I’d echo what Paul said above…

Regardless of how folks define virtual events, its really important to recognize that they are fundamentally different than face-to-face activities. They serve a different need and purpose in the relationship and sales cycle. A mix of the right marketing touches, whether in-person, virtual or otherwise is required to build and foster relationships between brands and their audience. Understanding the right number, type, frequency and cadence of these touches is the holy grail for marketers…

@Leesa Barnes – That a wondeful, simple yet powerful definition. I like it a lot. Thanks for adding to the discussion!

@Swan – Thanks for adding your feedback. I spent a long time on the phone with Malcolm and I don’t think he believes that virtual events are equivalnet to in-person events at all. I do think Malcolm believes that all face-to-face events like conferences will have some type of virtual component within a couple years.

You bring up some interesting points about virtual events providing a different experience from face-to-face. I’m not willing yet to say they are better, just different. Still wrapping my head around better/worse and different. Great thoughts to ponder for a while. Thanks again.

I got stuck at the beginning with the semantics of event versus experience. I agree with you in theory and think Jay is asking the right question about interactions and tools. I think the uphill challenge is that Webster defines an event as something that happens : occurrence : a noteworthy happening : a social occasion or activity. We’ll have to explore this more with #eventprofs.

Thanks again for the great feedback. It’s worth gold!

“In the meetings industry, there is a lot of discussion of virtual meetings and events. So what are virtual meetings and events?”…

I think Jay is on the right track with his question about what kinds of interactions we want and which kinds of tools we use to create those.

I’m thinking that we need to kind of define what a virtual “event” is as opposed to virtual interactions and experiences.

It may just be a matter of semantics, but I’m a big believer in categorizing an event as one where people are physically together and experiencing a common activity (which can take many forms). This kind of event can certainly have virtual components to it to extend the reach and complement the live activity, but I question whether something that is only virtual or online can be categorized as an “event”.

If we want to call something virtual an “event”, then I think the way to do that is to connect it in some way to a live event – creating a common experience and connection where the participants share content and an overall experience together in a “live” environment – that is in real time.

We’re starting to see some good examples of that such as the event that @pinnovation ran from ASAE the other day where he brought together live and virtual attendees into one common space and gave them both a shared experience and some different experiences based on their location (in room or in cyberspace), yet it was all live and real time so that there was an “event” element to it.

With things like on demand webcasts and virtual emulation environments (Second Life like environments), often there is a “live” aspect to it, in that it is run at a specific time, but since no one is actually live together in the same physical space – I’m not sure I can call that an “event”. It’s a virtual interaction or experience and has some event-like elements, but it is too disconnected, in my thinking, to be an actual event. So, I prefer the term virtual interaction or experience for these kinds of technologies.

There is no doubt that I am playing with words a little bit here. And, I do believe there are some valuable tools and reporting structures that virtual environments can provide that can help event marketers to create more pipeline and event measurement, but I think it’s important to create some distinctions and not fall prey to what some of the virtual tradeshow platform vendors would have us believe that virtual events are better than physical events and will eventually replace them.

I just don’t believe that, nor do I think it will happen.

It’s probably a losing battle on my part as so many people have already adopted the idea of virtual events to mean anything that is virtual and has content attached to it.

The important thing now is probably to get people to realize that Jay’s questions are the important questions – and call it what you will – it’s still about understanding what you want to do, who your audience is, what will deliver value to them and then finding the right technologies and tools to meet those objectives.

“Will virtual events replace in-person events?” is the wrong question (asked elsewhere, not here). The better question is “What kinds of interactions do we want our attendees to have? Then, which formats & technologies will best support those interactions?”