Fork In The Road Blog

Events: Technology. Design. Strategy.

Apple Just Showed The Event Industry What Disruption Looks Like

white label event mobile app

Apple made an announcement during its Worldwide Developers Conference in June (2017) that has repercussions for the entire event industry. Enforcement of rule 4.2.6 of the App Store Review Guidelines has severely impacted white label event mobile app developers. For those wondering what disruption in the event industry looks like, this is one beautiful example of the road ahead.

Apple Takes A Bite Out Of An Industry

Apple’s rule 4.2.6 states, “Apps created from a commercialized template or app generation service will be rejected.” Apple is enforcing the rule as a way to clear spam from the Apple App Store, but it impacts millions of legitimate and useful apps across many industries, including the live event industry.

There are hundreds of white label event mobile app developers in the global event industry, which means tens of thousand of white-label apps have been released and updated year after year for various events. Some, most, or maybe all of those (none of the developers knows for sure, and Apple isn’t super communicative about it) will be likely rendered obsolete by the end of 2017.

The initial reactions from the white label developer set ranged from (paraphrasing) “this is something big, but good riddance to the white label app model” to “it’s not that big of a deal, we got this” to “Apple isn’t talking about us. All of our apps are unique.”

As the weeks progressed, however, the “this is kind of serious” camp appeared to be justified in their paranoia and the “nothing to see here” folks quickly changed their minds as the Apple App Store began rejecting white label event apps much sooner than expected. The few hold out developers that haven’t been impacted yet remain confident that the crisis is overblown.

There are remedies for Apple’s crackdown. The top contender in the solutions column seems to be a so-called universal “container” app, which has both benefits and drawbacks depending on the event type and event organization. Some developers are revisiting an HTML5 mobile web solution or tinkering with the code on their white-label apps to see if they can still make the cut with Apple.

The Immediate Impact On Event Organizers

Event organizers have more to think about than Apple’s attempt at housekeeping. For many, this disruption is just one more thing none of them wants to deal with. The smart ones will immediately phone their event mobile app developers of record to discuss their options, although the options may not be entirely clear.

Organizers that opt (or have no other choice than) to go with a container app will have to revise their app download instructions for attendees. After all, The Apple rule only affects Apple device users. Organizers still have to accommodate Android, Windows, Blackberry, and increasingly, Amazon device users (and that’s only in the U.S. and Canada).

In the best-case scenario, container app users will have at least three additional steps to take after they go to the app store. More complexity could mean lower adoption rates and/or the need for more tech support.

With container apps in the mix, selecting a mobile app developer from this point on will be more complicated as buyers will again have a learning curve to navigate and no successful case studies on which to rely at least in the immediate future.

If some or all of the white label app developers figure out what the threshold for acceptance or rejection is at the Apple App Store, it’s likely that the degree of customization required to avoid the axe will drive up the cost of event mobile apps.

Just When Event Mobile Apps Were Catching On

This level of disruption has, up until now, been rather unusual for the event industry. Much-hyped companies have certainly failed in the past, but most event technology either never catches on (the multiple attempts to introduce virtual trade shows is a prime example) or it catches on slowly (by Internet-era standards). Forced extinction (if that’s what it turns out to be) is new.

The event industry has (without asking) become dependent on event mobile apps. The cost savings over printed show directories, dependence on digital ad revenue, convenience afforded to customers, and meeting of attendee expectations in a mobile world has cemented the relationship between organizers and apps. It doesn’t seem plausible that organizers will revert to paper.

The speed with which this disruption occurred—from the date of the original announcement until Apple began rejecting white-label apps that should have breezed through the previous approval process—was blinding. It’s only been about two and a half months. It’s shocking to an industry that has remained relatively unchanged for fifty years.

The Apple rule enforcement is inopportune since white label event mobile apps have finally, it seems, reached the “must have” status for event organizers. Apps hold a coveted, semi-permanent position in the event budget and attendees are beginning to expect a mobile-optimized event experience.

Get Ready For More Disruption.

Even though there is still a population of digital deniers—event organizers more interested in proving their relevance than preparing to be made irrelevant—a growing number of industry observers have lately wondered out loud about the inevitability of disruption.

Some thought leaders describe a “death by a thousand cuts” scenario in which smaller, less impactful disturbances begin to have a cumulative effect that drags the industry if not down then at least in an entirely new direction. Apple’s rule 4.2.6 could be the first cut.

The story is yet to unfold about how the white label event mobile app developers win the day or die trying. As some have suggested, storming the doors of Apple with digital torches and pitchforks demanding a reversal of the rule is one option. It’s more likely that most developers will adapt and a few will not survive. Either way, it’s a lesson for the event business as a whole.

