MC² has released a new report on the future of exhibiting titled, “Can Exhibiting be Friendlier? What Exhibit Marketers Want for the Future.” The report is based on the feedback from 57 event marketers and event managers who participated in the company’s virtual focus group held in summer 2010. The free report is available on MC²’s website: www.mc-2.com/FutureOfExhibiting.html.

MC² conducted the virtual focus group to examine the future of exhibit management and to identify ways to make exhibiting more friendly in the next five years. The report reveals current challenges and highlights three essentials to successful exhibiting programs in the future, according to focus group participants:

* Standardizing process for repeatable details to allow time to focus on brand-building strategies
* Having management buy-in and better metrics to demonstrate ROI and the value of trade show programs
* Increasing use of technology in the design of exhibits and trade show programs

“Face-to-face marketing events are critical to building deeper and profitable relationships. As we look to a new decade, MC² wanted to identify ways to best support event marketers efforts to develop and deliver successful programs in the future,” said Rob Murphy, CMO, MC². “While we found that many of the issues confronting the industry 10 years ago are still applicable today, there is an opportunity for the industry to come together to resolve these issues.”

The report further reveals the event marketers perspectives on how advancements in technology have influenced event management, the changing role of suppliers and vendors, and barriers to professional development.

Download Full Report

My career path leading up to the tradeshow industry started in the professional theatre.   I worked in management on Broadway in the 1990’s, specifically in a General Managers busy office in New York City.   What’s amazing to me are the similarities as well as one major difference between the commercial theatre (Broadway being the most well known) and our exhibit and tradeshow field.  In many ways they are parallel tracks.

There’s no Business like Show Business

To get a show produced on Broadway, the lead producer needs to hire a General Manager to run and oversee all the details of the production. If that sounds familiar it’s because it mirrors the show organizer and general contractor relationship in our industry.     Once the producer hires the general manager, the business really begins: hiring a director (think exhibit manager) casting the actors (think exhibit staff) renting the actual theater (think venue) hiring designers and set builders (think exhibit designers and builders and all the show labor via the stagehands union (think appointed contractors).  We even sell tickets (think badges) and invite an audience to see that show (think attendees on a busy tradeshow floor)!

My time spent in this theatrical General Management office taught me a lot, but the common thread through all these separate show components was ultimately to serve the production. The Broadway production is the # 1 priority and each department strived to serve the vision and needs of that project.    And for me, that’s exactly where things start to move “off-track” within our tradeshow model. We need to fine-tune and focus on our # 1 priority; serving the exhibitors basic needs and keeping them happy so they’ll come back and do it again and again.

Anybody can have their first theatrical project produced on Broadway; all you need is the money to hire a GM and cover capitalization of the production. It’s the truly successful producers who do it over again, year after year. The Broadway world used to call them impresarios. Now they just call them smart (and lucky) businessmen and women.

Let’s Go on with the Show!

What can our tradeshow industry take from the Broadway model to make it easier and more attractive for brands to speak face-to-face with news prospects about their businesses? How many hurdles do we collectively need to put up for our exhibitors to stumble and trip over? How can we start to remove those tradeshow hurdles one-by one?

I had the opportunity to participate in a panel discussion titled “Improve Exhibitor Satisfaction” at PCMA’s Convening Leaders meeting this week in Las Vegas.   PCMA is the Professional Convention Managers Association, and their membership is primarily comprised of association show organizers – with a heavy concentration of those in the medical industry.  It had been a number of years since I had attended a PCMA event, and I was quite impressed with the turnout at the MGM Grand for the meeting which, according to the PCMA, was the largest they have ever seen.

I was also impressed with the numbers of topics on the conference agenda that had to do with re-thinking the existing trade show model in an effort to deliver additional value to exhibitors.  A brief listing of some of these “out of the box” sessions on the trade show model included:

•  The 24/7/365 Association – the examination of adding a virtual events and virtual education to the trade show

•  Position Your Show for Long Term Success – a discussion on metric-based assessment

•  Tradeshow Trends – A discussion of ideas transforming the trade show space.

Adding Value

There was a common theme to these discussions that centered on the idea of finding new ways to improve the trade show’s value proposition.  Value was certainly the catchword at the session I participated in as a speaker.   Organizer’s in attendance were interested to learn about new and innovative offerings that would extend the value of trade show participation and deliver more of what the exhibitor wants in exposure and sales opportunities.

Of course, the conversation included mention of the exhibitor’s concerns with unchecked and unsustainable cost increases.   But, as it was pointed out, part of the reason exhibitors are consumed with controlling costs is because organizers haven’t typically done a very good job of assisting exhibitors with identifying and validating the outcomes of their investments.   Without validated data on show performance, exhibitors tend to concentrate on the part of their trade show participation that they can control – their spend.

