Fork In The Road Blog

Events: Technology. Design. Strategy.

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.

 

 

 

 

This Revolution is Being Tweeted

My “conversation” with Chris Heuer of Social Media Club fame says it all:

Wow. what do u think? RT @chrisheuer: Connect to #Badgeless2012, FB on.fb.me/xrP9zC and the Web bit.ly/AuxLXb #eventprofs

@michellebruno a great thing about this country is the freedom to associate / assemble. Doesn’t mean we dont respect events, just a reality

@chrisheuer here’s the difficulty 4 me tho–SXSW folks spent 25 years building and promoting an event that you will now take advantage of

@michellebruno very similar to the challenges many face trying to sustain associations. People can use socnet group features for free…

@michellebruno I am part of a non-profit association, its tough to realize people can just create their own groups too. #WorldHasChanged

@chisheuer nonprofs make up a large part of our profession so totally understand but still intrigued by your logic

@chrisheuer can you rationalize the rewards with no risk practice as freedom to associate?

@michellebruno hardly taking advantage of, we’ve, and I’ve been a big supporter for years. making $500 to support a non-profit cause…

@chrisheuer perhaps a better Q 4 you is could SXSW have done anything to bring you into the “tent”?

@michellebruno the reality is there is a community of people that exists who are #badgeless2012 already

@chrisheuer not blaming you for the “movement” just wondering if you’ve considered what sxsw did to provide you with the oppty

@michellebruno its truly not against anyone, it’s for and about the alternative. we cover & promote the conference extensively, globally

@chrisheuer I come from the industry of event organizers and such a practice is difficult for us to swallow

@chrisheuer We are not all behemoths like sxsw–lots of entrepreneurs who makes lots of sacrifices to bring an event to fruition

@michellebruno I’ve invested plenty in putting on exceptional events which barely break even, I understand, doesn’t negate the power of tech

@chrisheuer I am more interested in how “we” could bring folks like you into our group so we could profit/exist together

@michellebruno that’s easy. don’t be antagonistic to community organizers, think of event as a platform & create pseudo API’s #badgeless2012

@chrisheuer as an org of exceptional barely breakeven events–do you have some understanding of how we feel?

@michellebruno we’re part of the event too, actively promoting it globally and encouraging people to come, covering it as media/journalists

@michellebruno make it easier for the related communities the event serves to participate, maybe #EPI not #API, Event Programming Interface

@chrisheuer pseudo APIs love the idea–explain.

@chrisheuer totally get your contribution–I am a blogger/journo too. BUT do you feel that your coverage is = to the investment of the org?

@michellebruno never said that. not the point. It’s at a much lower level of intention and organization, only an idea that connects people

@chrisheuer love the #EPI idea. What wld that look like? #eventprofs you following this?

@michellebruno dont have time or space here to elaborate. as a community organizer, have lots of insights into what is possible, necessary

@michellebruno only thought and spoken over the years, not my primary focus really, though it was brief

The Takeaway:  Maybe what the event industry needs is a good community organizer.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It Takes a (Virtual) Village to Build an Industry

A very interesting discussion in the “Virtual Events and Meeting Technology” group on LinkedIn was recently derailed. The initial question posed by the group administrator was, “Will Virtual Events Ever Really Take Off?” For those of us invested in this topic—vendors, event organizers, journalists and passionate observers—this question is the key to unlocking the resources and momentum necessary to move beyond mere discussion to widespread understanding. It is the kind of question that begs responses from any and all whether they have a horse in the race or a comfortable seat in the stands. Instead, some of the most important voices were admonished or excluded.

After several weeks of contributions to the discussion from mostly vendors, it was revealed that Michael Doyle, the founder of the Virtual Edge Institute (VEI)—a prominent voice in this fledgling industry—has been intentionally excluded from the group. The announcement took the focus off of what was a fantastic dialogue onto who should or should not be allowed into the discussion.

The group owner clearly stated his reasoning for excluding Mr. Doyle in a recent post: “Since VEI is financially supported by vendors, I consider content produced by them to be a form of advertising. There have been of couple of past members who were tied to VEI and only posted links back to VEI. Not in line with my goals for the group. So my question has always been this, if I approve Michael does this forum become just another exposure point for his agenda?”

The group owner’s position on admitting Michael Doyle or excluding persons affiliated with VEI is self-defeating. If, as he admits, live event producers have not yet embraced the virtual models, who is available to participate in the discussion if not vendors and thought leaders like Doyle? At least Doyle has street cred for having moved the needle on a class of technology that is helping to bring our old school industry into alignment with the rest of the business world.

