Executive summary and implications for managers and executives

Citation

(2010), "Executive summary and implications for managers and executives", Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, Vol. 25 No. 4. https://doi.org/10.1108/jbim.2010.08025dab.001

Executive summary and implications for managers and executives

Article Type: Executive summary and implications for managers and executives From: Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, Volume 25, Issue 4

This summary has been provided to allow managers and executives a rapid appreciation of the content of the special issue. Those with a particular interest in the topic covered may then read the articles in toto to take advantage of the more comprehensive description of the research undertaken and its results to get the full benefit of the material present.

How to get the best results for the effort and expense put into organising, taking part in or visiting a business trade fair has, and continues to be, a difficult question to answer. Getting the right people there, steering them towards your wares, and having the wherewithal to turn interest into sales is the organisers’ and exhibitors’ plan but, despite best efforts, it doesn’t always turn out like that.

Trade fair business is growing worldwide yet, across a range of industries, nearly 40 per cent of first-time exhibitors do not return to the same show the following year and the typical exhibit reaches fewer than 60 per cent of its prospects. Yet trade show participation represents a significant share of the promotional budget of firms operating in business markets. Therefore show participation must be effectively managed and show performance and returns on investment measured. Consequently customer experiences should be monitored – not just to help those wishing to engage in business with them, they should be monitored by their own organisations to assess the worth of attending.

Yet, while many exhibitors might assume that visitors are at the show to collect important purchase data, in fact many people might be there for no other reasoning than “If you are in this business you are expected to be there” – a sort of ritual attendance.

For those visitors there for more commercial reasons, it is essential to find ways of measuring return on investment of attendance. What do they and their organisations get out of it? Is it worth it? Is the information gleaned at the show passed on to those who did not attend? It should be – but only if it is accurate, relevant, clear and timely. What needs to be understood is the value of trade fairs to relationship building and relationship management.

Industrial buyers at a B2B trade show are assumed to be more professional and rational actors than the private consumer. However, one thing private and professional customers have in common is that they’re all human and they all get tired. So beware of information overload. Although information search is one of the main reasons for attending, visitors often conclude that there’s just too much – especially at the largest ones attended by hundreds or thousands of exhibitors.

Would-be prospects also get tired because, generally speaking, trade show visits are physically fatiguing. Someone concerned that their feet are killing them and their shoulders numb with carrying a heavy collection of catalogues and leaflets (or those with tiring experiences from previous shows and ready not to make the same mistakes again) will think nothing of discarding the promotional material you have handed to them, or missing out huge chunks of the exhibition altogether.

One thing industry experts do agree on is that a key reason for show failure is the inability to provide a setting that enables attendees to fulfil their objectives, suggesting that objectives vary widely across attendees and therefore understanding how they engage in the show experience is a critical element of success.

Exhibitor performances are, to a certain extent, dependent on organiser activities. Even the most carefully managed stands will yield few returns if organisers fail to attract visitors that correspond to the exhibitors’ target groups. It is therefore in the best interests of both exhibitors and organizers that trade show research provides guidance on how to organize them ”better”. Managing the stands, or booths, is one thing. Deciding what form they take can be crucial – large, small, open-plan, semi-secluded, shared or individual – as can their location within the trade show arena. All has a knock-on effect on customer behaviour. That choice can be determined by many factors – sometimes opposing ones. For instance, an exhibitor with a higher motivation for promoting the image of the company will be less inclined to go in for cost or time saving devices, such as sharing facilities.

Ask why the popularity of trade shows is still high, and increasingly so, many will point out the face-to-face interaction, meeting people, walking about and experiencing the “buzz” of the occasion. The internet has – as it has in most walks of life – had its impact on the shows, but as yet hasn’t replaced them. (But beware, online shows are becoming a cost-effective alternative and advances in technology will eventually allow the “face to face” meetings, interactive product demos, customized presentations and on-site “experience” that only exist in the real world at the moment.) The internet already has its role in pre-show promotion, internet-enabled selling at shows, and internet follow-ups afterwards.

