Seating Chart MakerOpen the maker

Types of seating arrangement

There are 9 standard seating arrangements: theatre, classroom, cabaret, banquet rounds, U-shape, pods, boardroom, hollow square and chevron. They differ in one thing that matters — whether people face the front, each other, or a table — and everything else follows from that. The editor below opens in theatre style (rows facing front); switch it to any of the others and export the result.

Keynote — Main HallRiverside Conference Centre · Day 1Lectern1/1 seatedABAnita B.Row A14/14 seatedDCDesmond C.FOFarida O.GMGideon M.HNHalina N.IBIsaac B.JSJuniper S.KBKwame B.LFLorna F.MAMilo A.NRNadia R.OVOsian V.PKPetra K.QRQuentin R.RSRania S.Row B11/14 seatedSTSilas T.THTamsin H.UEUgo E.VMVivienne M.WFWes F.XPXenia P.YBYannick B.ZLZofia L.AGAled G.BNBrigid N.CSCorin S.+++Row C0/14 seated++++++++++++++Row D0/14 seated++++++++++++++Row E0/14 seated++++++++++++++Row F0/14 seated++++++++++++++

Drag tables · click a guest, then a seat · drag canvas to pan

Event details (title on your chart)
Guests (26/30 seated · 85 seats)

Paste a whole list here — one name per line, or separated by commas.

  • Anita BergLectern
  • Desmond ClayRow A
  • Farida OseiRow A
  • Gideon MarshRow A
  • Halina NowakRow A
  • Isaac BloomRow A
  • Juniper SaleRow A
  • Kwame BoatengRow A
  • Lorna FitchRow A
  • Milo AshbyRow A
  • Nadia RaskRow A
  • Osian VaughanRow A
  • Petra KovacRow A
  • Quentin RoeRow A
  • Rania SabbaghRow A
  • Silas TrentRow B
  • Tamsin HaleRow B
  • Ugo EzeRow B
  • Vivienne MarchandRow B
  • Wes FerreiraRow B
  • Xenia PappasRow B
  • Yannick BouvierRow B
  • Zofia LisRow B
  • Aled GriffithsRow B
  • Brigid NolanRow B
  • Corin SladeRow B
  • Dervla Hayes
  • Emil Stauffer
  • Fenella Drake
  • Gustav Holm

Free, no signup · exports PNG and print-ready PDF · start from one of 17 templates or open a blank chart

The arrangements, compared

Capacities below are the seats these particular starting templates open at, counted from the template data rather than typed — the presenter’s lectern, the teacher desk and the speakers’ table are excluded, since those are not delegate seats. Treat them as a like-for-like comparison on one canvas, not as the capacity of your room.

ArrangementAlso calledSeatsBest for
Theatre styleauditorium style84Keynotes, briefings, AGMs — anything where nobody needs to write or talk to each other.
Classroom styleschoolroom style24Training, exams and note-taking. The same rows as theatre style, but with a table in front of every chair.
Cabaretcrescent rounds36Conference dinners and workshop days — group discussion without losing sight of the stage.
Banquet roundsfull rounds60Galas, awards nights and weddings. Maximum conversation, minimum sightline to a stage.
U-shapehorseshoe22Seminars, board sessions and workshops where everyone must see everyone else's face.
Podsclusters, groups30Group work and project sessions. Fast collaboration, poor sightlines to the front.
Boardroomconference styleno presetCommittee meetings and interviews under about 20 people.
Hollow squareopen squareno presetNegotiations and large committees where there is no front of the room.
Chevronherringbone, V-shapeno presetLong training rooms where the back rows of a straight grid lose the screen.

The spread in that column is the single most useful fact about seating arrangements. On the same canvas, theatre style takes 84 people and u-shape takes 223.8× — and nothing about the floor changed. Every conversation that starts “will they fit in the small room?” is really a question about which layout you are willing to accept, because the layout moves capacity further than any room booking will.

Facing front: theatre and classroom

Theatre style is chairs in rows with no tables, and it exists to fit people in. Nobody can write, nobody can spread out a handout, and nobody can talk to anyone except the person beside them — which is exactly right for a forty-minute keynote and exactly wrong for a workshop. Rows are usually curved slightly or offset so that people see between the heads in front rather than over them.

Classroom style is the same rows with a table in front of every chair. It costs roughly half the capacity and buys the ability to write, use a laptop and put a drink down, which is why training rooms use it and conference halls do not. The trade is that simple, and it is the reason venues quote two different numbers for the same room.