I can well appreciate the group owner’s interest in protecting the integrity of the discussion. I will be the first to admit that the cacophony of advertising and digital stimulation eating my brain cells has my cognitive shield on red alert. Yet, with an industry in its infancy, there have to be exceptions made in the interests of the community at large. If, in exchange for valuable contributions, the community has to accept the bias, motivations, and sometimes “commercial” references (in the opinions of some) that come along with them, isn’t that a fair exchange?

There is an important place for moderation in a group. Ad hominem attacks and blatant commercialism without any added value to the discussion does not advance the cause and a third party presence to normalize the discussion is very helpful. But, if we have learned anything by choosing to have our discussions on public social media platforms such as LinkedIn, it’s that the community takes care of itself—they either voice their opinions loudly (recent developments in the political/public space prove that point unequivocally) or they move on to forums where the discussion is more fruitful and open.

There is a responsibility on the part of the group owner as well as the group participants to move the discussion forward. Using one’s affiliation or the behaviors of those seen as sympathizers to his or her cause as a reason for exclusion seems a little short sighted. That said. The onus is also on the participants of a group to check the commercialism at the door, lest they be “wailed upon” by the community or the moderator and to apply the same openness to their own groups, discussions and endeavors elsewhere as a sign of their genuine intention to contribute to the greater goal of the community. Should we be drawing lines in the sand before there is actually a beach?

 

 

 

 

 

Can the Trade Show Industry Innovate or Are We Just Too Damn Tired?

WARNING:  “The trade show industry is not innovative” is a blanket statement. Yes, there are pockets of new ideas. Yes, there are individual shows and organizers who are trying new things and taking risks. But, for the most part, as an industry, we have been doing the same thing, the same way for the past 50 years.

I realize that the term “innovative” is overused. In many ways it should be banned from the vernacular (or at least all press releases). However, that doesn’t excuse an entire industry which is clinging to the same business model, infrastructure, programming, floor plan design, metrics, and look (pipe and drape) for half a century. And here it is important to note:  Getting a mobile app for your show is not innovation.

Here are some other tell tale signs that this industry, our industry, the industry we make a living in, is lagging behind on the innovation curve:

  • The love/hate relationship we have with virtual/live hybrid events that represent the first breath of fresh air we have had in a decade for growing an audience, building on killer content, and saving a buck
  • The fact that we just can’t seem to crack the code for bringing down the costs to exhibit
  • The knowledge that we depend on a monolithic infrastructure of organizations, buildings, and business practices when the rest of the world is nimble, on-demand, customized, peer-to-peer, DIY, community-based, intimate, and virtual
  • The news that large industry suppliers continue to expand their offerings beyond trade shows, buying up competitors, and re-branding themselves rather than living within the self-imposed limitations of the “trade show” industry
  • The fact that some of the best innovation is NOT coming from the industry. It is coming from citizen innovators filling a void
  • The mounting evidence that innovation in content marketing, social media, and digital marketing is eating away at the corporate budgets previously reserved for trade shows
  • The realization that there has been virtually no increase in the number of shows in the U.S. in a decade

Why should we innovate?

 

The expectations from our stakeholders have changed. Attendees want trade shows that are transformative—personally and professionally. Exhibitors want clear evidence that trade shows are superior to other marketing mediums (not just that they have can achieve ROI from trade shows in general). Sponsors want an immediate, measurable rush of attention/leads/interest from attendees. To deliver these results we can no longer have attendees lumbering through the aisles, exhibitors unable to afford or understand how to effectively exhibit, and sponsorship opportunities that don’t keep pace with the real world. Being unable to innovate in AT LEAST these three areas makes our industry vulnerable. As the next generation comes in and the current one moves out, the current situation will only worsen.

Why don’t we innovate?

 

It all begs the question “why?” If we accept that the trade show value proposition is still valid, why are we flat lining? As an industry, do we not value innovation? Is the investment in infrastructure so large that we can’t innovate? Are we so overwhelmed by 9/11 and the Recession that we are afraid to risk? Do our customers and members have too little appetite for innovation? Are we married to the “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” ideology? Are we earning too much to care about innovating? Do we think we’re innovative when, by the rest of the business world’s standards, we really aren’t? Are we afraid that true innovation will reveal structural deficiencies that we would be unable to overcome? Are we still using the publishing industry as a template (should I mention where newspapers and some print publications are now?)… Are we analog, when we should be digital?

 

Although there are those that argue for the need to ”innovate or die,” I’m not convinced of the advantages of innovation for innovation’s sake. However, I do know that companies and industries that are characteristically innovative also happen to be earnings leaders and job creators—think Apple computers.