Measuring Outcomes

The natural segue from this part of the discussion was the call for standardized show performance metrics that will assist the exhibitor to evaluate the trade show opportunity and compare one show to another when making trade show selection decisions.   After all, it was agreed, exhibitors would gladly invest in trade shows at increased levels if they knew it was proven to deliver on corporate marketing imperatives.

And that is where I noticed something distinctly different about this particular conversation about the challenges our industry faces.    While the topic of discussion wasn’t necessarily groundbreaking , the level of participation and the questions asked signaled a significant change of attitude – at least in this particular session.

Rather than pushing back with the standard fare – “we can do audits, but exhibitors never ask for them”, or “it’s the exhibitor’s job to follow up on show leads” – this crowd wanted to know more.   As organizers, they wanted to know what could be done, from a strategic standpoint, to connect with their exhibitor clients in a more significant way and help them identify the sales and marketing outcomes that would secure their continued participation.   Words like open dialogue, partnership, and strategic marketing had replaced tactical thinking centered on the development of a new form for the show kit, or the addition of a new rule to the event’s exhibitor rules and regulations.

What’s Next?

The question becomes – was this an isolated incident?   Or does this experience represent the beginning of a new day in our industry?     Let us know if you see other signs that customer satisfaction really is on the agenda in the trade show industry.

Please offer your observations and comments today.  Our customers are waiting.

I had an interesting experience when I was a plane a few weeks ago.   I sat next to a university professor who is in charge of his department’s exhibit program.  His university exhibits in three exhibitions per year to showcase their programs to prospective students.  He started with some questions and the asked for suggestions about how they could improve their experiences.   I won’t bore you with all the details but one question came up at the end that I hear from many exhibitors: “Do I need to use the official service providers for the show?”

The answer is surprising for many.  No, you don’t have to use the official sevice providers – any of them. As as exhibitor, you have choices, of which the official provider is just one.  Sometimes it does make sense to use the official show service providers.  Sometimes it makes more sense to use your own exhibitor-appointed contractor (EAC).  Most important, though, is that it is your choice.

Many factors weigh into what is best for you, such as:

· Price
· Knowledge of your exhibit program
· Experience
· Familiarity with the city/venue
· Relationships

The next time you are at show, do your research, weigh the options and pick the one that is best for you to work with.  I promise you it is worth the time.

While it seems certain that an economic recovery is finally underway in the United Sates and that the exhibit and event industry is coming back, it is also clear that our industry will not return to its pre 2008 levels anytime soon, if ever.  This has put tremendous pressure on all of the companies that support the exhibit and event industry to change their business models to drive future growth.  The question is how that will happen.

A much smaller event and exhibit industry with slower growth will enviably push all suppliers to look for new revenue opportunities.  These will take many forms; there will be consolidation in the supplier base, there will be companies offering services outside of their traditional core businesses, partnerships between companies that traditionally have not worked together or in many cases competed, and the creation of new services.

These changes will make many people very nervous as it will challenge the way companies have traditionally done business and made money.  Change is messy and not all players will adapt to thrive in this new economy.  Some players will try to use brute force to hold onto or gain market share. History shows this rarely works in the long term.  Like it or not these changes are coming, but if we seize the opportunity that change presents to us, this could be a great moment to revitalize an industry that everyone involved with is passionate about.

Change is messy and never goes in a straight line, but there are two fundamental guideposts that all of us must not lose sight of as we evolve our industry.  First is the exhibitor, our main customer. For them, change needs to bring lower costs, better service and measurable results.  If we do not meet the customers goals, these exhibitors will find other ways and other countries to market their products and services.  The second is in the middle of tough competition, we cannot have practices by any player that limit competition, restrict the emergence of new ideas or drive customers away from event marketing overall.

All players have a stake in the outcome of these seismic changes in the industry and the EIC supports the idea that the industry must evolve or risk becoming irrelevant.  What the EIC has started is the process of laying out best practices that do not tell any one constituent how to evolve their business, but rather lay out guidelines to insure we have the most open and fair markets for companies to innovate new products and services.

A Call for a Trade Show Rating System

If you Google “trade show rating system” you won’t be surprised to find a complete lack of information.   One would think that in this multi-billion industry there would be some objective third party information that would help to inform and assist its customers on which shows to choose.   But NO!

To Rate or Not to Rate

The blogosphere and social media discussions related to “rating” and “trade shows” seems to focus on the rating of leads and lead systems.  While this is a noble pursuit in my view, it skips an important step – the development of data that helps distinguish which events to invest in to generate those leads in the first place.