To remain vibrant, event organizers must apply three new rules: be vigilant (one change from a foundational technology provider can send ripples of disruption across an industry), treat disruption as an opportunity to adopt new ways of doing business, and make adaptation part of the organization’s DNA.

Apple gave white-label apps to the event industry and, apparently, can take them (theirs at least) away. This is what disruption looks like. Buckle up.

Crowdfunding Your Conference

The trade show and conference business used to be far more entrepreneurial than it is today. Back in the day, almost anyone with a great idea and a few friends could launch an event. Today, most of the new launches come from corporations, media companies and trade associations. The number of entrepreneurs in the b-to-b event industry has dwindled not because there are no more great ideas, but because the cash is harder to come by or the risk is too great for just one or a handful of friends to give it a go. That could change if the crowdfunding tactics being pioneered by artists and techies catch on in the conference world.

Crowdfunding is a system of investment that pools the financial resources of friends and strangers together to finance specific projects. Most of the online crowdfunding platforms employ an all or nothing approach—projects don’t receive the funding unless the financial goals are met within a specific time frame. In exchange for their pledges, supporters receive rewards (designed by those asking for funds) when the projects are funded. The leading platform is Kickstarter.

XOXO gets crowdfunding love

Earlier this year, Andy Baio (Kickstarter’s former CTO) and Andy McMillan used Kickstarter to raise $175,911 (the original goal was $125,000) to launch their XOXO Festival—a combination conference, exhibition (Market) and citywide funfest (Fringe) taking place September 14-16 in Portland. The festival is designed to bring together artists and technologists. After the 400 tickets to attend the festival ($400 each) sold out in 50 hours, they raked in another $15,000 selling “goodies” from local merchants, T-shirts and access to digital content. It’s not surprising that Baio and McMillan, who both have insight into using the Kickstarter platform, were successful. But, what about mere mortals?

Tiny Kitchen raises too tiny a sum

Not all projects are ripe for crowdfunding.  Just because the idea gets traction on social media channels or the event organizer has existing über-successful events doesn’t mean the followers and friends of said organizer will actually pony up for something new. That’s what Denise Medved of The Tiny Kitchen discovered. The Houston and Washington, DC installments of her Metropolitan Cooking and Entertaining Show are successful with a huge following. But, when she turned to Kickstarter to launch a new event in Dallas, the crowd went cold.

Medved set a goal of $15,000, but only raised $1,000. She estimates that it took at least 20 man-hours just to create the pitch video—an essential component of the Kickstarter regimen—plus the time it took to fill out the forms and pour through the rules. She attributes the failure to two factors. Her existing crowd was formed around events in other cities. “Most attendees were from Houston or DC.  I’m not sure they cared about launching a show in Dallas,” she says. Another reason is that Kickstarter does very little to help. “The [Kickstarter] project requirements didn’t tell the whole story.  I thought they would reach into their database to help market,” she adds.

Chicago writers write (and video) their own future

Mare Swallow selected Kickstarter to launch the Chicago Writers Conference—an opportunity to place writers in the same room with publishers and literary agents. “It was a process much like starting a business. We put together a plan, did a lot of planning and talked to people that had a lot of experience on Kickstarter or had supported other Kickstarter campaigns,” she says. Her idea worked. The event will take place September 14-16 at the Tribune Tower in Chicago. The project was fully funded in 30 days by backers who pledged $7,725 (103% of their original goal).

Swallow used Kickstarter as a crowdfunding tool, but also as a community platform. “It was a constantly ongoing process that included networking every day. We were constantly adding rewards and I keep it updated for Kickstarter supporters,” she explains. Although her investment in time and effort paid off, Swallow admits it was hard work. “You need to be present with it every single day. You are doing just as much work in person [as online]. It’s not for the faint of heart,” she says.

Even Denise Medved agrees that crowdfunding could be a viable fundraising mechanism for events. Those who have been successful no doubt support that optimism. Wired magazine summed it up nicely when referring to Baio and McMillan’s efforts on Kickstarter. “They also believe that there’s a real underutilized potential for launching more events on Kickstarter. Baio, who helped build Kickstarter and who launched the event-coordinating startup Upcoming.com (acquired by Yahoo), points out that many event organizers have to lose money fronting venue deposits and planning for unknown attendee numbers. Kickstarter secures that audience ahead of time.” Who knew rewards like tickets, cupcakes, books and T-shirts could fuel an event-funding revolution?

