Archive for » February, 2010 «
Imagine the typical conference scene depicting hundreds of people at a convention center doing a variety of interesting meeting and tradeshow things.
Now consider this image is a hand drawn double page spread in large children’s book.
Your task as the reader is to find Waldo, the supplier and exhibitor, at the event hidden in the group. Unlike the famous Waldo with his distinctive red-and-white striped shirt, bobble hat and glasses, Waldo the supplier does not have any distinguishing characteristics. Waldo the supplier looks and acts like all of the other people in the scene. So, where’s Waldo the supplier?
As you intently scan the two-page spread, you realize that the page is full of red herrings involving deceptive use of red-and-white striped objects, just like the real children’s book Waldo. The harder you look, the more you notice that there is really no way to tell who is an attendee or an exhibitor.
Then your eye notices a tiny stripe on each individual’s name badge. Some name badges have green stripes, some yellow and some red. You conclude that attendees have a green stripe, exhibitors yellow and speakers red.
Then your brain notices an amazing pattern. All of the suppliers with yellow stripes congregate in small huddles away from attendees. As you continue to scan the page, you recognize rooms set in theater style with a podium at the front and a speaker. The attendees are all sitting facing the speaker looking at the back of heads of each other. You don’t see any exhibitors sitting with the attendees. The more you analyze the page, the more you detect that the exhibitors rarely are with other attendees, except in the exhibitions hall where they expect the attendees to just come to them.
You chuckle to yourself and say out loud, “Not much different than most conferences I’ve attended.”
A couple weeks ago, Dave and I participated in GaMPI’s Meetings Exploration Conference in Atlanta. At this event, Dave had an interesting observation that reminded me of the “Where’s Waldo” children’s book. He didn’t see many yellow-striped name badge exhibitors attending breakouts. Their absence sent a loud message to attendees. Suppliers want their business, but they don’t want to help them be successful.
As Dave and I presented two sessions on hybrid events, an unusual thing happened. Even though most suppliers are worried about how hybrid or virtual meetings will cannibalize face-to-face events, we found a Waldo, an exhibitor, attending our session. 80% of the exhibitors did not attend any GaMPI education sessions but Megan Maharry, National Sales Director from Disney did. Yes, she could have chose to follow in the footsteps of her exhibitor peers and reply to emails, play Mafia Wars, hang out in their booth or respond to RFP’s that they’ll never win. She wisely chose a different path.
Megan was present in all of the concurrent sessions. She understands that she is in the relationship business and that by attending the breakouts with the planners, she’s growing those relationships and helping attract planners that will later visit her booth. She’s building trust and sharpening her saw so she can better help her clients solve their problems. Megan doesn’t just sell brass, glass and attractions. She sells better meeting experiences. She gets that meetings mean business…that face-to-face matters.
And Megan has a deeper understanding. She really surprised us by asking us the $64,000 question: “How can we help our clients provide Hybrid Meetings along with their face-to-face events? What should we be providing as the venue to support their endeavors?” Wow, that was the right question and she got the right answer too. Megan now has a secret weapon that will help her in her consultative sales approach.
So what makes Megan better than the rest? Is it good training, a genuine interest in helping her clients, a love for the meetings industry or good genes? Dave said “It’s all of the above and I’d put big money on her employer getting more ROI out of their participation in the MEC than their competition.”
The moral of the “Where’s Waldo The Supplier” story? Suppliers, if you truly believe that the meetings and events industry is a relationship business, then you should carefully consider your actions at your next tradeshow. Suppliers don’t build and grow their professional network without taking advantage of participating in every opportunity possible. That includes participating in the breakouts to better understand your customers challenges and opportunities.
As Dave says, “Suppliers, go to more education sessions so you can be more helpful to your clients. You might actually learn something. You might book something. You might even build relationships that pay off for many years.”
What do you think? How can you attract more Waldos in your education sessions? Do you have any advice for the Waldos at your exhibitions or events?
Eeny, meeny, miny, moe
Face-To-Face or Virtual Go
My mother told me
To pick the very best one
And you are [not] it.
Often when meeting professionals consider whether to offer a face-to-face or virtual event, they feel as if the choice is best made by using a children’s counting rhyme.
You know…
Pizza, pizza, pizza pie
Offering virtual will cause our face-to-face to die
Or perhaps this is the rhyme you use. Get your fists ready.
One potato, two potato
Face-to-face galore
Hybrid or virtual
Which offers more?
Face-to-Face? Virtual? Hybrid? Which should I offer? The choice can seem daunting.
And understanding all of the dynamics involved with hybrid (offering both a face-to-face and virtual elements) or virtual events can be overwhelming. Heck, finding a common vernacular for virtual events is a maze itself.