Much of the consternation among our exhibitor clients these days seems to be about their frustrations with the ability to predict and/or control costs.   But I would submit that those frustrations would be greatly abated if there were clear data on the prospective outcomes of the monies that were invested.   In other words, the heightened concerns about cost are greatly exacerbated by the lack of market data.    Exhibitors seek to control costs because they don’t have any other verifiable data that can be reviewed, analyzed and acted upon.

A rating system for trade shows shouldn’t be such a novel idea.

Consider the other places that customers routinely access rating data to aid their buying decisions:

•            In traditional media outlets advertisers are very accustomed to data provided by BPA for print advertising, by Arbitron for radio advertising, and by Nielsen for TV advertising.

But that’s not all.   There are even rating systems for new technology marketing modes like:

•            Email rating systems   – there are any number of systems that enable bulk emailers to rate products and services of bulk email suppliers

•            Web ad rating system – there are also numbers of web ad rating systems that enable web advertisers to rate the effectiveness of web ads based upon click throughs, relevancy, etc.

There’s even a rating system for customer complaints:

•            Pissedconsumer.com – rates suppliers based upon customer complaints.   A five star rating means that the supplier in question has excessive numbers of complaints about them.   It’s a different take on Consumer Reports.

Speaking of Consumer Reports that long-standing consumer product-rating agency now offers subscribers mobile reports.  Just download an app to your cell phone and you can have access to one of their consumer reports while you shop.

Why Can’t That Be Done in the Trade Show Industry?

If Consumer Reports can put together comparative product info on products that cost as little as $50, why can’t the trade show industry, with exhibitors who budget in the millions for some shows, have a system that allow our customers to gain comparative market info prior to making their buying decisions?

After all, advertisers/marketers are accustomed to this type of information.  Lacking verifiable market data on trade shows one can appreciate why a good percentage of senior marketing executives are more trusting of their television advertising spends than they are of trade show spends.    I believe it’s well past the time that this dynamic is changed.

At industry meetings in the past show organizers have been heard to say “the exhibitors don’t ask for this kind of information.”   While it may be true that the exhibitors haven’t demanded this information as a pre-condition of participation, it is also true that the lack of its availability limits the show organizer’s ability to prove the value of their events to even themselves.   And, if they can’t prove the value of the event to themselves how do they communicate value to an exhibitor?

It’s a long standing tenet of business administration that whatever one measures will improve.    Armed with meaningful and verifiable data, our natural human instincts direct us to the necessary ideas and innovations needed to create continuous improvement.     Lacking any kind of meaningful data or feedback is like wandering in the wilderness without a map, a compass, or a GPS.   We are prone to walk in circles and make the same mistakes over and over again.

One Possible Approach

The conversation about show ratings is not a new one in our industry.    For years there are those that have called for “show audits”.   While audited attendance data is a step in the right direction, the audits by themselves can fall short of the mark.

Show management should measure not only what they produce in terms of the audience, but also how they price that opportunity.   One possible recommendation is the development of two indices that describe the results of their efforts.

These indices would recognize that shows have both a marketing and sales value.  If shows started to routinely produce data for these indices exhibitors would have a much better yardstick to compare events against one another.

1.            Marketing Index This index would give exhibitors a broad-based rule of thumb that would let them know the general marketing reach of show participation.   And, I believe, this number would be relatively easy to generate.
Marketing Index =   Total Verified Buyers / Avg. Total Costs per booth

2. Sales Index This Index would give exhibitors very specific information on the value of exhibiting based upon sales generated at the show.    While more challenging to generate this number, it would be a far more compelling yardstick.

Sales Index =   Total Sales / Avg. Total Costs per booth

Note: To produce this Index show management would need to conduct a Sales Conversion Survey for the show.

What Do You Think?

Let us hear from you.   Do you have any comments, suggestions, ideas on how the trade show industry could create an independent, third party information system that enable the exhibitors to better evaluate which shows they should invest in?

Please offer your opinion today.  Our customers are waiting.

In the recent past when choosing shows in which to participate, we may have trusted our intuition and the integrity of our show organizers to help us decide, but today is a different world. Our budgets are shrinking and undergoing ever-tighter scrutiny. We’re uncertain of the quality of the audience. Are they our target market?  Do they have purchasing power? Are they making critical buying decisions?

Audits of attendance numbers and demographics provide show organizers with independent, third-party certification of their registration data and verification process. This audited data guarantees to us as exhibitors, sponsors and stakeholders, an accurate number and comprehensive profile of all markets represented. It proves the quality of the audience in attendance, is the foundation for all other measurement metrics we may use, and provides us with credibility in and transparency of our show management’s attendance data.

