather we are short of reviewers. The other thirteen are fine and I will have them done by the 20th.
Director of Benefits, Bellwether Consulting
A question on the practical relevance criterion. Last year reviewers read it very differently, and some scored research-heavy sessions low by default. Could we agree that a 3 means an attendee could apply at least one thing within a month?
I would also like a line on the form to flag proposals that are thinly disguised product pitches.
Grace ZhangNew
Director of Benefits, Bellwether Consulting
I have gone through six so far and want to raise something before I continue. Four of the six are on pay transparency, and all are competent. If the pattern holds across 212 we will be choosing between good sessions on the same topic, so a separate ranking within that theme may serve us better than raw scores.
Dana WhitfieldCRP, GRSNew
Director, Global Compensation, Meridian Health Systems
