Traffic density may not be easy to understand at first glance. While working on this problem I came up with some useful additions to the concept.
I was answering a question for a colleague that centered on understanding traffic density numbers (as provided by Exhibit Surveys in their show research). Exhibit Surveys provides what I consider to be definitive benchmark data on trade shows as it is derived from good solid primary and secondary research.
First off, Exhibit Surveys defines traffic density as: "the number of attendees per 100 square feet of exhibit space" available at an exhibition.
The average across all shows for 2007 was 2.3. The top ten shows measured in 2007 ranged between 2.9 and 8.4, a very wide range. (Source Expo Web Marketwatch: Trade show attendee benchmarks - http://www.expoweb.com/Benchmarks_Research/2008MayMarketwatch.htm)
The formula is:
Traffic Density (TD)= N x tv x 100/A x ts
Where:
N = Net Attendance = _____ (excludes exhibitors, press, and staff)
A = Total exhibit space = _____ net sq. ft.
tv = Average time attendees spent at the exhibits = ___ hours
ts = Total hours the exhibits were open = ___ hours
This calculation takes into account how many people are in the halls, for how long, spread among a number of exhibitors.
But how many visitors on average does this translate to for an exhibitor? That is the question I am most often asked. Here is a simple way to take a traffic density number and turn it into an average visitor count:
Take the traffic density number, say 2.3 visitors per 100 square feet of exhibit space, and multiply it times the average number of exhibits seen per hour, (I don't recall seeing this number currently used or reported so you may have to estimate from your own observation, or ask show management.) That gives you the average number of visitors/ hour/ 100 square feet. For example: a 2.3 traffic density x average of 4 exhibits visited per hour = 9.2 average visitors/hour/100 sq. ft.
Multiply that times the total number of exhibition hours, and you get the average number of visitors/100 sq. feet/ show. Example, if the total number of exhibition hours is 24, then the average number of visitors / 100 sq ft. would be 221 (9.2 x 24) for the show! Remember, these visitors are "net" of exhibitors and other untargeted personnel.
Caution!!! a bigger exhibit does not necessarily mean more visitors, and there is a limit to how many visitors are available, regardless of how attractive you are.
My direct observations through client evaluations indicate visitors go to 3 – 4 exhibits per hour and 21 – 32 exhibits per show. (7 to 8 hours in the exhibition x 3 to 4 exhibits per hour.) Exhibit Surveys many have more definitive data on these variables.
Exhibitors are most interested in estimating the traffic they can expect. Mercenary aren’t we! I hope this helps understand an important concept and to get a little more value from it.
Regards,
Ed
Call me if you have questions or to discuss. +1.770.391.0015. edjones@constellationcc.com
Subscribe To
Posts
All Comments
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Thursday, June 5, 2008
Generating Leads and ROI from Event Marketing - from First Wave
This is a post you may be interested in regarding the all important pre and post event marketing and communication campaign steps, from our friends at First Wave. This was based upon a lunch conversation I referenced in this blog a few weeks ago.
"...I had an interesting lunch the other day with some folks from Constellation Communication Corporation about event marketing and the lack of ROI and real leads companies generate and track from these costly events. Companies spend millions each year in one of the largest marketing budget items, but too often very little time is spent on pre- and post-event planning and lead nurturing."
TO READ MORE GO TO:
target="_blank" >Generating Leads and ROI from Event Marketing
Ed
"...I had an interesting lunch the other day with some folks from Constellation Communication Corporation about event marketing and the lack of ROI and real leads companies generate and track from these costly events. Companies spend millions each year in one of the largest marketing budget items, but too often very little time is spent on pre- and post-event planning and lead nurturing."
TO READ MORE GO TO:
target="_blank" >Generating Leads and ROI from Event Marketing
Ed
Wednesday, June 4, 2008
Speakers vs. Event Objectives... Event Communications Effectiveness
This response was provided to a reader who questioned how to effectively work with high profile speakers, especially those who have handlers that often seem to "muck- up" the process:
A common misfortune in event execution is when a high profile speaker dictates or detracts from the purpose of the event. That purpose is normally to persuade the assembled group to go out and perform certain activities in an expected manner that will benefit the event host, such as a change in job behavior among employees or taking a step in a prescribed sales cycle among customers and prospects. A "big name" speaker is almost always a draw, but is not a guaranteed advantage once people are assembled and in your seats.
Many speakers I work with, including the famous and powerful, are happy to support your agenda if you find and call to their attention a nexus between their views and your objectives.
When I worked with Walter Wriston, legendary Chairman of Citicorp years ago, or George Will the columnist, the approach was the same. I read their writings and speeches for the past six to twelve months, identified their talking points that helped position our speakers and proof points in support of our overall objectives. When we met, I presented them with a range of "ideas" they might emphasize in a presentation, paying great respect to their ideas as a basis. I also presented the purpose and goals of our event, and a block diagram of the agenda, explaining exactly how and where they fit into the overall plan.
Generally, speakers and their support staff (speech writers, etc.) will be surprised and impressed with the preparation and direction provided to them and will be willing to craft something that becomes a powerful part of your program. Speakers will often thank you for making their job much easier. Speakers tell me the reason they sometimes give a canned speech is lack of any direction to the contrary.