Even though trade shows face increasing competition from new media and the market for trade show organisers is likely to get increasingly competitive, scenario analysis of how the future may turn out – i.e. what the trade show market will look like in 2020 – indicates that they are unlikely to be completely replaced by other means.

In “An exploratory study of attendee activities at a business trade show” Srinath Gopalakrishna et al. note that, while the importance of trade shows in the B2B communications mix is well-known, show managers have only recently started to realise the critical role of addressing show effectiveness through understanding attendee behaviour. A growing concern for managers is the ability to reach decision-makers who are relevant to their product or service. An important first step in this effort is the access to individual level data that can inform organisers and exhibitors about the actual behaviour of attendees on the floor of the show.

This research takes the important first step of tracking actual visitor movement at a show at the micro level. What’s known about the retail mall shopper is integrated with the unique trade show characteristics to develop metrics that organizers can use to track and classify attendees. It takes into consideration both objectives and activities of trade show attendees and identifies clear segments based on a combination of these factors. The industrial shopper typology uncovers five visitor segments that differ along those metrics. If attendees can be segmented based on their objectives and activities, then firms may be able to leverage their trade show strategy more effectively by targeting preferred segments and show management might have a better sense of how to go about fulfilling attendee and exhibitor expectations. The similarities and differences between visitor segments identified harbour important implications for show organisers and exhibitors.

The basic shopper represents the typical visitor at the show. They make about seven “serious” visits while on the floor out of which nearly three-quarters are related to their agenda. Also, 70 per cent of their visits are made to stand-alone booths accessible on all four sides. About 45 per cent of their visits are to large booths, thereby indicating their preference for spacious and popular booths. The basic shopper shows very little serious interest in booths open at only one end and also appears to stick close to his or her goals and is attracted to large booths that maximise opportunities for achieving these goals while simultaneously seeking exposure to new products.

The enthusiast, representing 17 per cent of the sample, makes an average of 24 visits while at the show (more than three times that of the basic shopper). Additionally, four-fifths of their visits are agenda-related, showing high involvement as well as activity with the product categories. The enthusiast has a preference for large size booths and product variety that mirrors the preference of the basic shopper. Like the basic shopper, the enthusiast seeks to maximise opportunities to fulfil objectives by gravitating toward “where the action is”.

The niche shopper represents nearly 17 per cent and makes an average of 9.2 visits, which is greater than the basic shopper but lower than the enthusiast. However, the distinguishing feature of niche shoppers is that close to 40 per cent of their serious visits are made to small-sized booths and nearly 19 per cent of their visits are to booths that are open on one side (i.e. booths located in the middle of an aisle). These values are the highest across all segments on both aspects. Their agenda-relatedness is somewhat similar to the basic shopper (i.e. three-quarters of their visits are related to prior interests) but it is the size and limited accessibility of booths they visit that distinguish niche shoppers from other segments. The niche shopper is “on a mission” and is willing to seek out specialty vendors who do not have a big presence at the show.

The brand shopper represents one-sixth of the sample and makes about ten serious visits on average, but shows a very high preference for large booths (60 per cent) compared to the enthusiasts and niche shoppers (41 per cent and 32 per cent respectively). This is the highest across all clusters. Interestingly, the agenda-relatedness of the brand shopper is the highest (nine out of ten booths visited are part of the agenda), showing that they not only seek out the popular booths but also ensure they visit booths they are interested in. Brand shoppers know what they want to accomplish and they go about doing so in a very efficient manner.

The apathetic shopper represents the smallest proportion of attendees (11 per cent and has serious visits at two-thirds of the booths that he plans to visit before the show – the lowest across all clusters. Also, the apathetic shopper makes close to 20 per cent of his visits to peninsula-type booths (open on three sides), which represents convenience compared to booths in the middle of the aisle, which may present more navigational difficulties. Also, this type of shopper has a large preference for booths with a wide selection (50 per cent). Apathetic shoppers may represent “newcomers” or attendees who have difficulty navigating the trade show floor or are unfamiliar with the trade show environment.