Why? Virtual is a catchall phrase that encompasses a broad variety of terms. To the purists it only means 3D immersive environments like Eve Online, EverQuest, SecondLife, Virtual U or World of Warcraft. To others it means a high tech component that has a steep learning curve and unique software that must be downloaded–something most don’t want to do. Still to others it means something as simple as an online gathering of people.
Kelly A Graham, a Cisco System’s Virtual Events Strategist, says “A virtual event is a gathering of people who meet in online environment at a set time to acquire info, share, network and engage.” Using Kelly’s definition, a virtual event can include 2D and 3D environments, hybrid events, livestreaming, online chats, teleconferencing, telepresence, video conferencing, Webinars or Web streaming. In short, virtual is an umbrella term for any type of an event that is not face-to-face in person.
So figuring out the right mix for your audience can be overwhelming.
But won’t a virtual event cannibalize the face-to-face attendance? That’s the first reaction and fear of many.
And, it was the reaction of Mike Ray, Intel Americas’ North America Channel Sales Manager. Ray spoke recently on the Virtual Edge Summit 2010 panel: Learn How Oracle, Intel and SAP Extend Reach And Build Community With Hybrid Events.
In 2009, Ray decided to offer a hybrid event with both face-to-face and virtual live streaming components to his customers. His number one concern was if he did, would it cannibalize the face-to-face registration, costing more and reducing revenue. He and his team were concerned that the virtual element would deprive the company of vital elements, resources, and funding as less people opted to attend the face-to-face experience.
Ray said he now likens the decision to attend a face-to-face or virtual event similar to attending a baseball game. The choice: to watch a baseball game in person in the stadium or watch it at home on his large screen high definition TV.
His answer: “Depends.”
It “depends” on:
- Who’s playing
- How important the game is
- Where his seats are in the stadium
- How much his tickets would cost
- Who’s going with him
- Where the game is held
- How much is it going to cost to get there
- What the travel time would be
- What the weather is like
- What his schedule is like
Ray’s analogy has rich meaning for understanding how people decide to attend a face-to-face or virtual event. His baseball analogy identifies the criteria many use, often intuitively, when deciding to attend.
The attendee’s registration, whether face-to-face or virtual, “depends” on:
- Who will be at the event in person (both speakers and attendees)
- How important this event is professionally and personally to them as well as how unique the content and experience is
- Where the attendee will sit…is it a large event with more than 10,000 people so good seats are premium and they are going to watch the image magnification anyway or a smaller intimate experience
- How much the registration fee is
- Who in the attendee’s professional and social network is attending too
- Where is the face-to-face event being held…location, location, location…can the attendee do additional business in that location, can they bring the family and make it a mini-vacation, are there other things to do in the conference city, is it easy and quick to travel to
- How much is it going to cost to get there
- How long will it take to get there…especially in this day of long security lines, increased airport delays and constant flight cancellations
- Will weather impact travel, don’t forget 2010’s snowmageddon
- Can the attendee take the time off from work to attend the event
And did Ray’s concern about cannibalization of the face-to-face event ever materialize? No, just the opposite happened. Intel now has more people registered for the 2010 face-to-face event and for the virtual event than in 2009.
Engine, engine number nine,
Going down Chicago line,
Virtual, hybrid, face-to-face,
Which will win the meetings race?
What other criteria do you think people use when deciding to attend a face-to-face or virtual event? What is your experience with hybrid events? Share your thoughts.
When used properly, high-tech networking can increase the quantity and quality of professional connections. But to accomplish this, you’ll need an ‘Extreme Networking’ technology strategy — which starts weeks before and culminates in the face-to-face event.
Helping grow a participant’s professional network is a sure-fire way to increase loyalty. Last month, we explored how to do this with low-tech networking strategies. Here, we look at a tech-based “Extreme Networking” strategy. Note that this will necessarily vary from group to group, depending on where your members live their online lives.
Rather than try to do everything, it’s best to choose a few of the following 11 high-tech options and spend the bulk of your time building adoption and engagement – if you do, pretty soon you’ll attain the enlightened state of Extreme Networking.
1. Collect IDs
Use optional fields in event-registration and membership-renewal forms to ask attendees for their blog, Facebook, LinkedIn, and Twitter URLs. Explain the benefits of providing this information, and share your privacy policy.
2. Create event pages
Encourage attendees to RSVP via LinkedIn and Facebook event pages; updates and posts to these then will display in each person’s network stream. Provide fresh content that will encourage people to participate.
3. Use crowdsourcing
Online polling is a great way to engage your audience before the meeting. It also establishes a conduit for valuable input and a forum for attendees to meet one another.
4. Compare to connect
Some event-specific solutions allow attendees to compare their existing social networks against your registration list – and reaching out in advance to people you already know is an Extreme Networking best practice. Solutions that allow you to send a LinkedIn message, write on a person’s Facebook wall, or Direct Message Twitter followers are also very powerful.