Facing each other: U-shape, hollow square and boardroom

These three are the same idea at three sizes. A U-shape keeps one end open so a facilitator can walk into the middle and everyone still sees a screen; a hollow square closes it, which suits a negotiation where there is no front of the room; a boardroom table is the solid version for a group small enough to sit round one table. All three cap out fast — the open middle is expensive floor area, and past about twenty-five people the far arms can no longer hear each other.

Facing a table: banquet rounds, cabaret and pods

Round tables are for talking and eating. Full banquet rounds seat people all the way around, which is right for dinner and awkward for a speech, because part of every table has its back to the stage. Cabaret solves that by leaving the stage-side arc empty — a ten-seat round becomes a six-seat one, everyone faces front, and the room’s capacity drops accordingly. Pods are the same instinct with small tables: fast group work, poor sightlines, and the layout most likely to need rearranging halfway through a day.

Getting from a layout to a named plan

Choosing the arrangement is the first half. The second is putting names in the seats, which is where the same decision stops being about furniture and starts being about people. Once you have picked a shape here, the seating chart maker takes your guest or delegate list, seats it, and exports a chart. For a hall booking the seating plan template and table plan template pages start from the finished-document end instead, and the restaurant seating chart covers a dining room, where the arrangement is fixed and the mix of table sizes is the real decision.

Come back to this later?

Choosing the room layout happens long before the names go in, and this page will still be here. Leave your email and we will send new templates, layout ideas, and first word when Pro lands:

Seating arrangement FAQ

What are the main types of seating arrangement?

The 9 that cover almost every room booking are theatre style (rows of chairs facing front), classroom style (the same rows with tables), cabaret (rounds with the stage-side seats left empty), banquet rounds (full rounds, everyone seated), U-shape or horseshoe, pods or clusters, boardroom, hollow square and chevron. Everything else on a venue's layout list is a variation on one of those — "crescent rounds" is cabaret, "schoolroom" is classroom style, "herringbone" is chevron.

What is conference style seating?

Confusingly, two different things depending on who is saying it. To most venues and hotels, conference style means boardroom style: one long table with delegates down both sides, used for committee meetings of up to about twenty. To some conference organisers it means theatre style, because that is what a conference hall looks like. If you are booking a room, ask which the venue means before the chairs get set — the capacity difference between the two is enormous.

Which seating arrangement holds the most people?

Theatre style, by a wide margin, because it is the only layout with no tables. Of the 6 arrangements with a starting template here, drawn on the same canvas, theatre style seats 84 and u-shape seats 22 — a 3.8× spread for the same floor area. Those are the sizes these particular templates open at rather than a law of rooms, but the ordering holds anywhere: rows beat rounds, rounds beat anything with an open middle.

What is the difference between cabaret and banquet seating?

The empty chairs. Banquet rounds seat people all the way around the table, which is right for a dinner and wrong for a presentation, because a third of the room ends up with its back to the stage. Cabaret uses the same round tables but leaves the stage-side arc unseated, so everyone faces front — typically six at a table that would hold ten for dinner. That is why a cabaret room seats far fewer people than its banquet capacity suggests.

Which arrangement is best for discussion?

U-shape for a group under about twenty-five, pods above that. The U works because every person can see every other person's face without turning round, which is what makes an argument possible rather than a queue of comments aimed at the facilitator. Past twenty-five the U gets so wide that the far arms cannot hear each other, and breaking into pods of five or six beats one enormous horseshoe.

How do I choose between them?

Work backwards from what people have to do, not from the headcount. If they have to write, they need a table, which rules out theatre and cabaret-with-no-writing-space. If they have to talk to each other, they need to see faces, which rules out rows. If they have to eat, they need full rounds. The headcount only decides the question once those are settled — and if the room will not hold the arrangement the task needs, the honest answer is usually a bigger room or two sessions, not a worse layout.

Can I build these layouts here?

Yes — that is what the editor above is. It opens in theatre style (rows facing front) with 84 chairs, and the 17 templates include starting points for classroom rows, pods, cabaret, banquet rounds and the U-shape. Boardroom, hollow square and chevron have no preset, but each is one or two edits away: a boardroom is a single long table, a hollow square is four rows closed into a rectangle, and a chevron is classroom rows split and angled.

More seating chart tools