An important feature among the industrial shoppers is the extent of agenda-relatedness. Attendees stick to their prior agenda plans by visiting booths that displayed products they had an interest in, as expressed in pre-show surveys. This is in stark contrast to retail/mall shoppers who make a large number of unplanned visits and purchases during shopping trips.

A majority of attendee visits are made to booths open at all four ends. Although a majority of the shoppers like to go to booths with greater product breadth. Booths that display fewer products also receive a substantial number of visitors. Therefore, it appears that aspects of booth design make a difference in an exhibitor’s ability to attract specific segments of trade show attendees.

Booth design is also highlighted by Diego Rinallo et al. in their study “Exploring visitor experiences at trade shows”. They find that the typical route followed by industrial buyers goes from market leaders’ stands to those of regular suppliers. Market leaders will thus attract and contact a large number of visitors to their stands, but will “convert” only a small number of these into leads. Therefore, to preserve their reputation, market leaders will prefer larger stands and/or “closed” stand designs to screen visitors. Conversely, follower exhibitors can expect to attract and contact a smaller number of visitors, but convert a larger share of these into leads. For these exhibitors, it is important to adopt attractive and “open” stand designs that tempt visitors to change their intended routes. Preliminary competitor assessments are required to plan these decisions effectively. A company may, for instance, be a leader at home, but a newcomer in a foreign export market. Stand design decisions regarding home versus foreign trade shows should thus vary accordingly. Among their key findings were:

1. 1.

   Trade show visits as embodied experiences. The information-processing situations faced by visitors are characterised by:

2. 2.
   • •

     sensorial overwhelming;

   • •

     information overload; and

   • •

     physical fatigue.

3. 3.

   Trade show visits as instrumental experiences. For professional visitors, valuable trade show experiences provide:

4. 4.
   • •

     cognitive stimulations that result in learning and new knowledge;

   • •

     the opportunity to relate to exhibitors and other visitors and to collect knowledge and other benefits for their activity; and

   • •

     a sense of community.

5. 5.

   The perceived value of exhibitors and organisers’ experience providers. The most appreciated experience providers for exhibitors are:

6. 6.
   • •

     the presence of products; and

   • •

     competent personnel.The most appreciated experience providers for organizers are:

   • •

     selection of exhibitors and distribution of exhibitors in the exhibition space according to visitors’ search processes;

   • •

     trend and rest areas; and

   • •

     social and technical events.

Among the many elements that constitute experiences, product presence and the “relate” factor are among the most important. Other components, such as background music or the stand’s aesthetic appeal, have a minor impact on visitor satisfaction when compared to the innovativeness of products and the quality of interaction with stand personnel and other visitors. As a consequence, exhibitors should invest in the quality of these two factors, with, for example, stand personnel “speaking the same language” and sharing the same national and occupational culture as visitors.

As trade show visits are also “learning expeditions” for industrial buyers, it is important that people on the stand are competent interlocutors (e.g. new product development staff), rather than welcoming personnel devoid of technical expertise. Moreover, visitors greatly appreciate interaction with other visitors, who are members of the same occupational communities. By creating situations of encounter where visitors can informally interact among themselves (e.g. staging technical seminars or cocktail hours after the trade show closing time), exhibitors may significantly add to their customers’ experiences.

In a context characterised by a proliferation of trade shows that actively fight to attract the limited resources of exhibitors and visitors alike, these organisations need to understand their dual markets more fully in order to offer better events. Rinallo et al. suggest that trade show organisers are better placed than individual exhibitors to manage the overall visitor experiences. By selecting exhibitors, including market leaders and innovating companies, laying out their stands in the show according to visitors’ needs for information, designing visitors’ routes in the exhibition space, and providing trend and service areas, trade show organisers can set the tone of visitor experiences and create the context in which the experiences provided by individual exhibitors are embedded. The trade show business is fully part of the experience economy. By monitoring visitor experiences and by creating more engaging experiences, organisers can design “better” trade shows that improve exhibitor and visitor satisfaction.

