Sessionboard vs Linklings

Linklings has run submission and review for technical conferences for over 20 years, and review is where it stops adding value.

Trusted by teams running Informa, FT Live, medical societies, and global enterprises
Informa
Clarion Events
Financial Times
Dynatrace
ACEP
AVIXA
NACD
ASHG
American Society of Anesthesiologists
Google
Docebo
NRECA
CyberRisk Alliance
AdventHealth
Questex
IAAPA Expo
NAEYC
Informa
Clarion Events
Financial Times
Dynatrace
ACEP
AVIXA
NACD
ASHG
American Society of Anesthesiologists
Google
Docebo
NRECA
CyberRisk Alliance
AdventHealth
Questex
IAAPA Expo
NAEYC

Quick answer

Sessionboard is the Linklings alternative for technical and scientific conferences: call for papers (CFP), blind multi-round review, and conflict-of-interest tracking, plus the speaker CRM, portal, live transcription, and Awards that Linklings does not offer. Linklings covers submission and review; speaker operations, faculty history, and content capture need other tools.

Sound like your team?

Match your role to the job Sessionboard solves — program ops, content reuse, or marketing attribution.

Program committee chair

Blind review, rebuttals, and conflict-of-interest tracking run natively in Sessionboard, so review rigor is no longer a reason to stay.

Conference manager

Every Linklings cycle restarts from a blank import. A speaker CRM keeps bios, materials, history, and consent across editions.

Speaker operations

Accepted presenters get a portal with tasks, AV specs, and automated reminders. Nobody chases attachments in email until the meeting.

Content and communications

Sessions end and the content evaporates. Live transcription, Media Library, and Attendee Hub turn the program into an asset.

Why teams choose Sessionboard

Where Linklings stops, and where program teams keep going with Sessionboard.

Linklings — where it ends

  • Peer review tenure

    Twenty years of single- and double-blind review, rebuttals, and reviewer discussion workflows for the review phase of technical conferences.

  • Long-standing committee relationships

    Committees at SC, SIGGRAPH, and similar conferences have run their review cycles on it for years.

  • Conference logistics add-ons

    Signage, space planning, and student volunteer tracking, useful if a review vendor also handling signage matters to you.

The narrow case

  • Submission and review is the entire scope, this cycle and every cycle, with no speaker operations worth software
  • The committee prefers filing vendor requests for form and report changes over editing them directly
  • Signage and student volunteer logistics outweigh speaker experience and content capture in the buying decision
The way forward

Sessionboard — program, CRM & content

  • Everything Linklings does at review time

    Call for papers (CFP), custom forms, multi-round blind review, rebuttal workflows, conflict-of-interest tracking, and committee assignment run natively. Switching costs zero review rigor.

  • Speaker CRM across years

    Faculty, bios, materials, communications, and participation history persist across editions and events. Returning speakers see prefilled profiles, and the committee sees who delivered.

  • Speaker portal and readiness

    Accepted presenters get tasks, deadlines, AV specs, and uploads in one portal with automated reminders. Linklings has no equivalent; this work lives in email.

  • Content capture built in

    Live transcription, captions, Media Library, AI clips, Attendee Hub, and Create run on the session record. The program becomes a year-round library instead of ending at the closing keynote.

  • Self-serve platform, no request queue

    Committees change forms, workflows, and reports themselves the moment they need to. Vendor-managed systems put a person between you and every tweak.

  • Awards and advocacy on the same graph

    Awards programs, tracked peer shares from speakers and sponsors, and registration attribution reuse the same contact records. No second system, no re-import.

When Sessionboard wins

  • The program needs anything after acceptance: speaker readiness, materials, portal, communications, or content
  • Faculty return year over year and the committee wants their history, not an annual blank import
  • Review rigor matters and so does everything review rigor feeds: the meeting, the content, the community
  • The team wants to configure workflows itself, same day, without a vendor in the loop
  • Awards, advocacy, or multi-event reporting are on the roadmap, because a review tool will never grow into them

What Sessionboard owns

Program, speaker CRM, content — plus Advocacy and Dispatch marketing tools competitors treat as afterthoughts.

Program layer

Call for papers (CFP), multi-round review, chair workflows, conflict of interest (COI) tracking, and published agenda — work competitors leave in spreadsheets.

Speaker CRM

One faculty record: portal, bio, materials, and communications across years — not a fresh CSV every submission cycle.

Content marketing

Live transcription, Media Library, clips, Attendee Hub, and Create on the session record you already manage.

Advocacy

Peer shares from speakers, sponsors, and faculty — tracked links to registration when sessions are accepted or confirmed.

Dispatch

Internal team distribution — automated share recipes for staff when content is ready, beside Hootsuite or Sprout for always-on social.

Event MCP

Ask your AI about the event — not a spreadsheet export

Sessionboard connects to the assistants your team already uses through MCP. Sessions, speakers, and committee data stay in Sessionboard — Claude, ChatGPT, and Copilot read it live.

  • OAuth sign-in — no API keys to copy or rotate
  • Live program graph — sessions, speakers, review rounds, readiness gaps
  • Works beside registration and capture tools you already run
Sessionboard Event MCP
You

Which accepted speakers still haven’t submitted bios before we publish the app?

Assistant

12 accepted speakers are missing bios. 4 also lack headshots. Top gaps: Dr. Rivera (keynote), Panel B moderators (2), Workshop track (3).

Live from Sessionboard · updated 2 min ago

Evaluating Linklings alternatives?

See how Sessionboard fits beside your existing stack — no rip-and-replace required.

Request a demo

Where Sessionboard displaces Linklings

What winds down on their contract, and what your team gains the day Sessionboard turns on.

Linklings — their lane

  • In-flight review rounds can finish in Linklings during a mid-cycle transition, then close out
  • Nothing else needs to stay. CFP, review, speaker ops, and content all run natively in Sessionboard

Sessionboard — your advantage

  • Call for papers, blind review, rebuttals, and conflict-of-interest tracking
  • Speaker CRM, portal, and readiness from acceptance to the podium
  • Live transcription, Media Library, Attendee Hub, and Create on every session
  • Awards, advocacy, and cross-event reporting on the same contact graph

Frequently asked questions

Evaluating Sessionboard against Linklings for the program layer — not a forced rip-and-replace.

Yes. Call for papers (CFP), custom submission forms, single- and double-blind review, rebuttals, conflict-of-interest tracking, and committee workflows are native. Committees switch without giving up review rigor, and gain the speaker CRM, portal, and content layer that Linklings does not offer.

You can run the split mid-contract, and accepted submissions import cleanly. Most teams consolidate at renewal instead: two systems mean two logins, two imports, and a seam in the data exactly where speaker handoff happens. Since Sessionboard runs the same blind review natively, the second system stops earning its keep.

Now, in parallel. Speaker CRM, portal, and content capture do not touch the review contract, so this year's faculty data can build value immediately while review finishes where it is. By renewal the committee is already working in one system and the consolidation decision makes itself.

Yes, natively: blind review modes, conflict-of-interest tracking, rebuttal workflows, and multi-round decisions. Bring your current review configuration to the demo and we will rebuild it live.

It becomes the starting point. Past participation, bios, and materials import into the speaker CRM, so returning faculty see prefilled profiles instead of a blank form.

Linklings does not publish pricing; quotes follow scope and services. Sessionboard pricing follows meeting and submission volume, and a scoped quote takes one demo. Put it beside your renewal before you sign it.

Replacing Linklings?

Talk through your event workflow — abstracts, speakers, content, and marketing on one program graph.

Loading form…