Chapter 2: Choose Your Format
On-site, online, or hybrid — and why it matters more than you think
Now that you know why you're running this event (you did Chapter 1, right?), it's time to decide how people will participate. This choice affects your budget, your audience reach, your tech stack, and how much sleep you'll lose during the event.
There are three options. Each has real strengths and real trade-offs. Let's walk through them honestly.
Option 1: On-site (in-person)
What it is: Everyone gathers in the same physical space — a co-working space, university, office, or event venue. Participants hack side by side, eat together, and present live.
Why it's great:
Energy is contagious. There's something about being in a room full of people building things that simply can't be replicated online.
Spontaneous collaboration happens naturally — overhearing a conversation at the next table leads to unexpected partnerships.
Mentoring is easy: walk up to a team, look at their screen, point at something, talk it through.
Team formation is faster and more natural in person.
Social bonding is stronger — people remember who they shared pizza with at midnight.
The honest trade-offs:
It's the most expensive format. Venue, food, power, AV equipment — costs add up fast (expect roughly $10–30 per person just for the venue).
Your audience is limited to whoever can physically get there. This shrinks your talent pool dramatically.
Logistics are heavy: wifi testing, power strip counts, dietary restrictions, accessibility, setup and teardown.
About 65% of people who register for free events actually show up. Plan for that.
Best for: Community building, networking-heavy events, recruitment, events where hands-on collaboration and energy matter most.
Option 2: Online (fully virtual)
What it is: The entire event happens digitally. Participants join from anywhere via video calls, Slack/Discord, and your event platform (like BuilderBase). They hack remotely, submit projects online, and present via video.
Why it's great:
Anyone can participate from anywhere in the world. Your talent pool is global.
Dramatically cheaper — no venue, no food, no physical logistics.
Easier to record everything (workshops, ceremonies) for people who can't attend live.
Asynchronous elements mean you can accommodate multiple timezones.
Lower barrier to entry for first-timers who might feel intimidated walking into a physical venue.
The honest trade-offs:
Virtual imposter syndrome is the default state. Online, a newcomer can stay muted, camera off, and completely invisible — and the silence feels like confirmation they don't belong. You need to actively pull people in.
Energy management is hard. You can't rely on the room's buzz to keep people going.
Team formation takes more effort — you need structured processes (Slack channels, virtual mixers, matching tools).
Tech support is trickier when you can't walk over and look at someone's screen.
Engagement drops off. People close tabs, get distracted, drift away quietly.
Best for: Global events, budget-conscious organisers, events with participants spread across geographies, events where the primary output is digital anyway.
Option 3: Hybrid (on-site + online simultaneously)
What it is: Some participants are in the room, others join remotely. Both groups participate in the same event at the same time.
Why it's great:
Maximum reach: local participants get the in-person energy, remote participants can still join from anywhere.
Inclusive by design — people who can't travel still get to participate.
Demonstrates that your organisation values accessibility.
The honest trade-offs:
This is genuinely the hardest format to execute well. It's not "an on-site event with a livestream" — it requires intentional design for both audiences.
You essentially run two events at once. Budget 1.5x the staff of a single-format event.
Format equity is a real challenge: on-site participants tend to get more attention, better mentoring, and an unfair advantage during judging unless you actively prevent it.
The technology bridge (cameras, microphones, streaming, two-way audio) adds complexity and cost.
Remote participants can feel like second-class citizens if you're not careful.
Best for: Events with a strong local community plus global interest, organisations that want to build both local and remote audiences, events where you expect 50+ participants across locations.
How to decide
Ask yourself these questions:
Where is your audience? If they're all in one city, go on-site. If they're global, go online or hybrid.
What's your budget? On-site is expensive, online is cheap, hybrid is the most expensive (double the infrastructure).
What's your objective? (See — Chapter 1 keeps coming back.) Community building works best in person. Global hackathons need to be online or hybrid.
What's your team's capacity? Hybrid requires the most organisational bandwidth. If this is your first event, start with one format.
How important is newcomer inclusion? Online has lower barriers to entry. On-site has stronger mentoring support. Hybrid needs intentional design for both.
A note on hybrid equity
If you go hybrid, here's the principle that should guide every decision: design for remote-first, adapt for on-site. If something works for remote participants, it works for everyone. If something only works on-site, you need a remote equivalent.
Concrete examples:
Don't have onsite-only mentoring sessions — offer video office hours too.
Use asynchronous judging (demo videos) so the format doesn't bias results toward in-person teams.
Make Slack mandatory for everyone — otherwise on-site conversations stay offline and remote participants miss context.
Appoint a dedicated "bridge coordinator" whose job is to ensure remote participants aren't forgotten.
What BuilderBase supports
Good news: BuilderBase works for all three formats. Your event page, registration, team formation, challenge portal, submissions, and judging all work the same regardless of format. You configure once, participants access from wherever they are.
For on-site events, BuilderBase's check-in tools handle registration. For online events, the platform is your central hub. For hybrid, it's the unifying layer that both audiences share.
Key takeaways:
On-site = best energy, most expensive, limited reach
Online = global reach, cheapest, hardest to keep people engaged
Hybrid = maximum reach, but genuinely the hardest to do well
Your objective (Chapter 1) should heavily influence your format choice
If going hybrid, design for remote-first and assign dedicated format leads
BuilderBase supports all three — pick the format that fits your event, not your tech