By gathering together in the same place and at the same times, it is argued that exhibitors provide visitors with the possibility to collect a significant amount of important purchase data at a very limited cost. Rinallo et al. suggest that visitors to trade shows are motivated by more than just information search. In the words of many of their informants, there was no echo of a planned, economic reasoning. On the contrary, they heard countless times that “if you are in this business, you have to be here”. That trade shows can become ritualised, standard appointments in the life of an industry is a fact on which current research is silent. Trade shows at which attendance is taken for granted are significantly insulated from competing events as a result of visitor (and exhibitor) loyalty. It can be assumed that simply with the passage of time, the older and most established events have become more institutionalised than newer shows. However, hierarchies among trade shows are dynamic and new events can successfully challenge the supremacy of older ones. How can a trade show become a cultural resource for members of a given occupational community of industrial buyers? This appears to be one of the frontiers of research on these events.

The ever-present concern of what form an exhibitor’s booth or stand should take is addressed with a specific comparison between joint and individual, in “Structure, strategy and performance of exhibitors at individual booths versus joint booths”, Kåre Skallerud’s focus being on international events in particular.

Several differences in exhibitors’ strategies are found between the two groups. Individual exhibitors plan their participation better, allocate more resources for exhibiting and the top management’s commitment is stronger. However, the extent of written objectives is lower among the individual exhibitors compared with exhibitors at joint booths. The following explanation for this finding is suggested. The greater extent of written objectives for international trade show (ITS) participation strategies among exhibitors at joint booths indicate that dealing with the booth organizer requires written objectives and strategies for their trade show participation. Carrying out this formalised strategic planning demonstrates that their participation mode is a deliberate choice for both cost-saving (i.e. fewer booth personnel and hence fewer resources allocated to exhibiting at ITS) and time-saving (i.e. less planning and top management commitment).

Individual exhibitors assess their image-building performance as higher compared with exhibitors at joint booths. These findings indicate that it is better to exhibit individually if the purpose is to maintain and develop the image of the firm among visitors and other exhibitors. A joint booth does not offer the same opportunity to promote the firm’s image. Joint booths very often promote a generic image based on regional, geographic or product advantages. Individual exhibitors also assess their information gathering performance as lower compared with exhibitors at joint booths. However, no differences in sales, relationship-building and motivation activities were found in this study. But it is worth noting that the best performance in both groups is related to relationship-building activities. The findings show that there are no significant differences with regard to size and experience as ITS exhibitor between the two participation modes. Exhibitors at joint ITS booths are not significantly smaller with less experience than individual ITS exhibitors. The findings therefore suggest that the floor space at joint booths is limited compared with individual booths.

The most important findings are those that indicate the differences in strategies and performances between joint booth exhibitors and individual exhibitors. The extent of written objectives for an overall trade show strategy is significantly higher among exhibitors at joint booths. Often, the sponsoring body of a joint booth subsidizes some of the costs of participation and requires establishment of written objectives by participants to justify its outlay of funds. This finding indicates that participation at joint booths or pavilions is not necessarily an easy way of exhibiting at international trade shows. On the contrary, joint booth participations may require more formalized planning procedures compared with individual participation.

The study showed that exhibitors at joint booths staffed their booth with fewer personnel and exhibited fewer products, which saves costs. Exhibitors at individual booths allocate significantly more resources for exhibiting at ITS, they plan their participation significantly better, and the top management’s commitment to exhibiting is significantly stronger. These findings further strengthen the argument that individual exhibition is a more costly and resource-demanding strategy compared with exhibition at joint booths or pavilions. Exhibitors therefore also have to take resource considerations into account when choosing between participation modes.

