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.

Why Reed’s Decision to Scale Back AIBTM is Brilliant

dominoesRecently, Reed Exhibitions announced plans to change the format of its America Incentives, Travel and Meetings Expo (AIBTM) from a “traditional” trade show to an “exclusive, private” scaled-back event.

In the proposed plan, the number of hosted buyers and exhibitors will be reduced to 250 each. Turnkey “pods” will replace raw exhibit space and attendees—carefully screened buyers—will be required to keep a schedule of thirty appointments.

This conversion is sheer madness or, as I believe, absolute brilliance. Here’s why.

First, the obvious. The slimmed-down event addresses two major pain points for exhibitors: the inconvenience and cost to exhibit. It also speaks to the supreme time deficit of most VIP planners.

The proposed exhibit pods will level the playing field for exhibitors. By removing the perceived requirement to build elaborate custom booths in order to differentiate, exhibitors can focus on the mission of selling and educating prospects instead.

The one-to-one format distills the trade show form factor down to its simplest form and highest value proposition. It epitomizes the value of meeting face to face and the intimate setting allows participants to forge and renew relationships in a way that cannot be replicated online.

The proposed IBTM incarnation is the perfect scenario for justifying to management the time and expense to attend. The perception of decision-makers that such events are fun-filled junkets for an employee is virtually eliminated.

The funds that were previously spent by exhibitors on building exhibits, renting large spaces, labor, and drayage, for example, can be claimed by Reed as compensation for drastically reducing the number and improving the quality of the buyers. As a friend once told me, “it’s easier to sell one locomotive than a hundred ice cream cones.”

The smaller event has the potential to dramatically improve the attendee experience. With such a small group of buyers, Reed can pinpoint and address the educational needs and desires of every single attendee.

Reed staff will be able to focus on identifying power buyers rather than administering to crowds.

The reduced strain on WiFi could make it possible to deliver content, images and information digitally (to compensate for the lack of exhibit real estate to tell the exhibitors’ stories) at a lower cost, as well as enable location and mobile technologies to function flawlessly.

Hosted buyer matchmaking software can focus more on divining optimal mutual matches rather than giving every exhibitor and attendee a certain number of appointments.

On one hand, there will be implications for the IBTM Americas ecosystem and others who attempt similar transitions:

  • In the absence of elaborate booth constructions, exhibit sales staff will have to be brilliant storytellers rather than name takers.
  • The convention center will rent less space.
  • The general service contractor will receive less revenue.
  • The registration system will become an RSVP system

On the other hand, it’s an opportunity for stakeholders to embrace a new reality: alternative marketing mediums are strong competition for some trade shows. It’s better to devise new strategies and service offerings now, rather than wait for something truly disruptive to disable a line of business.

The oft-repeated mantra of our industry—nothing can replace meeting face-to-face—isn’t completely true. In fact, we are pushing our exhibitors and attendees into the arms of less than optimum selling and buying environments because the pain of participating in some trade shows often far outweighs the benefits.

What Reed has announced is truly disruptive and instructive for the entire industry. There are many ways to compete and it’s far better to create disruption than to be victimized by it.

 

 

 

 

 

What Will We Call Face-to-Face Meetings Next?

Third-party, face-to-face meetings must start looking forward.The third-party, face-to-face meetings industry has, by design, placed itself in a silo. For whatever reason—lethargy, existing infrastructure or the lack of a compelling impetus for change—it has developed a superiority complex.

Meanwhile, another environment has emerged, courtesy of the Internet, where individuals can learn, network, establish relationships, buy and sell using digital platforms.

Whether or not digital environments compete with or complement the live-event platform is a matter of perspective as, increasingly, the lines are becoming blurred.

The indisputable fact is that the universe of companies and individuals who will connect and/or transact business online is much larger than those who will ever do so in person at a live event.

