Have Conferences Become a Thing of the Past?

By Jerry Durant

This week was herald with some unfortunate news… the flagship of all outsourcing events, Global Sourcing Forum, held each year in New York City was cancelled (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/14/nyregion/14show.html?_r=1 ).  The less than one week notice left participants from around the globe (China, Poland, S. America…) stranded without an event to participate in.  Literally thousands of dollars was spent by suppliers and nations, some of which supported by the World Bank, to promote their services. 

While rumors circulate about the loss of sponsorship monies and general maleficent behavior, the question remains; has the conference format for anything other than education outlived its usefulness?  If you review most any conference venue the promoters will talk about the level of exposure that one will have from participating.  This might include the number of attendees, their relative position, the size of the companies involved and even the buying power they represent. 


The real unknown is the amount of business that an organization might crystallize from being a part.  It has been my observation, based solely on unscientific discussions, that the number of real sales is less than 1% of the total attendee base.  For example, a 1,000 person conference will yield 10 possible sales.  Even if the number was 10 times that amount would it be acceptable when there might be an equal number of vendors trying to win those opportunities?  I guess if I was shooting to win 10 or 100 sales and I was spending over $100,000 to gain exposure to 1,000 people I might decide that it might be a more practical investment to advertise.  At least the exposure would be greater. And if the question is losing valuable face-to-face time… there are many ways to do this using the latest in technology. This would permit us to show our real technical capabilities.

But instead we have chosen to follow traditional approaches that don’t work in the tough economic times that we are in.  Maybe that is the very reason why the Global Sourcing Forum was cancelled, a format that has outlived it’s effectiveness?  Conferences are a source of education and the latest in current thinking. Forum was more an example of market promotion with education as a sideline (with a strong presence of key vendor supports being the speaking/education cadre).  This slant creates a much different twist on sustained viability than one based on knowledge value. Companies are much more willing to forgo participation if the market returns are not there and if it is too skewed towards intellectual contribution.

As I see it, the harm caused by this unfortunate set of circumstance is substantial not because of the cancellation but the short notice that was given.  It has forced many vendors and countries to reassess their promotion strategies.  There were a lot that followed the standard, big name, promotional traditions without really evaluating their ROI and the value that they may have received that isn’t as easily measured.  

I suspect that there are many who will be asked with some very hard questions. Even though they may not have had a hand in the outcome the questions that will be asked will revolve around the real value of a physical event venue.  With technology, social outlets and organizations capable of putting you in direct face-to-face contact with real buyers the question remains… is a conference really the right forum for promoting visibility, establishing brand (which frankly many seem to be a whole lot like their competition) and to make real deals?  

I guess we won’t know what these discussions will be like behind the closed doors of countries, companies and with individuals but it’s certainly an issue that everyone will have to contend with in the upcoming years. Until next time feel free to contribute your thoughts or send me an email at jdurant@Int-IOM.org.

Posted in: Industry News

About the Author

Jerry Durant

Jerry Durant is viewed by many as one of the pioneers in outsourcing. Starting his ventures in 1988 by supporting many of the premier global buyers he has carried this practice through to over 70 countries. Most recently Jerry established the International Institute for Outsource Management (IIOM) with the sole purpose of advancing professionalism in the supplier community. His practical and market specific innovation can be seen in the formation of the Outsourcing Management Body of Knowledge, the Global Star Certification (GSC) the only assessment measuring outsource company viability, Certified Outsource/Offshore Project Management Certification, and the establishment of the 1st International Outsource Management Research Center in Wuxi, China. Though his efforts the IIOM has quickly been recognized as the leading source for outsource service provider support. Jerry's unrelenting enthusiasm is constantly pushing forward the sourcing agenda as a means to global prosperity through responsible behavior and innovation.

Jerry has advanced degrees in Computer Science, Management and Accounting and is certified in a number of disciplines associated with technology. He is a prolific writer and widely sought after as a speaker around the globe.

2 Comments

I've worked on the association side of training and believe there are a lot more factors in play below the surface (based on the original NY Times article). The sad fact is that conferences (especially international events, as was this one) are enormously expensive to conduct, even before the event opens. Far too many details are in play to specify here, but things like room guarantees, A/V and F&B deposits and other up-front fees quickly add up. Losing key sponsors just prior to the event can be devastating. It sounds to me as though several factors were probably in play here on top of those financial issues. For example, it's possible that registrations were lower than anticipated (affecting those up-front commitments) because this just isn't the year for international outsourcing, which some sources say has been in decline recently as more US firms turn internally for partners. So while I agree that organizations need to reconsider the benefits of their investment in attending or participating in such conferences, I'd add that it's premature to assume that conferences as a whole are an endangered species. Here's why: despite the 2008 economic collapse, many associations (with a heavy reliance on their annual conferences to help meet their expenses) actually saw increases in attendance in the year following and most others had at least the same number of attendees. This was despite an across-the-board cut in travel expense budgets for those attending. Why? Because many individuals embraced the opportunity to network -- just in case their job was the next thing to go. Professional development via the education events meant they were going to stay on top of the latest trends and products, keeping them -- and their organizations -- competitive. Vendors flocked because that one additional sale on down the road could have made the difference for that annual bottom line. As for actual sales at the trade show? Some organizations are prohibited from allowing it. Thinking of the trade show/expo as a way of making sales is -- quite frankly -- limiting. The company purchasing booth space that expects to make an $XXX return (especially within a specific period of time after the show) misses the point: the trade show is about making contacts, showing off the product or promoting the service, seeing what the competitors are up to, and meeting with current (even former) clients and customers to nurture those relationships. Quite honestly, if you were shopping for a multi-million dollar, customized LMS, would you make a commitment on a trade show floor after just meeting the rep and seeing a quick demo? Not likely. From the customer's point of view, the trade show/expo is an opportunity to see a lot of possibilities in a short amount of time and for a lot less $$ than it would take to visit every possible vendor outside of the expo. It's a fact-gathering mission for the potential customer. At the association where I used to work, the executive director said it best when he described the event as "creating the dance floor where the customer and vendors can meet." Sometimes you get asked to dance and sometimes you don't. But if you don't attend the dance at all, you most certainly won't get asked. Yes, conferences need to evolve -- just as the dance needs to keep up with the times -- but extrapolating one conference cancellation into a conclusion about the conference model overall is a stretch, and an inaccurate one at that.

Ellen BehrensNovember 11 2010 (2:14 PM)

I too have spent allot of time in the ‘conference/seminar’ ranks both as a participant and as an organizer. Wasn’t trying to put the traditional conference venue in a grave, but to point out that times are changing and that a change should be considered. Coming out of this economic situation is going to present a whole lot of new challenges aside from purely money - it also is a factor of time availability. I’m sure you have heard all of the arguments about ‘networking’ and value from face-presence in conferences. The reality from a management perspective is that they have social value but not much relates to real business value. I guess I would refute this to a limited degree by qualifying that it would be dependent upon the goal/mission/audience event that was being undertaken. Over time we will see, since it’s starting to show signs of application, whether the virtues or downsides of virtual conferences will be. For audiences in global outsourcing it’s a perfect vehicle to be explored and overcomes some of the phobia that exists between buyer/supplier contact. Thanks again for your comments and all the best.

Jerry DurantNovember 11 2010 (2:17 PM)

You must be logged in to post a comment: or Join for Free!