It is a great honor and privilege to be named a Fellow of the Institute for the Study of Business Markets as it showcases my deep engagement with B2B trade show research for  the last 30 or so years. You have probably heard this before from senior management – “How did the event go? Was it a huge success for us?” Trade shows are big business (over $10 billion revenue in 2018) but in today’s world, data has become the Holy Grail. Companies are relentless in acquiring and processing information and answers based on personal observation and gut feelings (“. . . . our booth was packed with visitors all the time . . . .”) do not cut it anymore.

Trade shows involve three distinct stakeholders: attendees (prospective short- or long-term buyers and current customers), exhibitors (prospective short- or long-term sellers) and show organizers who coordinate with industry associations to organize and manage the event and facilitate buyer-seller interactions. There is consensus that trade shows provide opportunities to create value along three dimensions: (a) Educational (disseminate knowledge about new products, feature new research, highlight industry trends), (b) Networking (provide a setting for social interaction and help expand the professional network) and (c) Commercial (generate new business opportunities).

The Covid-19 pandemic altered the trade show industry landscape resulting in the emergence and rapid growth of virtual events. In this new reality where virtual and in-person events will coexist, three broad questions will dominate much of the discussion on how this important B2B communication medium is going to evolve in the years ahead.

Economic Viability of the Trade Show

The post-pandemic recovery of the trade show industry has begun to stabilize at a new normal where show organizers now face intense pressure to demonstrate value to other stakeholders in order to survive. Virtual events are here to stay as several attendees and exhibitors consider the cost advantages (travel costs, time away from office). Show organizers traditionally relying on three revenue streams (sale of floor space, sponsorships, and attendee registration fees) are now challenged to monetize virtual events and virtual engagement.

Hybrid versions of trade shows (some combination of online and in-person) can feature (a) the traditional in-person live event, (b) a real-time virtual experience occurring synchronously with the live show where virtual attendees pay a fraction of the full price, (c) an on-demand asynchronous experience where edited event content is made available to ‘visitors’ at a lower fee, or (d) promotion of event highlights via snippets and recaps that visitors and others share via social media. Show organizers may choose one or more of these versions.

Industry experts generally agree that the educational dimension of a trade show is executed quite satisfactorily (audience surveys affirm this fact too). Challenges remain, however, on the networking and commercial dimensions of the trade show as the value of a face-to-face encounter between exhibitors and attendees featuring a ‘happy hour’ or a product demo is very difficult to replicate in the online format.

Role of Trade Shows in the Marcom Mix

Exhibiting companies will have to address the virtual-only audience of prospective and current customers while trying to find a balance between participation in virtual versus in-person events. Overall cost-effectiveness of communication in B2B markets varies considerably across different channels (advertising, social media, trade show, sales calls, website) and across different stages of the customer buying process (Gopalakrishna, Lilien and Donsbach 2022). To ensure customer progression through the sales funnel, exhibiting companies must find the best approach to engage its audiences in multiple ways before, during and after the trade show. Synergies often exist between communication media – for example, trade shows are known to enhance the effectiveness of sales calls (Smith, Gopalakrishna and Smith 2004). Finding the right blend of marcom channels can offer a significant competitive edge for B2B marketers.

Trade Show Metrics and Measurement

The value derived from exhibiting at a trade show is a difficult task (see Gopalakrishna et. al. 1995 for an illustration) and its impact on the bottom line remains a debatable topic among managers. Typical metrics such as attraction, contact and conversion efficiency (Gopalakrishna and Lilien 1995) provide a basis to address trade show accountability. The online format has produced several digital metrics (# of online registrants, # of attendees, firmographics, event preferences, type of engagement) although many of these are in the early stages of development.

Tactical variables such as pre-show promotion, booth space and location, booth staff, attention-grabbing techniques and others that likely drive these performance metrics are of great interest to managers and academic researchers. Opportunities for quasi-experiments in the online and field settings to understand causal effects will add to our knowledge base in this area.

Opportunities for Research

There are several avenues for meaningful research that can bring great value to the academic and practitioner communities. I note a few examples below, but this is just the start of an exciting journey in an under-researched area in B2B marketing that has now entered uncharted territory. There is much to be explored and discovered to gain leverage from this important medium of communication that brings together a concentrated group of interested buyers and sellers.

• How do we effectively integrate online and in-person experiences to create a cohesive event?
• How do shifting corporate budgets for events and travel impact the in-person event format?
• How do we refine show effectiveness metrics in the digital format? What is their linkage to bottom-line outcomes?
• Which shows do we participate in-person versus online? What are the drivers of this decision?
• Which techniques are more effective in attracting our target audience in online events?
• How can attendee engagement be enhanced in the online setting?
• How do we assess online attendee satisfaction; how does that track with buying outcomes?

References

Gopalakrishna, Srinath, Gary L. Lilien and Andrew Donsbach (2022), Trade Shows in the Business Marketing Communications Mix, Handbook of Business-to-Business Marketing, Edward Elgar Publishing, 247-265.

Gopalakrishna, Srinath, Gary L. Lilien, Jerome D. Williams and Ian K. Sequeira (1995), “Do Trade Shows Pay Off?” Journal of Marketing, 59, 3 (July), 75-83.

Gopalakrishna, Srinath and Gary L. Lilien (1995), “A Three-Stage Model of Industrial Trade Show Performance”, Marketing Science, 14, 1 (Winter), 22-42.

Smith, Timothy M., Srinath Gopalakrishna and Paul M. Smith (2004), “The Complementary Effect of Trade Shows on Personal Selling”, International Journal of Research in Marketing, 21, 61-76.