Remaining cloistered behind a singular ideology, business model or delivery system disregards the enormous potential customer base that is currently thriving in cyberspace. It leaves business on the table, hinders the evolution of the meetings industry and provides a disservice to existing customers.

There is a way forward:

Invest in a strategy, not a technology. The strategy for our time is to embrace the fact that the two dimensions—physical and digital—in which to learn, network and transact business are no longer mutually exclusive. The closer the live-events industry gets to being agnostic about where the products and services are delivered, the more quickly we can take advantage of the vast potential that exists from an expanded customer base.

Adopt new metrics. To continue using one-dimensional metrics—net square feet, number of exhibitors and/or number of attendees—to characterize and measure the growth of the meetings industry ignores the new multidimensional reality and underestimates the potential of the digital audience. New metrics, such as impressions, number of virtual attendees or the size of social networks can vastly improve the value, perception and opportunity of live events.

Flock to the bridges. The platforms, technologies and thought leaders espousing the existence and providing access to a much larger universe of customers are already here: content aggregation platforms, virtual conferences, online learning platforms, social networks and mobile applications. But, narrow thinking; an aversion to change and a lack of knowledge about what’s possible limits their potential.

Delivering information, networking opportunities, sales leads and services inside physical buildings is the chosen differentiator of the face-to-face meetings industry, but not its unique value proposition.

If this industry elects to iterate, it must change how it sees itself. We have to acknowledge that we are and should be a different industry now—one that takes advantage of the new facilities we have at our disposal and an expanded vision of what we could be.

We have to move away from the face-to-face only products and services business model if we are to be perceived as something more than a delivery system.

The industry needs a new name—one that illustrates its true point of differentiation—the profound understanding and intimate knowledge of specific business verticals and an ability to deliver education, networking, sales, services and community ubiquitously and agnostically within those verticals.

What do you think the new name should be?

The Next Logical Phase of Event Hybridization and Why It Will Be a Game Changer

hybrid eventsThe merging of live events with digital content and remote attendees was bound to happen. When the Internet poked her head through the ceiling of the convention center, the industry expected something interesting to follow. The divide between face-to-face and virtual experiences has already been narrowed by hybrid events, but the convergence won’t stop there.

There is another side to opening up the Pandora’s box of digital and pouring the contents out onto the trade show and conference room floors.

 

Phase-one hybrids
Hybrid event producers and platform providers have done a fabulous job of providing remote attendees with access to the live event environment. Live presentations are streamed out, while virtual “visitors” chat, tweet and Skype their thoughts and images back into the physical event. Everyone is happy; the “outsiders” are rewarded with great content and some engagement and the “insiders” reap the benefits of increased visibility and net-new live attendees.

But, what happens when live attendees are given access to the digital environment, all of it, even exhibitors, presenters, and content that isn’t physically there?

When we can harness the universe
Imagine a time in the future when a face-to-face event attendee will be able to visit a physical trade show, come upon an interesting booth, engage the exhibitor in conversation and collect product information, BUT instead of moving on, he will linger in the aisle to learn about all of the other companies that offer similar products and services—even the ones that aren’t at the show.

Also in the future, a live conference attendee will be able to sit in a presentation, hear something compelling, life-changing, even transformative and afterward learn about other presentations, companies, ideas, books, white papers, movies and Ted Talks related to the session topic—even those not featured at the conference.

This blending of live and digital is a game changer. Where before, the remote attendees extracted value from the live environment (and craved to experience it), in this new scenario—the next logical phase of event hybridization—live attendees will be able to obtain value from the virtual environment (and they will crave the live experience even more). Going forward, the blending of the real and digital worlds will come full circle.

Mobile will bring it all together
We have all of the tools now to make the convergence happen. Using mobile devices and specially designed applications, live event attendees can scan barcodes, QR codes and augmented reality symbols or tap NFC-enabled phones on posters, columns and signs to access new content, be “transported” into another realm or simply direct the information they desire to a central database for later review.

I haven’t even mentioned Google Goggles.