There are exceptions, notably those speakers who insist on giving the same canned speech at every appearance. Their value is usually their celebrity. Hire them at your own peril. If you do, preview their talk and be certain that no part of their presentation will conflict with your agenda and identify the points they make that support your objectives, and can be reprised in presentations by your other speakers.
Entertainers are an exception too, although a similar brief has worked wonders on many occasions.
Ed Jones
A common misfortune in event execution is when a high profile speaker dictates or detracts from the purpose of the event. That purpose is normally to persuade the assembled group to go out and perform certain activities in an expected manner that will benefit the event host, such as a change in job behavior among employees or taking a step in a prescribed sales cycle among customers and prospects. A "big name" speaker is almost always a draw, but is not a guaranteed advantage once people are assembled and in your seats.
Many speakers I work with, including the famous and powerful, are happy to support your agenda if you find and call to their attention a nexus between their views and your objectives.
When I worked with Walter Wriston, legendary Chairman of Citicorp years ago, or George Will the columnist, the approach was the same. I read their writings and speeches for the past six to twelve months, identified their talking points that helped position our speakers and proof points in support of our overall objectives. When we met, I presented them with a range of "ideas" they might emphasize in a presentation, paying great respect to their ideas as a basis. I also presented the purpose and goals of our event, and a block diagram of the agenda, explaining exactly how and where they fit into the overall plan.
Generally, speakers and their support staff (speech writers, etc.) will be surprised and impressed with the preparation and direction provided to them and will be willing to craft something that becomes a powerful part of your program. Speakers will often thank you for making their job much easier. Speakers tell me the reason they sometimes give a canned speech is lack of any direction to the contrary.
There are exceptions, notably those speakers who insist on giving the same canned speech at every appearance. Their value is usually their celebrity. Hire them at your own peril. If you do, preview their talk and be certain that no part of their presentation will conflict with your agenda and identify the points they make that support your objectives, and can be reprised in presentations by your other speakers.
Entertainers are an exception too, although a similar brief has worked wonders on many occasions.
Ed Jones
Tuesday, June 3, 2008
Paper or Plastic? Should I Use Electronic Tools to Gather Opinions and Input from My Participants?
A recent electronic newsletter reader asked the question, "Should I investigate electronic tools for capturing input from my event participants or should I stick with paper?" Below is the response I provided.
As with most things in life, there are pros and cons to alternate approaches. Electronic interactive technologies abound today for capturing live, instant feedback. They range from touch screen kiosks, wireless or RFID handheld devices and even smart cards. Pros - The feedback is instant, even to the extent that you can modify the presentation that is actually in play! There is no data to enter after the event and the data is reported accurately as a part of the overall system. Cons - For the most part, these devices are programmed with a pre-conceived range of answers among which the participants pick and choose. Open- ended feedback is often difficult or time consuming to enter. Also, you may be limited to the number of devices on hand, which can cause a slow down in a busy exhibit environment.
Paper based surveys may seem old fashioned, but they can't be beat for having the guest take on the labor aspect of documenting data, and it provides for the most fluid response to open- ended questions. You might want to consider a simple paper survey when people are waiting for a presentation to begin, when you have very large crowds and when you want the visitors to tell you more than you might already know through their responses to open- ended questions. Paper is also the most inexpensive route if you are on a budget. Cons - Somebody has to read and enter all of that data after the event and turn it into a report! (Use a contractor) Also, sensitive information can develop "legs" and walk away from your exhibit, so guard those forms and the completed surveys.
Don't discount the value of waiting until after the event to gather input. You can simply collect contact data at your event and then re-contact people via an email notice and web based survey afterwards. This has most of the advantages of both approaches.
Live interview plays a role as well. If you really want in-depth information on who visited with you and their reaction and perceptions, hire interviewers to conduct live, random sample intercept surveys with visitors who have completed your event experience.
Ed
As with most things in life, there are pros and cons to alternate approaches. Electronic interactive technologies abound today for capturing live, instant feedback. They range from touch screen kiosks, wireless or RFID handheld devices and even smart cards. Pros - The feedback is instant, even to the extent that you can modify the presentation that is actually in play! There is no data to enter after the event and the data is reported accurately as a part of the overall system. Cons - For the most part, these devices are programmed with a pre-conceived range of answers among which the participants pick and choose. Open- ended feedback is often difficult or time consuming to enter. Also, you may be limited to the number of devices on hand, which can cause a slow down in a busy exhibit environment.
Paper based surveys may seem old fashioned, but they can't be beat for having the guest take on the labor aspect of documenting data, and it provides for the most fluid response to open- ended questions. You might want to consider a simple paper survey when people are waiting for a presentation to begin, when you have very large crowds and when you want the visitors to tell you more than you might already know through their responses to open- ended questions. Paper is also the most inexpensive route if you are on a budget. Cons - Somebody has to read and enter all of that data after the event and turn it into a report! (Use a contractor) Also, sensitive information can develop "legs" and walk away from your exhibit, so guard those forms and the completed surveys.
Don't discount the value of waiting until after the event to gather input. You can simply collect contact data at your event and then re-contact people via an email notice and web based survey afterwards. This has most of the advantages of both approaches.
Live interview plays a role as well. If you really want in-depth information on who visited with you and their reaction and perceptions, hire interviewers to conduct live, random sample intercept surveys with visitors who have completed your event experience.
Ed
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)