🚩the cfp field everyone skips.

Hey {{first name | there}}. Two weeks ago, I wrote about “speaking isn't invite-only” to tell you that it is possible to take the stage at the biggest developer conference in the world no matter where you are.

Based on popular demand, I'm making it a series. And the next logical part is how to get your talk accepted now that you know where to look.

In today’s career notes:

Here's the mistake almost everyone makes.

They think the CFP gets rejected because the idea wasn't good enough.

It's usually not that.

I've reviewed CFPs of the biggest cloud native conference (KubeCon + CloudNativeCon).

So let me tell you what actually happens on the other side. A reviewer opens your proposal with a checklist and about 90 seconds of patience. They're scanning for three things:

That's it. And here's the part that changes everything:

The reviewer is often not an expert in your niche topic.

Now wait!!

I am not saying that they don’t understand your topic. Let me give you an example. 

I've reviewed Data on Kubernetes tracks and have experience with it, but do I know as much about Container Storage Interfaces (CSI) as someone who works full time building one? 

Absolutely not!

That's normal. So if your CFP assumes the reader already gets it, you lose. 

You're writing for an audience that wants your knowledge. That's why people go to conferences to learn. 

So treat reviewers as your audience. Because they are. 

Make their job easy, and something quietly shifts. They start rooting for you.

Your title is doing more work than your abstract. It's the first thing that gets read.

The formula:

[Action-oriented] + [specific technology/practice] + [clear outcome]

Good:

Rejected-on-sight:

If your title could be a blog post from 2016, rewrite it.

Not a wall of text. Four moves, in order.

1. The Hook (2–3 sentences). State the pain. Make it specific enough that the right person feels seen.

2. The Promise (2–3 sentences). What will they learn? What can they do Monday morning? Use real numbers if you have them.

3. The Content (3–4 sentences). What you'll actually cover. Name the tools. Specificity reads as competence.

4. The Credentials (1–2 sentences). Why you. Brief. Relevant. No résumé.

Most CFPs have an "additional notes" field. Most people leave it blank.

Don't.

DON’T

I REPEAT DON’T!!!

Use it to tell the reviewer why you are the person to give this talk. 

And then link your LinkedIn, your past talks, books, and any other evidence out there that shows your experience.

Here's why that's not optional. Reviewer guidelines literally tell us to look speakers up, see for yourself here. 

When I have to search your name myself, that's friction. 

When the link is right there. I trust you faster. You just did my job for me.

That's the whole game: reduce the reviewer's effort at every step, and you tilt the decision your way.

Before you submit, kill these:

One brilliant CFP, submitted to one conference, is still a coin flip.

The people who speak at six conferences a year aren't six times more talented. They took two or three strong ideas and submitted them, tailored to many events. More than half won't land. That's the job.

A great template raises your hit rate. Volume does the rest.

Your homework:

Worst case, they say no. You've lost nothing. Best case, you're on a stage.

Your move!

Stay sharp. Stay visible.

Divine Odazie

P.S. — This whole framework, plus talk structure, slide design, and demo survival, lives in the Speaker's Toolkit. [Want it? Reply "TOOLKIT" and I'll send it over.]