Online Collaboration: The Next Best Thing to Being There

The meetings industry is no stranger to the idea of collaboration: planners bringing suppliers to the table, association members joining volunteer task forces and trade show organizers co-locating their events. More recently, participants have managed to emulate collaborative behavior on social media channels like Twitter (chats) and Google+ (hangouts) where facilitators preside over brainstorming and idea-sharing sessions. As the practice of collaboration evolves to online platforms, it’s time to reap the full benefits.

There is a proliferation of document sharing, group communication, collaborative visual reviewing and project management tools available, but few case studies of event planners using them. A recent initiative from the Outdoor Retailer Show and Nielsen Expositions signals a move toward a more collaborative approach to problem solving online. The group has introduced The Collective Voice website where the outdoor industry’s members can weigh in on the discussion around moving the exhibition from Salt Lake City (which it has outgrown) to other potential locations.

While The Collective Voice is unique and an excellent example of the Outdoor Retailer Group’s characteristic leadership, it stops short of being a work site instead of just a website. The next step for online collaborative platforms is to give them more functionality and purpose than floating communication stations. They can serve as virtual workspaces, libraries and asset storage facilities where actual planning, co-creation, ideation and iteration can occur. The collaborative work that results can impact the outcome of a specific event or help to solve a major problem plaguing the industry.

The advantages of online collaboration in the meetings industry are obvious. Virtual spaces are more convenient—participants can check in and out on their own schedules. They allow for a greater number of participants from a broader range of perspectives. Online interactions complement face-to-face relationships and offer contributors ownership in the project. And, Internet-based platforms can function as around-the-clock storage facilities for institutional knowledge and assets. With all of the talk about cloud computing, there is no better time to build upon the tools that are available.

Imagine what’s possible:

  • Event planners working more closely with suppliers—eliminating repetitive tasks and inquiries—by placing all of the event’s assets online: building layouts, event floorplans, room specifications, menus, A/V inventory, design library, event color palettes, move-in/move-out schedules, exhibitor lists, rules and regulations, timelines and event goals. When problems surface, all of the suppliers can weigh in (online) on the solutions bringing their considerable experience with other events (and presumably similar issues) to bear on the discussion.
  • Associations asking members to co-create conference presentations by placing relevant materials (articles, white papers, blog posts) online and inviting discussion on key topics from the participants. The work group(s) can collaboratively develop the presentation down to the actual PowerPoint and room design as an alternative to the current system, the legendary “call for presentations” followed by the flood of rejection notices.

The concept of collaboration is more complex than learning to work the levers of an online platform. It requires a mindset about the value of sharing ideas, information and collateral. It demands leadership from those organizations willing to explore the true value of openness and authenticity. The notion of online collaboration is a sea change for an industry that banks on the importance of face-to-face meetings. It’s also a critical back-up system when all of the players need to lay their cards on the table, but can’t make it to the game until a week from next Thursday.

I would love to hear from the platform providers on this topic. Anyone?

Is the SXSWi Badgeless Movement A Sign of Things to Come in the Event Industry?

It started with a tweet:

“Connect to #Badgeless2012, FB on.fb.me/xrP9zC and the Web bit.ly/AuxLX”

At first, I thought that “Badgeless” might be referring to a technology that allowed event participants to interact with one another without using the square 3 x 4” piece of paper dangling from a string that we refer to as a badge.

I was wrong. A subsequent Twitter exchange with Chris Heuer, the founder of the global Social Media Club organization and member of the Badgeless Group at SXSWi, revealed so much more:

Badgeless is an organized movement of individuals who choose not to register (or pay the steep cost for a badge) for the annual nerd fest in Austin, Texas. Instead, its members connect via social media to enjoy the many free (and non-sanctioned) activities that have grown up around the main conference and trade show.

Badgeless participants don’t get to see the Al Gore or Ray Kurzweil keynotes (although some buy a one-day-pass), but they do get a lot of free tacos and beer and each other, which is apparently the main attraction for them. Many of them are SXSWi veterans who have been there, done that. Now, they just want to see their friends. Chris Heuer was selling Badgeless T-shirts to raise money for his Social Media Club nonprofit association.

Although the argument can be made that Badgeless members are entitled to draft off the 26-year success that is SXSW, the practice is discomfiting to people that organize events for a living.

Heuer’s rationale for justifying his Badgeless status is that he contributes to the event in other ways by blogging and promoting it, and because, he tweets, “there is a community of people that exists who are #badgeless2012 already.” Plus, “its truly not against anyone, it’s for and about the alternative, ”and “#WorldHasChanged,” he writes.