The Takeaway: Innovation does not necessarily mean technology adoption. All the apps in the world will not save an industry whose value proposition is muddy. Innovation requires a concerted, transparent, industry-wide effort to examine the current business models, consider the competition (other marketing mediums), differentiate, address the structural weaknesses that keep the industry from growing, think out loud, experiment with new business and pricing models, deploy new technologies, and be open to change. It is in our collective interests to tackle these problems together. What are we waiting for?

The Road Less Traveled: Event Industry Suppliers Move from Aggregation to Curation

This blog post is sponsored by AV Event Solutions offering audiovisual rental, audience response for polling, computer rentals for registration, LCD displays, and more to event planners throughout California.

Event industry suppliers—general service contractors, sales and marketing firms, and exhibit designers—are stepping out of their comfort zones to take advantage of the innovation that is sweeping over the industry. What might look like a desperate move by some companies to hitch their wagons to a star or an attempt to make up for the shortcomings of a flat industry is actually a smart business decision. A clear precedent for the trend comes from social media and the growing practice of content curation.

A hint that something was amiss came in the last half of 2009 when Maritz, a sales and marketing service company that relies on face-to-face events, introduced a suite of virtual offerings including their “Maritz LIVE initiative for delivering virtual events and experiences.” When Freeman, the 84-year-old general service contractor et. al. and kingpin of the trade show and live event industry, announced late in 2010 that it too would be offering virtual events as part of a new business unit, the door of opportunity flung wide open.

Virtual platforms aren’t the only star technologies being curated. MG Design recently rolled out plans to offer its exhibitor clients RFID (radio frequency identification), QR (quick response)/Mobile, Augmented Reality, and social media integration with their exhibit design and fabrication services. The company offered attendees a hands-on look at the four technologies during Exhibitor 2011 in Las Vegas:

  • Surveys and RFID tags matched visitors’ hot button issues with specific audio and video content
  • QR codes were peppered throughout the exhibit leading visitors to information about MG’s products and services.
  • An augmented reality demonstration helped attendees understand how to put interactive content in the hands of prospects without physically bringing more products and collateral to the booth.
  • Social media tools illustrated the potential for exhibit marketing programs to go viral.

MG Design’s Director of Marketing, Ben Olson, frames it this way, “We have clients that date back 10 to 20 years. They look to us to bring these solutions to them. We do a 360-degree deep dive. When we’re developing the exhibit concept, we work these technologies into the recommendations where it’s appropriate.”

The curation of services is different from the aggregation of services. In the old days, suppliers offered related services (domestic trucking, pop-up displays, freight forwarding) to their captive audience of customers, but the transactions were consummated between the sub-contractors and the exhibitors directly. In the curation model, related and even seemingly “competitive” services are hand selected by industry suppliers who stay involved in the work stream—hence the suppliers’ value-added position with customers.

A May 2010 article on Mashable.com by Steve Rosenbaum highlights the importance of curation in content strategies. The same points Rosenbaum offers about content validate the service curation strategies in the event industry. Rosenbaum quotes author and NYU Professor Clay Shirky; “Curation comes up when people realize that it isn’t just about information seeking, it’s also about synchronizing a community.” Even industry suppliers are saying as much when they explain their partial shift away from their core competencies with statements about their desires to utilize a “holistic approach to provide multiple value to customers” or “lead [clients] to a more successful event experience.”

Rosenbaum brought up another point that is analogous to the emerging practice of event industry suppliers. “A lot of it is economic — doing more with less — and it has crossed every media industry,” explains Allen Weiner of Gartner Group. “If you think about the tools you want to give an editor to make him or her more complete, you want to give them curation tools.” It could be “something they add to their own content. As more old media companies attempt to do more with less, publishing tools that allow this efficiency without demeaning the product quality … [are] going to be very important.”

In the previous aggregation model, suppliers were not operating under any imperative to explain the outsourced service offerings to their customers. No one needed a sit down to understand the importance of shipping your exhibit to the show using a domestic carrier with no waiting time in the marshalling yard, an empty trailer at the ready during move-out, and a presence in the exhibitor service area. But with technology, there is a huge need to explain to clients the relevance, impact, and execution of the offerings. As Rosenbaum explains, “from a user perspective, well done curation is a huge value-add in a world where unfiltered signal overwhelms noise by an ever increasing factor.”

The Takeaway: For now, service curation may be a road less traveled. In the past it was uncomfortable, financially risky, and a point of criticism for established companies to make a sea change in offerings. Social media has helped us understand how it can be done, where it fits into business models, and how to minimize the risk. What we may be seeing is the beginning of an assimilation of event technology into the backbone of the industry—great news for suppliers, exhibitors, attendees, and the platform developers that see it as a new sales channel.

Be Notified of New Posts via Email