ñ SURVEY RESPONSES SUMMARY AND INTERPRETATIONS
1) Demographics
ñ ‘average’ members are Field Archaeologists, centered on the eastern Mediterranean basin and Mesopotamia from 2000-100 BCE, who also work in History, Anthropology, and Biblical Studies.
Most of these ñ members (ca 55%) have been members for 10 years or less, although about 20% have been members for over 20 years.
About 45% of ñ members attend the Annual Meeting every year or nearly so and an additional 17% attend often – this (when combined with those attending irregularly) comports with other sources that indicate that about 64% of ñ members generally attend the Annual Meeting.
Many ñ members are also members of at least one other professional group – over 45% of respondents hold AIA membership and 42% (201/470) are members of SBL (this is a higher percentage than the 1/3 figure provided by SBL for joint membership); about 20% are in SAA. Over ½ of responding ñ members attend 2 or more professional meetings/ conferences per year with over 40% attending meetings other than SBL on a regular basis. About 55% of responding ñ members who are also SBL members (129) report they attend the SBL annual meeting on a fairly regular basis. This reportage is in line with that from SBL + ñ 2017 statistics, which maintain that about 160 registered for both ñ and SBL annual meetings in 2017. Additionally, the 129 figure comports with the 14-20% figure, from other sources, for the percentage of Annual Meeting attendees who are also SBL members.
2) The Annual Meeting Itself
It is clear that the vast majority of respondents are in favor of the fall season (70%) and the November month (60-86%). Which exact days are preferred showed less uniformity but Thursday and Friday were almost universal, with a shift to earlier or later in the week splitting the responses.
Seventy-five percent of respondents indicated that the Host City is important in their choice to attend or not (Very 23.9%, Usually 24.9%, Sometimes 26.4%) and yet about 63% reported they have chosen to attend every year (44.9%) or most years (17.7%). Ease and cost of travel were primary concerns for city choice (ca 75% each) while local attractions (36%) and location and weather (34%) play a smaller but still significant role.
Regarding the hotel choice, clearly the main three concerns (ca 66% each) deal with getting around (to local restaurants, the airport, public transit) and cost. Free WiFi and having all ñ meetings in one hotel were also important factors (ca 40% each). About 75% of respondents indicate they would be at least ‘likely’ to book a room in an ñ conference hotel.
In both of the above – city and hotel – it is clear that transportation and cost were the significant factors.
Expectations for the ñ Annual Meeting itself showed that quality sessions (90%) and networking opportunities (66%) were the main reasons for attendance. Four additional expectations garnered between 48 and 53%: receptions, booksellers, opportunities to present, and a desire for sufficient and appropriate presentation spaces.
3) Meeting with Others
About 43% of respondents did not feel strongly one way or the other about meeting with anyone else, even though many are also members of other groups and do attend additional meetings (see above). A similar percentage, though, would prefer to meet in some way with another group. Of the other possible groups SBL showed the largest interest (39%) and AIA the second most (21%). Two other groups were at 10%. If ñ meets ‘with’ another group, over half of respondents prefer to meet separately in such a way so members can attend both meeting without having to choose between them.
4) Comparisons with Previous Surveys and Polls
2016 and 2019 Surveys
The results of this Survey comport reasonably well with the data obtained from the 2016 Survey, which had a significantly lower response rate: ca 240/1700 in 2016 and ca 580/1700 in 2019. Considering those questions that were the same between the two surveys the following data emerge.
In terms of the Meeting Month and Days, the results were almost identical, as were length of membership and frequency of attendance at ñ AM
A lower percentage of SBL members filled out the 2016 survey, but the frequency of attendance at the SBL meeting was roughly the same as that of 2019.
Regarding whether we should meet with another group, the percentage of “Prefer” decreased in 2019 by a third while that of “Doesn’t Matter” increased by a quarter.
Comparing the 2019 Survey with the November 2018 Straw Poll data.
Given 4 general options (rather than the 9 of the 2019 Survey), 75% of Straw Poll respondents were split evenly between maintaining as close as possible a meeting connection with SBL and completely severing logistical ties with that annual meeting. The same trend is seen in the Survey, yet with a much larger percentage wanting to “stay” with SBL in some manner and about the same wanting a full split.
| 2018 Straw Poll Options | 2018 Poll | 2019 Survey Question 1 | 1-5 Year Members |
|---|---|---|---|
| Meet w/ SBL, same time (or shift days) and city | 37% | 52% (Options 1-3) | 68% |
| Meet w/ SBL, same time not same city (near) | 7% | 4.6% (Option 4) | — |
| Alternate (city near SBL + city far from SBL) | 17% | 11.2% (Options 5-6) | — |
| Split from SBL entirely | 37% | 29.3% (Options 7-9) | 18% |
To download detailed results from the survey, click here.