If an exhibitor is willing to put more resources into an exhibition, he should ask himself what the return on the investment should be. With regard to some dimensions, individual exhibitors may perform better and for other dimensions exhibitors at joint booths may perform better. For instance, this study shows that individual exhibitors perform better on image-building activities compared with joint booths. There are no structural differences between individual and joint booth exhibitors. This indicates that characteristics of the firm have no impact on the preferred participation mode.

Although the existence of value in trade show participation is commonly recognized among members of business and industry, what is lacking is a systematic consideration of issues surrounding how the value of information gathered at such shows is manifested, and how this value should be measured. In “The return on trade show information (RTSI): a conceptual analysis”, Harriette Bettis-Outland et al. focus on both tangible and intangible benefits of trade show information.

Tangible benefits include trade show information that affects:

• •

  acquisition of new customers resulting in the sale (or purchase) of products and services;

• •

  technical updates; and

• •

  training and implementation advice given (or received) at the trade show.

Intangible benefits include trade show information that enables improvements in sales planning, strategic planning, policy development, marketing communications, customer/supplier relationships, and new product development.

With these issues in mind, the authors propose an index referred to as the “return on trade show information” (RTSI). It is an outcome measure that allows for simultaneous consideration of both tangible and intangible benefits, and provides a measure of the overall impact and effectiveness of trade show information on the participating firms. RTSI analyzes newly acquired trade show information and is evidenced by benefits resulting from the acquisition, dissemination, and use of this information within the trade show attendee and exhibiting firms.

Exhibitor trade show success has traditionally been evaluated using more tangible measures such as the number of sales orders or sales leads generated from the show; making contact with current customers; and gathering competitive information. However, research suggests that exhibitors often express dissatisfaction, or lack of concrete knowledge regarding their success at trade shows. This suggests a greater proportion of intangible benefits than tangible benefits for exhibitors compared to visitors. Conversely, exhibitors might inherently place a lower value on the intangible benefits derived, skewing RTSI.

Visitors often state that their objectives for attending trade shows include various information-gathering activities. These involve gathering new product information, technical updates, and contact information from both exhibitors as well as other participants (suppliers, distributors, etc.). In contrast to exhibitors, visitors set clear goals for attending trade shows.

By analysing whether, and how, information gained from trade shows is used in the organization, it may be possible to quantify the impact that this new information has on the organisation as a whole. The RTSI index proposed can provide managers with a more complete understanding of the value of information resulting from trade show participation.

If exhibitors learn to appreciate the value of other departments in the organisation, based on new ideas or procedures learned from other trade show attendees, then this may result in intangible benefits manifested by improved interdepartmental relations, and a higher degree of organisational learning.

The RTSI model formally recognises that informational value is not determined simply when a piece of information is acquired. A more complete valuation of any informational input can be made as it moves throughout the organisation as a result of its availability for use in various managerial decision-making contexts. This less direct but potentially more substantial value can only be determined by examination of its movement and use over time.

Further, it is suggested that the use of RTSI in outcome assessment may also improve managerial planning by pointing out the types of information gathering activities by trade show attendees that is most useful, as well as improve the flow of potentially valuable information within the firm once the show is over. The return on trade show investment depends both upon the ability to evaluate the “return” as well as to properly judge the size of the “investment”. Consequently, the use of RTSI would provide management with a valuable tool to improve evaluation of the return on investment once made.

Talking of valuable tools, the internet – while threatening an electronic alternative to traditional trade shows in the future – is earning its keep at current shows in a number of ways, particularly pre-show promotion and follow-up information on exhibitor’s websites. In “Antecedents and effect of internet implementation for trade shows” Li Ling-yee says the key lesson for exhibitors is to adopt the right approach to internet marketing: using it primarily for informational and communicational purposes as in pre-show promotion, and for customer service and support purposes as in post-show follow-up.

By putting trade show content on the web, exhibitors can grab attention before the show even starts and attract visitors to their booths, while attendees can use the product/service previews on the internet to plan their visits and networking activities. In order to neutralise the threat or capitalise the opportunity associated with the advancing internet technology, exhibitors and show organisers need to know how the use of the internet can improve trade show strategies.