For some of the non-conformists, it’s about the money. Some Austin locals simply cannot afford to attend. Others, however, have somehow negotiated their airfare, lodging, food (no one can live on free tacos, can they?), local transport and other amenities, but choose not to buy the badge on principle or as one tweeter on the Badgeless2012 hashtag noted, “just to see what it was like.”

Circumventing the “system” is not new. Anyone remember Woodstock (jokes aside) where eventually the burgeoning crowd just broke the fences down and let themselves into the concert? Traci Browne recently wrote very poignantly about suitcasing at the Exhibitor Show in Las Vegas. And, despite conference organizer attempts to “own” the hotels surrounding their events, outboarding inevitably takes place all the time.

So what can event producers learn from the Badgeless movement at SXSWi?

  • For some, walled gardens of information are no longer attractive or worth paying for
  • There is a sense of entitlement (good or bad) among some community members that justifies their activities “outside the tent.”
  • We are vulnerable because people can and will self-organize if we don’t help organize them
  • There are whole groups of folks that aren’t part of our current communities doing interesting things
  • If face-to-face interaction is the best offering we have, that isn’t enough.
  • Our communities are organizing themselves around ideas because we are too lame to be the idea

What can event organizers do?

Acknowledge the dissenting voices. SXSW organizers are aware of Badgeless and other organized groups (there were plenty of companies selling their wares on the streets of Austin that didn’t pay sponsorship fees) and try to reach out to them.

Stop offering commodities. If what event organizers sell becomes something that is predictable, standardized and without differentiation, buyers will either look elsewhere for a less expensive option or seek to create something better on their own.

Let the outsiders in. Create virtual experiences—keynotes projected on a screen, hybrid extensions of live content and a social media outreach—to make people feel like there’s a party going on in the next room. Perhaps next time, they won’t want to miss it.

Provide a variety of ways for attendees to experience the event. There will always be a certain number of attendees who just want to hang out with friends. Others will come to learn. More will want to kick the tires at the trade show. Events must cater to all these groups.

The point is that the world has changed. After the current homogenous group of attendees moves on to retirement, the next demographic slated to fuel the growth of the trade show and conference industry isn’t going to settle for the same old same old. Either event organizers begin innovating now by changing the experience and opening up the doors to new ideas and ways of doing business or they will be on the outside sampling the free tacos and beer.

 

 

 

 

Why PCMA’s Investment in the Virtual Edge Institute Means More than Just Cash

In case you missed it last week, a joint press conference featuring Deborah Sexton and Susan Katz of the Professional Convention Management Association (PCMA) and Michael Doyle of Virtual Edge Institute (VEI) revealed that PCMA will be making a monetary investment (the amount was undisclosed) in VEI. The announcement is significant and it’s NOT about the cash.

Obviously, a little more coin in the till will help VEI reach its objectives sooner. It looked as if the two groups were heading towards some kind of relationship from their two-time co-location (Last year in Las Vegas and this January in San Diego) and Deborah Sexton’s unflagging support of virtual and hybrid events. But there’s more to it than a budding “vromance” (virtual + romance).

What PCMA has done is such a refreshing departure for an association. In the past, when associations became enamored with a technology or wanted to appease their members’ curiosity, they would invite providers to offer the solution (free of charge, of course) during the annual conference or trade show. Unfortunately, the revolving door of providers year after year scotched any chance for the users or the providers to achieve widespread adoption.

In other cases, associations have used the technology themselves—a sort of eat your own members’ dog food approach—but when the execution failed or the technology became obsolete, the organization ended up with egg on their face and forever after took the low (tech) road.

What PCMA is doing differs from the other approaches in a number of ways. Instead of hooking up with a particular vendor, they have come out in support of a technology. Smart, because it reduces their risk as an association and brilliant, because it is open source innovation at its best.

Under open source models, the “source code” is made available to the community enabling them to produce new products, applications, and uses from the original product. PCMA, with its investment and endorsement of VEI, is helping to unlock the innovation around virtual and hybrid event technology by, in effect, making the research, discussion and experimentation (the source code of a budding technology) available for the entire event industry.

Regardless of where you stand in the “value of trade associations” debate, one thing member-based organizations have been only marginally successful at is helping members get new business—really helping, not just putting buyers and sellers together in the same room or “allowing” suppliers to sponsor activities in exchange for access to planners. The precedent that PCMA is setting is crazy good.

PCMA’s investment in virtual event research and education through VEI can build the trade show and conference industry, help us to transition to digital—not by abandoning face-to-face (obviously), but by figuring out how to blend the old and the new together—create jobs, and accelerate innovation. I can’t wait to see what they do next.

The takeaway: Well done PCMA.

Be Notified of New Posts via Email