nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

PowerUp Challenge: First Product Update Briefing Feedback Task

Crystal Bruce

If you were not able to join us live, you can watch the OnDemand recording for your region.

North America

Canada

Europe/United Kingdom

Australia/New Zealand

Task #1

Watch the Product Update Briefing for your region and let us know what you think about the new messaging format.

Previously, these sessions were 90 minutes long, but many of you told us that was too much to process at once. We heard you and have shortened the session to 60 minutes, concentrating on strategic updates rather than detailed reviews.

How do you feel about this change?
Did the 60-minute format provide the right balance of information?
Would you prefer going back to the 90-minute format for more detailed content?

Find more posts tagged with

Accepted answers

All comments

Austen Brown

I preferred the longer session; felt it gave more detail. The shorter version isn't as taxing mentally.
I appreciated that the session was forward facing, focusing less on features recently released and more on what's to come.
I'd prefer returning to the 90 min version, but I suspect I'm in the minority.

Jordyn Kieft

I definitely preferred the change to the 60 minute format. As someone with a really busy schedule, its hard to find time for a 90 minute session. I do think that there could be value to the 90 minute format, if people are interested in it though. I am wondering if maybe there could be 2 briefings, one 60 minute one and one 90 minute one. Then, people can choose which option works better for them. While I find it hard to fit in a 90 minute briefing into my schedule, I could see myself making the time were I to find the product to be interesting or important to my work.

Julie Rempfer

I do like the 60 minute version better. 90 minutes was very tricky to make time for and a lot to digest.

I also appreciate that these will be occurring more frequently moving forward (I think I read that somewhere) so everything wont need to be crammed to fit the time allotted.

Rhiannon Ashmore

I appreciated the 60-minute length. I also don't have much spare time during the work week for webinars, but I like to fit them in when I can. If they're an hour long, I'm much more likely to be able to watch them.

I think the information provided during the webinar was more than enough to fill an hour. There were some features announced in the webinar that I think could use their own discussion of some kind, though. I did, however, appreciate the team fitting in time for quick live demos.

I like the 60-minute format, but if 90-minute webinars returned, I'd do my best to fit them in—at the very least, watch them back.

Remus Blais

I like that you clearly shifted from “feature tour” to “strategic updates.” It helped me understand where Blackbaud is going and why, so I can better explain the roadmap and priorities internally. The shorter format also feels more respectful of people’s time, and the pacing kept my attention the whole way through. Overall, I’m very much in favor of the move to a 60-minute format. As someone juggling a full-time role plus a lot of projects, it’s much easier to commit to an hour than to a 90-minute block, and I actually retained more because the content was more focused and less draining.

Gwen Williams

I feel that this change is good. An hour and a half was a long time and I don't think everything really sunk in as a result. The right balance was provided but I think it would be helpful if each speaker presented in the same format showing a single slide of what has already been implement and then continuing on with the roadmap. I'd prefer leaving it at a 60-minute format and possibly providing more detailed information as a downloadable document for those wanting more in-depth information.

Miki Martin

I personally preferred the longer format. I really feel like I need to go back and rewatch it just to catch all the updates coming; there was too much too quick for me to process it all initially.

I do appreciate that they did not dwell so much on things that are already active. Since Blackbaud provides weekly updates I think those are sufficient for the ongoing changes. Having the PUBs focus on what's to come is much more useful. I also liked the change in format of the roadmap. Having the focus broken into boxes rather than timeline form makes it easier to read and comprehend, at least for me.

Rachel Cavalier

I don't have any strong feelings about the change in format - 60 mins or 90 mins, both have been ok for me.

I think the 60 minute session did mean that there was less lingering on features that have already been added to RE like Miki mentioned and with less time available, there probably wasn't the temptation to put lots of demo videos in which I preferred.

I don't know if I would prefer going back to the 90 minute session, but I would definitely like for any follow-up scheduled town hall/demo sessions about new features that are mentioned to be signposted in an email to viewers along with the Q&A answers

Dan Snyder

I thought the briefing was great and 60 minutes was good for me. While I do like the detail, there are certain features our org does not use so I get distracted with other things when those are being explained in depth, but that is a me problem :). I do agree with others who have said that the focus on future enhancements vs. recently released was great and should continue.

I think the benefit of 90 minutes could be providing the detail folks need to not be worried about these changes and what might be missing with an initial release, but still being planned.