A study found the use of the website for selling functions at shows does not contribute to trade show performance. This reflects that the internet technology is not used as a relationship marketing tool during trade shows. Relationships in business markets are intrinsically linked to a social aspect and therefore exhibitors will continue to rely on personal interactions more than on electronic ones.

Given the specific findings that the usage of the website for pre-show promotion and post-show follow-up are primarily driven by a market orientation, emphasising inter-functional coordination and customer focus, exhibitors should find the internet applications beneficial in terms of improvement of internal efficiencies and coordination, and exhibitors should capitalise on the internet medium’s interactivity and connectivity to continuously create and deliver superior customer value.

Exhibitors are well advised to develop and monitor company website information quality, as perceptions over this quality are powerful drivers behind the usage of the website for pre-show promotion. With respect to quality of information content in an online context, exhibitors should pay special attention to three aspects of information content on the web, and keep it fresh and up-to-date, correct and with integrity, as well as useful and facilitating customers’ decision-making.

Exhibitors are strongly recommended to put the right emphasis on efficiency motives, as such an emphasis is crucial for firms to attain an intensive usage of the website for post-show follow-up. By emphasising the usage of the internet for the sake of cost reduction, productivity enhancement and operational efficiency, while de-emphasising its usage for legitimacy and image reasons, such a mindset will deliver goal-directed behaviour that contribute to superior performance.

While the physical attendance and consequent social relationships fostered at trade shows is a defining factor of the genre, virtual trade fairs exist in as a complementary if not competitive way. Cost saving is an obvious draw to the virtual world as cost is an important factor for both buyers and sellers, particularly those in small businesses who might decide not to attend because of cost. However, while companies may avoid expenditures for travel, accommodation, booth placement and personnel, large investments in both hardware and software, as well as in protection systems required to interact electronically, are required to participate in virtual trade fairs, at least for sellers.

In “The role of virtual trade fairs in relationship value creation” Anja Geigenmüller offers another reason why virtual trade shows have come to the fore, in that they facilitate serving a firm’s whole market. Virtual events are open to exhibitors and visitors around the globe and across different time zones, outweighing geographical barriers such as long distances or inconvenient travel routes. In addition, more precise instruments such as gradual access permissions (e.g. passwords and authentication codes), target and differentiate the audience and distinguish between less-qualified visitors and high-end customers and prospects. Virtual events allow for the development of a preferred platform on which to interact with high-level prospects.

The question arises of how virtual trade fairs can be used to establish, maintain, and develop valuable customer relationships. From the practitioners’ viewpoint, virtual trade fairs complement physical shows rather than replacing them, as no substitute has been found for the effectiveness of real face-to-face interaction. However, virtual events do more than simply augment physical shows with additional information; they differ from physical shows in three important ways.

First, communication at virtual trade fairs is IT-mediated. Although limiting personal contact, IT-mediated interactions may expand visitors’ privacy and reduce the perceived pressure to communicate personally. Electronic communication interfaces may also reduce the perceived social distance between actors, and hence facilitate communication between exhibitors and visitors.

Second, virtual trade fairs focus on interactivity such that several communication channels (e-mail, chats, weblogs or voice over IP) are available for interactions. Internet technology helps both buyers and sellers gather information at reduced search costs. Individual data about customers enables suppliers to evaluate the history of a relationship and to draw conclusions about the likelihood of further development, stagnation or even termination.

Third, exhibitors and visitors have access to virtual trade fairs anytime from anywhere. Virtual events enhance a continuous communication across time zones, increasing the efficiency of information exchange for exhibitors and visitors alike.

