Fork In The Road Blog

Events: Technology. Design. Strategy.

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.

 

 

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?

A Super Nerdy Way to Think about Growing an Event Community

Chris Heuer of the Social Media Club and a member of the SXSW Badgeless movement closed our recent Twitter conversation about attendees that attend, but don’t pay at SXSW with the following comment:

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

Heuer’s tweet made me think about the parallels between organizations in the live event industry and device manufacturers (among others) that use application programming interfaces (API) to grow a community of users—one that can be monetized.

In simple terms, an API is the gateway, tools and implicit permission that hardware manufacturers make available to enable third-party application developers to create products and services around its products. Think about the Apple iPhone and all of the independent companies that develop apps for it. More applications = more reasons for people to own iPhones.

The concept of an API isn’t limited to hardware manufacturers. Oren Michels of API management firm, Mashery, told Mashable that, “Ultimately, the API is a means for growing your business — and I use the term ‘business’ to include whatever your mission is, be it traffic or commerce or a nonprofit improving the world or a government entity serving its constituents — faster and larger by virtue of engaging with others. Understand how and why your API can do that and you will be successful. ”

If what Michels says is true, live event organizers (nonprofit associations and for-profit companies) have to re-think their mission and their modus operandi. In my Twitter exchange with Chris Heuer, we discussed the need for SXSW organizers to find ways to include even the non-paying attendees, especially those like Heuer who have contributed to the wellbeing of the festival by blogging and paying in the past and are legitimate members of the broader interactive community that SXSW aims to serve. If SXSW’s mission is reach and retain a larger community, they will have to develop some type of outreach—not unlike an API—to accomplish that goal.

All face-to-face event organizers share a common mission: to grow revenue opportunities by growing their communities. This goal exists at a time when the live event industry—trade shows and conferences in particular—is under pressure. Event organizers can only access a fraction of the community of potential users. New research indicates that the potential of face-to-face events is limited because total visitor time at events is decreasing. At the same time, corporate budgets are being overtaken by digital marketing expenditures, digital channels can be as productive for the discovery of new product information as face-to-face events and live event participation is fraught with friction for participants.

An API model could be the gateway for live event organizers to expand the revenue, retention and reach of their unique value proposition (UVP), which is NOT, by the way, the ability to bring buyers and sellers together face-to-face. Since the UVP of b-to-b event organizers in the digital age is, I believe, “frictionless customized engagement,” an API from a live event organization should facilitate access to two classes of information and draw two types of net new community members:

On the event level: attendee feedback, demographic information, customer preferences, audit data, organizational challenges, task force findings, sponsor/exhibitor case studies, exhibitor advisory committee discussions and other information allows application developers—mobile, virtual, social and other technology suppliers—to derive solutions. More technology solutions = less friction for event participants = more attendee/exhibitor/sponsor participation.

On the industry level: research (free or low cost), education (free webinars), digital events, data, news, industry challenges, demographics, statistics, thought leadership, think tank discussions, case studies, white papers, content and other information makes it easier for new companies and individuals to offer solutions around it. More solutions = a growing industry = an expanded event community.

Of course, the use of an API-like outreach model requires work. The care and feeding of the solution developers and new community members is no small feat. However, it just makes sense that in the Information Age, live event organizers should use information to improve their events and grow their communities of potential participants.

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?

Be Notified of New Posts via Email