How to write a talk proposal that actually gets accepted

Source: Dev.to

The Core Problem

Many submissions today are technically well‑written:

• Perfect grammar
• Clean structure
• Full of buzzwords

Yet they say nothing. Titles and abstracts that feel heavily AI‑generated often lack the one thing that helps a program committee decide: a clear, personal point of view.

When I read those proposals, I struggle to understand:

1. What the talk will really be about
2. How it will be delivered
3. Why this specific person should be the one giving it

Without that, it’s almost impossible to confidently put the talk on stage.

What a Talk Proposal Is (and Isn’t)

Not a Neutral Description

• Not a mini Wikipedia page
• Not a list of concepts you’ll cover

It’s a Promise

A proposal is the first signal of how you think, how you communicate, and what attendees will experience if they choose your session over dozens of others. Before your talk reaches the audience, it has to convince:

• The program committee
• The attendees scanning the agenda

Both groups look for clarity, relevance, and authenticity.

AI: A Tool, Not a Substitute

This is not an anti‑AI message. AI can be great for:

• Cleaning up language
• Improving structure
• Helping you iterate faster

The problem starts when AI replaces your thinking instead of supporting it. If you remove your name and the proposal could have been written by anyone, that’s a red flag.

Key question: Why do you care about this topic?
If that answer isn’t visible, the proposal feels generic even if it’s technically correct.

What Program Committees Look For

• Perspective: Not just the topic, but the lens you’re using.

  • Real‑world experience?
  • A hard‑learned lesson?
  • A comparison, failure story, or migration journey?

• Concrete experience over abstract authority

  • What you’ve actually tried
  • What went wrong
  • What surprised you
  • What you’d do differently today

• Focused scope
  Overpromising (e.g., covering fundamentals, advanced patterns, internals, performance, live demos all in 30–40 minutes) is a warning sign. A focused talk is far more attractive than an overly ambitious one.

• Sincerity
  Proposals that sound like marketing copy or technical documentation are harder to trust than those that feel written by a real person who genuinely wants to share something.

Common Patterns That Lead to Rejection

• Titles full of buzzwords but no substance
• Abstracts that list technologies instead of ideas
• Generic phrases like “we will explore”, “we will deep dive”, “you will learn everything about…” with no specifics
• No indication of why this talk exists
• No sense of who the talk is for

None of these are fatal on their own, but combined they make it very hard to say yes.

Before You Write (or Rewrite) Your Proposal

Answer these questions for yourself, not for the CFP form:

1. Why did this topic matter to me personally?
2. What problem or confusion led me here?
3. What do I wish someone had told me earlier?
4. What’s one opinion or lesson I’m confident about?

Then rewrite your abstract starting from those answers. You can still use AI afterwards—just don’t erase the core.

Final Thoughts

Conferences don’t need more perfectly formatted proposals. They need clear voices, real experiences, and honest stories. If your proposal reflects how you actually think and care about a topic, it will already stand out even before the talk is delivered.

If you’re new to speaking, struggling with rejections, or unsure how to improve your submissions—you’re not alone. This is a skill you can learn. If this article helps even one person get their first “accepted” email, it’s already done its job.