Effective IT-mediated planned communication in the pre-relationship stage may increase potential visitors’ interest in the exhibitor firm’s presentation. For instance, online advertisements, links to relevant websites or online press releases might attract potential visitors to the virtual trade fair from anywhere and at any time. Interactive elements, such as virtual booths, chat rooms or video-conferencing facilities, enable exhibitors to contact visitors directly, to initiate the exchange of information and, thus, to interact. Similarly, these interactive instruments provide the opportunity for a dialogue between exhibitors and visitors. Internet technology helps to decrease social distance and supports the establishment of contacts among attendees. At the same time, exhibitors and visitors can continue their conversations in private, logging on to separate chat rooms or joining a telephone conference.

Dr Geigenmüller argues that the effectiveness of virtual trade fairs refers to:

• •

  a firm’s ability to establish IT-mediated planned communication and interaction processes during pre-show, at show and post-show activities;

• •

  resulting in the establishment of contacts with a wider audience irrespective of local or time restrictions;

• •

  enabling an effective exchange of information between exhibitors and visitors leading to an ongoing dialogue; and

• •

  in order to identify and develop valuable customer relationships.

Virtual trade fair effectiveness is proposed as a central variable in determining the value of a relationship. A company’s ability to initiate and manage communication and interaction processes during pre-show, at-show and post-show activities on the internet is assumed to enhance activity links, resource ties and actor bonds between buyers and sellers acting as exhibitors and visitors in a multimedia-based environment. Therefore, a firm’s ability to generate responses to its communication activities in a multimedia-based environment affects all states of relationship development.

The effectiveness of virtual trade fairs is likely to depend strongly on human, physical, and organizational resources, as well as CRM processes and systems. One could argue that a switch to virtual trade fairs would mean cost reallocation, rather than cost reduction.

Benefits from virtual trade fairs will remain limited unless there is a strong commitment to internal marketing processes and a change in thinking related to marketing structures. Instead of using the traditional marketing model, companies should develop and sustain their ability to learn and to accumulate and manage knowledge. Especially in turbulent environments, an important prerequisite to gaining competitive advantage includes the development of abilities and competences that network partners, especially customers, are expected to provide in order to enable interactions. Companies could serve as mentors in developing customers’ competences and motivation for exchanging information. However, mentoring customers should not be confused with teaching immature recipients. Different levels of empowerment require different communication strategies to enhance valuable relationships.

While many trade fair attendees like to check out (mainly in person, but perhaps online) new products, what happens if you don’t have a tangible product to exhibit? Take trade travel shows, for instance. Like other trade shows, they’re booming but they need a different emphasis from shows which emphasise products.

In “Travel trade shows: exploratory study of exhibitors’ perceptions” Ulku Yuksel and Ranjit Voola say that experience and credence qualities, together with the underlying service characteristics, signify the importance of travel trade fairs for both visitors and exhibitors. The former operates in a business-to-customer (B2C) context in which customers visit the organised travel trade fair and shop around the stands of various exhibitors (travel organisers). The latter represents a B2B market relationship between the customer of the trade fair organisation (i.e. the exhibitor, such as a hotel, tour operator, airline, destination management company, incentive house, and so forth) and the trade fair organisation company. The customer in this context buys a stand (booth) from the organiser to display its services to its potential customers (e.g. outbound tour operators) or consumers (end consumers who personally intend to come and visit the foreign country as a tourist). Specifically, the complexity of international travel trade shows are further highlighted due to the multiple stakeholders, including travel trade organisers and travel trade participants (i.e. exhibitors).

Staff manning travel trade stands have to be very qualified and extremely knowledgeable about the service (i.e. sales managers, directors, general managers and even owners of smaller firms) and have the authority to book and sell, and possess pricing authority. Hence, excellence in communication, by the stand staff is essential. Second, the heterogeneity of the services further emphasizes qualified and experienced staff as the superiority, reliability, consistency and stability of the service communicated should be at a very high level. Therefore, travel trade exhibitors must ensure consistency in the delivery of quality, image and be able to manage fluctuating demands with full price authority, and design and package (bundling) services as per the retailers request in real time.