Every organizer, as a best business practice and at no cost to us, should provide audited attendance and demographics; however, only 3% of all US tradeshows are currently audited. We can help change that statistic!

As exhibitors, audited data is ours FREE for the asking! But we must ASK for it from our organizers.

We can help spread the word to other exhibitors about the industry’s need for audited attendance data. With our help, we can make a positive move toward the implementation of this industry best practice.

We CAN make a difference!

I’ve gotten interested lately in a phenomenon that I’ll call “nonresponsive markets.”  I’m no economist, so I’m sure I’m not coming up with anything new here, and it probably already has a (different) name.  But what concerns me is this: I wonder whether we’re seeing an example of a nonresponsive market in the healthcare convention industry.  I hope not.

My wife is a speech pathologist.  It continues to amaze me that, even in the midst of the worst economic downturn in our lifetimes, she still gets one to two completely unsolicited job offers every week.  The demand for speech therapists is sky high, and has been high for decades.  You’d think with that kind of demand, she could command the salary of a baseball pitcher.  Alas – no.

The same seems true in nursing.  America suffers from a chronic shortage of nurses, yet nurse wages remain relatively low.

Why is it that some markets don’t seem to respond to the ordinary supply and demand pressures that are supposed to dictate a free market?  I don’t have the answer to that (though I have some theories about both of the examples above).  But here’s the question it causes me to ask about our industry:  why is it that certain sectors of the trade show and convention industry don’t seem to respond to the ordinary supply and demand pressures of a free market, either?

Specifically: we (HCEA) have been telling the healthcare association community for years that a contraction was bound to happen in exhibit halls.  Ever increasing show costs in the face of a shrinking R&D pipeline, increased scrutiny of the measurable return of convention participation, and now the recession, made that about as sure a prediction as one can make.  Yet neither associations nor, in many cases, their suppliers, seem to have responded in ordinary ways.  Space rates haven’t gone down.  Costs of exhibiting haven’t gone down.  Or even leveled off.  Why is that?

The worst thing for a market is inflexibility.  Sometimes inflexibility is introduced from outside, such as government price controls.  Maybe in other cases it comes from other sources.  But where is it coming from in the trade show and convention industry?

The era of unscrutinized company participation in trade shows and conventions is over.  As it should be.  Don’t get me wrong: I remain convinced that we have a great story to tell, and once it’s out there fully, trade shows and conventions will stand up to scrutiny better most other sales or marketing channels.

But some associations, trade show organizers and their service contractors still don’t seem to grasp the full scope of this.  They try to shore up sagging revenue streams by raising rates or adding on new fees.  This is only going to exacerbate the problem.  An inflexible market, like an inflexible bridge, can withstand pressure to a point, then it catastrophically collapses.  When it happens to a bridge, people have to drive around.  When it happens to a market, companies find other ways to reach their customers.

Let’s all work together to make sure this doesn’t happen in the trade show and convention industry.  Flexibility is the key.  If we remain flexible, there is absolutely no doubt in my mind, the best days of the trade show and convention marketing industry are ahead of it.

Members of the Trade Show Exhibitors Association (TSEA), comprising the world’s exhibit marketing leaders, along with exhibit builders, agencies, show producers and other vested suppliers are openly collaborating at levels never before seen. Results of such collaboration are expected to create new efficiencies that will ultimately serve and benefit the exhibit and event marketing ecosystem as a whole. With that goal in mind, TSEA convened its inaugural Red Diamond Congress event, a three-day leadership summit held in Orlando, FL, April 25-27, 2010. The event brought together many industry leaders to directly address such key issues as third-party audits and housing and labor practices. Results included significant understanding and collaborative insight into the issues, potential solutions and a roadmap forward. The full white paper, produced in conjunction with George P. Johnson, is available at www.tsea.org

The following are examples of the key findings and recommendations:

• 95% of attendees believe that certified, independent, third-party attendance and demographic data would help validate continued investment in a show.
• Housing bureaus should adopt a customer service orientation when dealing with corporate marketers, in recognition of their status as true value generators. The needs of exhibitors and their companies should be considered at all times.
• More efficient and effective labor management can free up allocated budget and resources. These, in turn, can be invested into additional activities and promotions that can (1) improve the performance and increase the overall value of corporate exhibit programs and (2) enhance profit for show producers.

