Actual article date: Feb 26, 2016

Recently a topic that I have been thinking about is how do shows actually fail after chancing upon this old article on a mega tradeshow that never saw the lights again. Here’s a timeline of events from WSJ.

That though, is just one example amongst the whole exhibition world where shows rises and fall.

‍

This is a reflective post to share my thoughts and I welcome you to share your ideas in the comments below too.

The reasons behind why shows fail are complex and here’s what I personally think are key reasons that lead shows to their grave:

‍

1. Industry dynamics

Industry changes have the biggest impact on events outcome. During boom times, shows accelerate their growth within industries that is leading the boom. For example, during the construction boom in the Middle East, shows grew so huge that venues have to increase their capacity to accommodate the events’ requirements. There is however, not much an organiser can do in the greater context of how boom times occurs and we just have to ride and try to lead the “wave” as competition of similar shows arises.

So what happens when an industry falters after a boom? This is when the competition between shows for a declining audience becomes serious as naturally, only the strongest shows survive. This brings me to my next point.

‍

2. Misunderstanding of attendees’ needs

During boom times, there is a good chance for organisers to be misled by the fact that their shows is growing because they have hit the right notes with their attendees; since the attendence is increasing anyway. It is usually not that obvious during boom times when gauging whether if attendees needs are closely assigned to your event goals. This is until when the boom starts to plateau and when the audience starts to evaluate and choose to commit only to shows that bring them the maximum benefits/ROI. The attendees’ needs should be more obvious at this stage and organisers need the right processes to measure the sentiments and behavior to gain the right insights.

Armed with the right insights into the attendees’ needs, shows need to evolve past their present capabilities to bring added values to their audience. This may also be the time when organisers choose not to because…

‍

3. Complacency

“My show is currently the leading show in the industry and I don’t see why I will need to do more or explore something new”, is frankly, a reason I have heard before. This statement makes sense as typically, the leading shows already have their deep roots within the industry channels to be able to bring in the audiences as well as matured and valuable programmes in place.

However, I do believe that to have a long term aim in place for sustained lead on an industry, shows and their programmes need to evolve to compound on their own successes and not end up as a victim of their own successes.

‍

4. Thinking that one actually understands attendees’ needs

“I have done this show for X editions and I know my attendees well. They will not use this.” is also quite a common reason that organisers give on why they will not approach their show in a certain new direction. It is a perfectly fine statement to make as many organisers genuinely do understand their event attendees. However, in some instances, when further asked on how did they actually find out their attendees’ needs, organisers cite from a myriad of reasons like ‘I spoke to a few of my delegates and sponsors’, ‘we did a few focus groups’ or that ‘my survey responds from 10% of my delegates’.

In the greater scheme of things, if one is running an event that is sees hundreds or thousands of attendees, it is important to base reasoning on measurable and sufficient data. It is important to measure well and in a scalable way, reaching as many of the attendees as possible to avoid falling into the fallacy of thinking that one actually understands their attendees.

Good Reasoning and Good Data have to back each other up in a good way.