Third, the simultaneity and inseparability of production and consumption of trade shows mandates top managers to exhibit ownership and decision-making power. For example, the interactions require decentralised decision-making and the involvement of the retailer to the terms and conditions of the sale. Lastly, the perishability of services makes it vital for the exhibitors to close sales during shows. Selling a tourism service immediately is paramount as they cannot be held in inventory and stored to be sold at a later stage. All these features of travel trade shows highlight the distinctive nature and complexity of services marketing.

There are multiple layers of market and business relationships involved in the context of trade fairs. The first one is the travel trade organiser’s relationship with participant firms as exhibitors (B2B). The organisation’s name (reputation), quality, venue, invited visitors list, other exhibitors, and additional quality factors in relation to the exhibition, play an important role in participant firms’ attendance as an exhibitor, including exhibition installations, decorations, product displays in the stand, maintenance, and removals. Hence, the exhibitor has to examine both their promotional strategy and the quality of the fair. This will allow for a better understanding of how to allocate sparse promotional budget. A limited budget needs to be distributed wisely among various promotional tools (i.e. choosing the best quality fairs).

The second layer of relationship revolves around participant firms’ (exhibitors) relations to other travel organisers (retailers) who are visitors of the fair and buy services in order to resell them to their own customers (B2B). A third level of business relationship of services firms is between the exhibitors. For example, a tour operator as an exhibitor of a stand may visit another exhibitor of another stand in the same fair, say, an airline company of a specific destination to book its travel business; or a hotel may make new business deals with a new tour operator or with an airline company to accommodate their stop-over passengers or overnight crew. These examples highlight buyer-seller relationship or a marketing function occurs.

Another level of relationship may ensue, for example, between investors, construction firms, headhunters and hotel management companies. Finally, the last group of buyers may represent end-consumers who would visit exhibitors’ stands to decide on their next-year travel destination (B2C). Specifically, this represents a B2C context where exhibitors may sell some of their services directly to individuals who come and buy these services for their personal consumptions. In general, the majority of open days for most travel trade shows are just for professionals (B2B) during the exhibition; however, sometimes the last day targets individual consumers.

So what of the future? In “The future of trade shows: insights from a scenario analysis”, Manfred Kirchgeorg et al. say the scenarios suggest that trade shows will continue to be an integral and indispensable part of the marketing mix of companies. However, they clearly indicate that trade show companies should continue to move away from selling space and instead become information brokers who facilitate the networking and interaction of market players.

There are indications that this function represents the competitive advantage of trade show companies now and in the future. In addition, trade show organisers need to focus more on offering a broad range of high-level services. They have not yet been able to leverage fully the potential arising from efficient trade show branding and positioning themselves as experts on specific topics. To achieve their full potential trade show companies need the freedom to determine their activities without excessive government interference. Consequently, it is regarded as highly likely that the trade show business will be further privatised.

On the whole, the findings of this study’s scenario analysis indicate that developments affecting trade shows up to the year 2020 will be shaped by factors that can be controlled by the companies themselves, in conjunction with those beyond their control. For example, it seems very likely that economic development in Russia and Asia will lead to a continuing rise in trade show events and the building of further exhibition capacity.

Virtually all experts surveyed confirmed that personal contact between decision-makers, companies and customers in an attractive, emotionalised setting will still be highly valued in 2020. A question mark, nevertheless, hangs over the extent to which physical product presentations and exhibition space will still play a part in these global industry gatherings. This will also largely depend on the capabilities of trade show organisers to provide efficient and involving settings on industry relevant themes.

To conclude, examining the output generated, it can clearly be seen that more than ever before, the future of trade shows between now and 2020 will be shaped by the dynamics of intense competition and by changes in the surrounding environment. In the context of their strategic planning activities, trade show companies have no choice but to explore tomorrow’s development trajectories today. Only then will they be able to respond swiftly and flexibly to developments ahead, and with that defend and preserve their competitive advantage.

(A précis of the Special Issue “Trade show and exhibition marketing”. Supplied by Marketing Consultants for Emerald.)