TSEA expressly wishes to thank all Red Diamond Congress attendees as well as the following supporters for helping to make the event possible:  Orlando Convention & Visitors Bureau, Orange County Convention Center, Czarnowski, George P. Johnson, Universal Studios, Walt Disney World Resort; BPA Worldwide, Skyline Exhibits, Centerplate, Fantail Consulting & Technologies, Exhibit Surveys, LMG; SmartCity; Pictura Graphics, Momentum Communications, FedEx Graphics, Contact Keeper, and MMI.

The following communique was distributed by David R. Causton, General Manager, McCormick Place to all industry stakeholders regarding the new legislation which impacts trade shows at McCormick Place which was enacted in Illinois on May 27, 2010.

Dear Stakeholders:

On behalf the Metropolitan Pier and Exposition Authority, I am proud to announce that a new day has dawned in the Chicago convention industry.  On May 27, 2010, the Illinois General Assembly enacted historic legislation in response to your demands for a sweeping transformation in the way business is conducted on MPEA premises.  As a result of this legislation, show management, contractors and exhibitors will realize immediate and long-term benefits, and Chicago will become an even more competitive and attractive destination for conventions, trade shows, expositions and meetings.

While this legislation is effective upon enactment, the implementation process has only just begun.  Preliminary preparations have long been underway, and the Authority will soon finalize a full-scale implementation plan in cooperation with its key partners.  Certain changes will be implemented promptly.  Other changes are wholesale modifications to the way business is conducted on our premises and thus will require a lengthier implementation period.  The following examples illustrate the myriad complex tasks now required:

√               While the legislation expands the type of work that exhibitors may perform in their booths, it directs the Authority to develop rules and regulations to ensure that these new exhibitor rights are exercised consistent with the training and safety requirements for such work.

√               Exhibitors may now unload and load privately owned vehicles using non-motorized hand trucks and dollies in areas designated by MPEA for such purposes.  The Authority must evaluate the logistics of this new policy and identify the areas where such unloading and loading may occur safely.

√              The legislation establishes new rules governing when show managers and contractors may charge exhibitors for labor services on a straight-time, time-and-one-half or double-time basis and how such services must be billed.  The implementation of this provision will require an audit of current wage structures and a new communications piece regarding labor costs and billing practices.

√             While the legislation eliminates “stand-by labor” and requires all union stewards to be “working stewards,” it authorizes the Authority to exercise its discretion to determine whether more than one working steward may be necessary depending on the building or show at issue.  The Authority will develop protocols for evaluating when more than one working steward may be required.

√              The legislation establishes a new Advisory Council to represent the interests of all stakeholders and regularly advise the Authority on critical operations issues.  To illustrate, the Authority now has the legal right to determine the work jurisdictions of “show labor” and crew sizes when appropriate on MPEA premises.  The Authority may only, however, exercise these rights after consultation with the Advisory Council.  For this reason, the Advisory Council will be established as promptly as possible to facilitate a resolution of these important policy considerations.

√               At present, MPEA’s FOCUS One is the exclusive provider of electrical services to show managers and exhibitors.  By virtue of the legislation, MPEA may no longer serve as the exclusive provider, and customers may now choose either an in-house electrical contractor or an outside electrical contractor approved by the Authority.  The Authority will begin to develop a list of approved electrical contractors and modify the FOCUS One model to accommodate this change.

√             The legislation requires itemized billing statements for utility services provided by MPEA and establishes pricing guidelines for food and beverage contracts.  An audit of current practices and new communications pieces are necessary to implement this change.

√             The Authority is solely responsible for administering and enforcing these new legislative requirements and must now establish the necessary governing regulations and enforcement mechanisms, including procedures for audits and contract reviews.

As the above issues and others are resolved, the Authority and its partners will then be required to amend current agreements and substantially revise existing MPEA policies and procedures, including, but not limited to, the following:

√              License Agreements

√              Registration Agreements

√               Right of Entry Agreements

√              MPEA Meeting Planners Guides

√              Exhibitor Manuals

√              MPEA Facility Protection Guidelines

√              McCormick Place Exhibitor and Utility Ordering Guides

√              Informational Publications on the MPEA Website

Undoubtedly, a great deal of work remains to be accomplished.  MPEA and its partners embrace this challenge and reaffirm their commitment to implement this historic legislation in the most expeditious, efficient and communicative manner possible.  Until further notice, you should continue to rely on existing agreements, arrangements, practices and policies. In the meantime, the Authority will continue to finalize the full-scale implementation plan and will communicate with you promptly upon its completion.

As has been said before, we are truly grateful for your support and diligence in this important endeavor and appreciate your insight and patience as we continue this collaborative venture.  The future of Chicago’s convention industry is bright, and the best is yet to come thanks to your dedication and commitment.