5. Host Webinars and interviews
Schedule Webinars by conference speakers or locals from the event city who can give tips on restaurants and attractions. A pre-event Blogtalkradio series for speakers and Disney-lovers was a big hit for one association, whose attendees connected via Internet radio and text-messaging during the show.
6. Play matchmaker
Some solutions allow attendees to complete professional profiles and personal itineraries. Participants then use keywords and demographics to search for those with similar interests and schedule a time to meet. Some systems take this further and provide customized recommendations of people, sessions, or products.
7. Deploy PURLs
Powerful new solutions on the high-tech scene are personal Web pages (or PURLs) that aggregate links to session handouts, archives, exhibits visited, and attendees connected with. Oftentimes a proprietary device is used, although lead-retrieval and mobile-based solutions are quickly being adopted.
8. Monitor the hashtag
Some of the best connections come from watching others ask intelligent questions or provide insight on Twitter. Pick a unique hashtag (say, #pcma10), and ask attendees to use this when tweeting about the meeting.
9. Organize a “Tweetup” for Twitter-using attendees.
10. Game on!
Location-based apps with gaming components, such as Foursquare and Gowalla, help increase networking and connections. Encourage your hotels and local attractions to play along, and consider giving out awards to top connectors.
11. Share photos
Sites like Flickr allow attendees to deepen their relationships by sharing digital snapshots – and memories. For real-time memory-making, create a “Twitterfountain” that displays tweets and pics from the event as it’s happening.
Adoption Is Key
Too often, new technology isn’t utilized by enough participants to deliver desired results. Communication, education, and community management are the three pillars of success of encouraging adoption. As such, consider hosting a networking best practices Webinar before your meeting to teach attendees how to maximize their use of Twitter and take advantage of the power of the second degree on LinkedIn.
Reprinted with permission of Convene, the magazine of the Professional Convention Management Association. © 2009 pcma.org
It’s so dreamy, oh fantasy free me
So you can’t see me, no not at all
In another dimension, with voyeuristic intention
Well-secluded, I see all
With a bit of a mind flip
You’re there in the time slip
And nothing can ever be the same
You’re spaced out on sensation, like you’re under sedation
Let’s do the Time Warp again!
Take a step back into time with me. Let’s do the time warp again. “It’s a jump to the left. Then a step to the right.”
Let’s go back to the halls of one of the first education institutions, the university. Let’s say it’s Oxford or Cambridge or the Byzantine University. You decide.
Now, let’s walk down to biology labs. What do you see? If you’re like me, you’d probably laugh aloud or gasp at the sight of the 11th Century biology lab. It was a mix of astrological and religious influences, dead animals, potent chemical brews and intoxicating smells. It looks nothing like the biology labs of today’s high schools and universities. It’s antiquated and archaic. It looks and feels foreign to us.
Now, let’s continue our time warp field trip and move to one of the university’s standard classrooms used for history, math or English. Amazingly, not much has changed from today’s standard higher education classrooms. It’s not as antiquated or outdated.
This classroom feels very familiar and common. It’s home. There’s a podium at the front of the room for the professor to grasp. Chairs are arranged neatly in rows facing the lectern. We can just imagine students listening passively to the teacher while taking notes. The only difference is that there probably isn’t a screen for PowerPoint projection or a wireless lavaliere.
Now, let’s time warp forward to today and into a major convention center or hotel that’s holding an annual conference. Walk down the hallway and in to one of the sessions. It doesn’t look much different than the 11th Century university lecture hall. Besides the fact that the room may be carpeted and the chairs are covered in fabric, not much is different.
Could it be time for a change?
Why is it that with all the education advancements in how people learn we’ve not changed the way we deliver presentations? Why is it that with current neuroscience brain research and reports from major universities on how people learn in a digital age that we continue to promote ballroom presentations where attendees sit in nice rows, look at the back of each other’s heads and quietly passively listen? Why is it that smart conference planners, seat the audience in rounds or pods, but don’t require the presenters to incorporate small group interaction? Why is it that when research teaches us that listening is the least effective way to learn that we continue to make it the primary conference experience? Why is it that at some conferences, attendees learn more from hallway conversations than from sessions? Passive listening is certainly a great way to kill curiosity and the thirst for exploration.
Is it because the general sessions and breakouts with lecture based monologues are efficient and effective? Is it because it’s easy to steer people into large rooms like a cattle drive and compel them to sit quietly, listen and learn? Anyone that ever watched the Rocky Horror Picture Show in the theatres knows better than to just sit there passively. It’s about participation and engagement.
So who is that efficient and effective for anyway? It’s certainly not efficient and effective for the attendee or their learning. It’s the least effective way for them to learn and the least efficient return on their registration dollar.
