Close
Home
About WAMS
Venue
Program
Speakers
Sponsors
Contact Us
Home
About WAMS
Venue
Program
Speakers
Sponsors
Contact Us
Feedback
Conference Evaluation Form
1. CATEGORY OF RESPONDENT
(please select √)
Government
Security Practitioner
Academic
Mining Industry Executive
Other
Field is required!
Field is required!
Other (Please Specify)
[{"field":"{option}","logic":"equal","value":"Other","and_method":"","field_and":"","logic_and":"","value_and":""}]
Field is required!
Field is required!
2. SURVEY QUESTIONS
a. To what extent would you agree that the conference was valuable to your business outcomes overall?
(For each row, please select √: 5 = Strongly Agree; 4 = Agree; 3 = Neither agree nor disagree; 2 = Disagree; 1 = Strongly Disagree)
Overall Usefulness of the Conference
Rating
Strongly agree
Agree
Neither agree nor disagree
Disagree
Strongly disagree
The conference provided me with valuable information for my business/operations
5
4
3
2
1
Field is required!
Field is required!
The conference provided me with access to relevant expertise
5
4
3
2
1
Field is required!
Field is required!
The conference met my expectations
5
4
3
2
1
Field is required!
Field is required!
b. To what extent would you agree that the presentations were valuable to your business outcomes?
(Please select √: 5 = Strongly Agree; 4 = Agree; 3 = Neither agree nor disagree; 2 = Disagree; 1 = Strongly Disagree; N/A = Not applicable)
Relevance of Presentations / Content
Rating
Strongly agree
Agree
Neither agree nor disagree
Disagree
Strongly disagree
N/A
DAY ONE
Session 1
Regional security environment; trajectory and trends
5
4
3
2
1
Field is required!
Field is required!
Session 2
Security environment outlook and implications for mining investment; operational challenges and risk mitigation
5
4
3
2
1
Field is required!
Field is required!
Session 3
Panel discussion and Q&A
5
4
3
2
1
Field is required!
Field is required!
Comments
Field is required!
Field is required!
DAY TWO
Session 1
Community peace and resilience building; working alongside artisanal miners; partnership opportunities with the GCERF
5
4
3
2
1
Field is required!
Field is required!
Session 2
Regional political outlook; coup contagion factor
5
4
3
2
1
Field is required!
Field is required!
Session 3
Panel discussion and Q&A
5
4
3
2
1
Field is required!
Field is required!
Comments
Field is required!
Field is required!
Workshop – Kidnap Mitigation
Part 1
5
4
3
2
1
Field is required!
Field is required!
Part 2
5
4
3
2
1
Field is required!
Field is required!
Comments
Field is required!
Field is required!
c. To what extent would you agree that the conference was well organised?
(Please select √: 5 = Strongly Agree; 4 = Agree; 3 = Neither agree nor disagree; 2 = Disagree; 1 = Strongly Disagree)
Quality of Program Delivery
Rating
Strongly agree
Agree
Neither agree nor disagree
Disagree
Strongly disagree
The conference program was well structured
5
4
3
2
1
Field is required!
Field is required!
The quality of presentations met my expectations
5
4
3
2
1
Field is required!
Field is required!
The networking activities were a useful experience
5
4
3
2
1
Field is required!
Field is required!
Sufficient opportunities were provided for questions
5
4
3
2
1
Field is required!
Field is required!
The venue and service facilities met my expectations
5
4
3
2
1
Field is required!
Field is required!
Field is required!
Field is required!
Field is required!
Field is required!
How often would you attend a WAMS Conference?
Annually
Biennially
Field is required!
Field is required!
Field is required!
Field is required!
Submit