Madeleine Holdsworth

I definitely prefer the 90 minute format. I felt the 60 minute session was a little rushed. I understand that people have trouble blocking the calendar for 90 minutes, so perhaps you need to rethink PUBs and have a Part 1 and 2 of 45 minutes each? I did appreciate the focus on future enhancements but it's frustrating to learn of them but not get a implementation time that is more specific. I feel it's more of a "teaser" especially when something is announced but then is walked back

Emma Baguley-Lockwood

I prefer the 60 minute session, it packed a lot in, I watched it On Demand a week later and was able to rewatch the bits I found interesting and wanted to takes notes on. With the amount of new things being added I think 90 minutes might be too much to listen to. Could always do a 60 minute this is what is going to be added to NXT and then a monthly 15 minute this is what is now on NXT.

Patti Hommes

I prefered the longer format, which allowed more time to absorb what was being presented, as the 60 minute format felt rushed. The longer format also allowed those of us attending the "Watch Party" to interact without feeling rushed or missing any content. I would definitely prefer going back to the 90 minute format.

roger berg

I definitely appreciate the shorter format. I feel like we covered just as much material but I didn't have to invest as much time sitting through the update, so thank you. I feel like I can always go to the on-demand in case it feels like I missed something.

Sara Niemiec

I liked the change, especially this time of year. Sixty minutes felt more manageable for my calendar. I think it provided the right balance of information, and I think having a live follow-up meeting, like what Prenger did, in which we had the chance to ask our questions, was incredibly helpful. I would like to ask that the slides be made available as a download after the meeting. Not only for the QR codes to participate in the early adopter programs, but for content in general. The summary docs that were available for download during the presentation were helpful, but sometimes the slides just work better for me.

Carlene Johnson

I much prefer the 90‑minute format as I want all the detail, all the time. The 60‑minute session felt like drinking from a firehose — too much condensed information without enough time to absorb it.

As @Sara Niemiec noted , having the slides available would be greatly appreciated by most of us. If a QR code is used, the link should also be provided as a direct resource link.
@Dan Snyder made an excellent point : “I think the benefit of 90 minutes could be providing the detail folks need to not be worried about these changes and what might be missing with an initial release, but still being planned.”
Personally, I’d rather carve out 90 minutes on one day than try to fit in multiple shorter sessions or attend follow‑ups.

That said, I did enjoy, and highly recommend, both the @Prenger Solutions Group Q &A session and the Product Update User Group session organized by @Sunshine Reinken Watson — those were valuable complements to the briefing.

JoAnn Strommen

While I prefer 60 for my personal schedule, it was a lot of info very quickly. Did like that less time seemed to be spent on charts of what already done.

Yes, to having slides available.

Priscila Napoli

I much prefer the 60-min session. With so many other meetings during the day, anything more than that becomes very exhausting for me. If I need to remind myself of any details, I just go back to the recording. I've actually done that a couple of times now.

Robin Kuehn

I appreciate the difficulty in finding time for more than 60 minutes, but I did find the information in this PUB felt very rushed and skipped details that I could have used. I agree with the suggestion above to split this into two separate updates, especially if particular pieces of the product can be assigned to each PUB.

Jaclyn Whitelock

I found that 60 minutes simply wasn't enough for the PUB- I would fully support going back to the 90 minute format. These PUBs are critical as more and more features come out in NXT, and as much as we might all be busy, I have no problem making 90 minutes to watch live. I had so many questions watching the PUB that I simply could not keep up, it felt very rushed.

Aldera Chisholm

It's tough - 60 is the right amount of time, but 90 gives the right amount of content. I'd rather have two detailed ones, rather than one where it doesn't dive deeply enough. A compromise could be a 60 with a very good follow up summary with links for more information on the pieces we are particularly interested in.

Lauren Williams

I like the 60 minute format a lot. It gave the right balance of what's been done and what's coming up. I would like the 60 minute format to stay, it's much easier to fit into a busy work day.

Joe Henricks

I am fine with either but I would give a slight advantage to the 90 minute version as I do like the additional details and the 60 minute version seems a little rushed for the volume of content. The Prenger Solutions Q&A session a few days after was also very helpful. I hope those continue to happen. As others have mentioned, having the presentation slides at the time of the update would be helpful for note taking.