“With your hands on your hips. You bring your knees in tight. But it’s the pelvic thrust that really drives you insane, Let’s do the time warp again.” Jump forward into an annual conference of the future. What do you see? Is it still the 11th Century model? Or is it different?
Could it be time for a change? What do you think?
What event professional do you know that takes full responsibility for the entire attendee experience at their face-to-face event or meeting?
What would meetings and events look like if meeting professional’s quit blaming others for the content, programming and experience of the event?
For the past 18 months I’ve consistently heard meetings and event professionals denounce the government and organizations for lack of support of face-to-face meetings and events. I’ve heard them cry and bemoan that their value is not appreciated by their executives, the Board of Directors, the public and even the President. Many have said that our industry associations need to do more to promote the vale of face-to-face meetings.
Typically, when event professionals try to educate their boss, executives or Board members on their value, they talk about the value of logistics they perform. You know, cost savings, cost avoidance, those kind of things. Or they state the past conference’s evaluation smile factor. Or they quote the economic impact of meetings as the primary reason to meet as handed down from our industry associations. Or they start talking about the number of jobs each meeting creates.
So what! The publication industry created thousands of jobs and had a positive impact on the economy. But that didn’t stop that industry from experiencing disruptive innovation.
So tell me, how can you prove your value to the CEO or executives if you can’t prove the value of the content or the programming? How do you know that lessons learned at your conference were applied to your attendees’ business? What were the results six or twelve months after your meeting?
How can meetings and event professionals continue to distance themselves from the real meat and experiences of the conference? Are we seriously kidding ourselves that meetings and events, for meetings sake are more important than the content and programming of that meeting?
If that’s the case, then no wonder the government, elected officials, and executives have doubted the value of meetings. We’ve tried to prove the dollar’s worth of a meeting without proving the value of the content of the meeting. That’s like saying schooling is important because it provides hundreds of thousands of jobs and provides a place for our kids to go during the day. Yet, we hold our public schools to a high standard and expect specific outcomes. We’ve standardized the education process and if the kids don’t meet specific knowledge and skills assessments, they fail and the schools fail. And who wants to send their kids to a failing, poor-rated schools?
With limited professional development dollars per head per company, who wants to send their employees to a conference that doesn’t stimulate the heck out of them from a learning perspective? Oh, but the content and learning opportunities are not the meeting professional’s job, you say.
Can you imagine what would happen if the public started failing meetings and events because the content and programming was below expectations? Oh wait, that did happen and we call it the AIG effect. But instead of increasing the value of the content and programming, meetings professionals have cried foul! Or we’ve screamed, “But my meetings aren’t like AIG’s.”
Guess what, the public doesn’t care. Society has moved the goal posts and imposed new expectations on meetings and events. They want new measures of performance! And attendees want content that is relevant, that pushes them to change things up when they get back to the shop. They don’t want another set of meeting rooms with chairs in a row!
When are meeting and event professionals going to wake up and measure the ROI of the content and programming elements that they put into the meeting from the beginning? That means spending more time crafting the right overarching meeting’s experience and education goals. That means allocating additional resources to securing the right speakers that understand the content and good adult learning techniques. That means focusing on the learner objectives of each workshop and session. That means we must also measure the outputs (months after the meeting) to see if the attendees walked away with the right learnings that we intended.
When are we going to take the bull by the horns and help drive the right speakers, programming elements and content for the meeting? Ultimately, that’s what makes or breaks the meeting. Suppliers (including 3rd parties and consultants) attend primarily for networking. Attendees attend primarily for the content, at least that’s how they justify attendance to their boss–by the content. They don’t justify their attendance based on the meeting’s experience, or networking. If you don’t get the attendees there, the suppliers and consultants don’t have anyone to network with.
When was the last time you said, “I’m going to return to that conference? It was so well organized. I didn’t stand in line for registration. The rooms were set perfectly. The closing party was a blast. The food was great. So I’m going to go back again.”
Ha! Not if you are a true attendee. You grade the value of conferences and events on the experience you had, whether the content met your expectations, whether the speakers delivered, whether you had emotional connections or whether you learned anything that can be applied to your business or position.
So when are event professionals going to see themselves as the partner in the attendee’s experience and not just the logistics order taker? When are our meetings industry associations going to step up to the plate and teach meetings professionals how to craft the conference experience appropriately with an emphasis on being attendee-centric and a focus on the education design of the content? [Stop saying that's another department's job. You've just reduced yourself to an administrative assistant to that department!]
I’m tired of watching the meetings and events professionals default to the old way of planning where they distance themselves from the content of the program. If meeting professionals don’t step up to the plate and see themselves as the strategic partner to the program and content, then they will continue to sound like a dripping faucet to the rest of the world.
Just saying…
What say ye?
Recent Comments