Before the riot starts
What live event organizer in their right minds would agree to flinging open the digital doors and exposing their existing customers to the competition of companies that aren’t even there? What exhibitor or sponsor would pay to exhibit in or sponsor a live event that supports their competitors? ALL OF THEM. Here’s why:

  • Some time soon, fewer attendees will use live events to initiate buying decisions or learn new information because the events won’t be representative of all of the products, topics and solutions that exist. They will only come if and when they are ready to buy, choosing instead to collect digital information to narrow down the field.
  • Blended (phase-two hybrid) events will be more compelling than stand-alone events. Live attendees will have (and want) the best of both worlds to experience and reach their goals.
  • Exhibitors and sponsors that participate in the live event are automatically privileged over companies that only participate digitally.
  • Organizers are paying much more attention to the attendee experience. What could be more fulfilling for conference-goers than to be able to compare, contrast and continue the learning from a single location?
  • Additional content (from digital participants) represents potential revenue streams for the organizers and introduces a type of tiered participation scheme.
  • Nothing replaces the face-to-face event (so it’s been said a million times) and if the convergence is inevitable, live events will be the only environment where live and digital can exist together.
  • A certain percentage of the companies that participate digitally at first may one day exhibit in and sponsor the live event. It is a brilliant onboarding strategy.

The takeaway:
As the next phase of hybridization emerges, event organizers will have to rethink the value proposition of stand-alone events. They will have to become curators as well as planners and use technology to make sense of the digital landscape as an extension the physical floor plan. More than anything, they will have to understand that hybridization will eventually become a two-way street—remote attendees looking in and live attendees looking out—and it will change the live event game for good.

Talking to the Empty Chairs

Trade show and conference organizers—associations, especially—are very good at delivering information to their attendees and members. It’s a practice that drives business and membership. But, what about creating content for the thousands who have never and will never attend? There are compelling reasons to deliver consistent, unbiased and useful information to non-customers besides getting them to attend the live event.

Educating the community: Knowledge—research, news, case studies, and how-to videos—helps keep a market sector and its community vibrant. No event organizer is interested in building an event around an industry that is depleted, obsolete or shrinking. When organizations charge themselves with the task of keeping a group energized, they are the first to know when the market is on a downward slide.

Thought leadership: It’s critical for event organizers to help shape the conversation rather than just chronicle it. Some attempt to set the tone of the discussion through their blogs and social media outreach, but few really succeed. Instead they use their “bully pulpits” as advertising channels and shy away from controversy that could, in reality, help them stand out from the crowd.

Revenue:  More content equals more opportunities for revenue, especially if the pool of advertisers extends beyond the exhibitors and sponsors of the show. Advertisers eager to reach the entirety of the audience in a market would naturally be interested in every blog, newsletter, white paper, e-book, video, slideshare deck, infographic and cartoon.

Dialogue:  It’s easy to survey past and current attendees. But existing customers have already drunk the Kool-Aid. By talking to people that have never and will never attend, event organizers can understand how they compete with other marketing mediums, why they aren’t attractive to a particular segment and what’s working better for non-customers than trade shows and conferences.

Word of Mouth:  Just because one person is unable or uninterested in attending an event doesn’t mean they won’t tell others about it. In today’s social world, one tweet can land a customer and the full reach of free, frequent and great content passed along social channels is nearly incalculable.

Talking to the empty chairs is a long-tail approach. It doesn’t yield quick results and requires a consistent effort. And, because there is so much good information provided by bloggers, suppliers (that invest in useful, non-commercial content), consultants, independent trade press and marketing agencies, most show organizers—even the ones affiliated with trade publications—have to put out really good content in order to be effective.

The Takeaway: In a world where intermediaries like trade show and conference organizers compete with digital content producers, alternative channels for buying and selling and the economy, it makes sense to speak with and to the whole community or risk finding every chair empty when the music finally stops.

 

 

Be Notified of New Posts via Email