“A Literature Review Generalizing About Trade Show

Effectiveness for Corporate Exhibitors”

Dr. Robert Beland

Tiffany Stearns Chacon

University of Florida

July 2010

Abstract

This literature review seeks to discuss the research that has been

conducted regarding trade shows and their effectiveness for corporate exhibitors.

This study will explore the benefits and features of trade shows as well as the

negative aspects that companies face when they participate in trade shows and

exhibitions. This review attempts to give a clearer picture of the state of the trade

show industry from the viewpoint of the exhibitor. The pieces reviewed include

journal articles, trade show industry research done by organizations such as the

Center for Exhibition Industry Research (CEIR), articles published by exhibit

houses, books, journal articles and presentations done by industry experts and

professionals. The results of this literature review showed that trade shows are a

cost effective means of locating a company’s target market, presenting their

products to that target market and moving toward closing sales with buyers within

their target market. Additionally, the literature review found that show selection,

measuring return on investment and pre-show/post-show efforts will assist

corporate exhibitors in having more effective, efficient trade shows.

Introduction

For the last several decades, trade shows and exhibitions have been a

primary tool for most companies as a means to reach out to retail stores as well

as consumers. For the purposes of this review, trade shows will be defined as

business-to-business events where manufacturers (corporate exhibitors) gather

to meet with corporate attendees in order to build relationships with those

corporations so that the attendees will purchase the products or services from

2

the manufacturers. For example, at the Natural Products Expo West, over 2,000

manufacturers of products such as Emergen-C, Muscle Milk or Gatorade will

have booths so that the attendees (executives from retail stores such as GNC,

Vitamin Shoppe and Walgreens) will visit their respective booths and hopefully

start purchasing their products. Some companies will exhibit in as many as 400

trade shows a year. In the 1980s and 1990s, the number of trade shows in the

United States and Canada grew from about 3,000 shows a year to over 4,000

trade shows a year. The Trade Show Bureau reported that the number of

attendees grew from 60 million to 85 million and the number of exhibiting

companies grew from 1 million to 1.3 million (1994). Konikow effectively captures

the sentiment toward trade shows during this time:

On the roles trade shows can play and the importance of trade shows to

marketing programs in general, researchers have been unanimous: trade

shows, if properly planned, can be an integral part of a company’s

marketing communications program in the way they convey the desired

messages to prospects through graphic displays, trained booth staff, have

products and/or service demonstrated, have brochures and collateral

support materials, etc. (Konikow 1983).

Today there are over 13,000 trade shows in the U.S. and Canada in

approximately 2,000 venues. The amount of exhibitors, however, has stayed

about the same: 1.5 million (CEIR, 2009). Due to the recession, many companies

have begun to scale back their trade show involvement. Many organizations and

companies desire to have a measurable return on investment when they

3

participate in any marketing activity. While trade shows can be a good tool for

organizations to use, it is difficult to measure return on investment and return on

objectives for these events.

Figure 1 shows the results of surveys and research conducted by CEIR in

2009 regarding the number of exhibitors, attendees and the revenue of trade

shows for the last several years.

The results of this literature review will allow for a better understanding of

the state of the trade show industry. The review will show the factors that

improve effectiveness of trade shows for corporate exhibitors. After summarizing

Figure 1: Attendance of exhibitions overall in 2000-2008

4

the key points of these pieces of literature, an analysis of the factors affecting

trade show effectiveness will be conducted.

As the literature is reviewed, there will be several main markers that will

be analyzed for trade show effectiveness:

Show Selection

Return on investment (ROI)

Return on objectives (ROO)

Cost of trade shows

Exhibit Design

Trade Show Staff

Pre-show/Post-show efforts

These markers were chosen based on the emphasis of the literature

reviewed. If a marker was mentioned in several of the pieces of reviewed

literature, the marker was included in this review.

Show Selection

In order to look at the effectiveness of a trade show, exhibitors must

determine where to locate their target audience. The purpose of a trade show for

exhibitors is to interact with potential customers. A trade show can only be

effective and efficient for a company if their target audience is present and

prepared to purchase their products or services.

Despite the recession, trade show attendee quality is high. More than 93%

of attendees authorize or approve purchases for their companies and more than

70% are in professional or managerial positions at their companies (Weisgal,

5

2009). In order to take advantage of trade show attendee quality, exhibitors must

select their trade shows effectively. Kerin and Cron (1987) found that trade show

selection is crucial to the success of the trade show and that a well-selected

show will increase the efficiency and effectiveness of a trade show for a

company.

When selecting trade shows to participate in, companies have to

determine whether they will take part in vertical or horizontal trade shows.

Vertical trade shows are shows that are very specified, such as trade shows for

resveratrol (a specific antioxidant health supplement) suppliers whereas

horizontal trade shows are broader, such as trade shows for health supplement

companies. Skyline and Tradeshow Week’s industry analysis shows that 39% of

exhibitors rate having more success at “smaller regional shows” and 37% rate

having more success at “big national shows” whereas 13% of exhibitors rated

having success at “vertical market shows” and only 4% rated having success at

their own private events (2009).

However, another study reported that exhibitors attract more of their target

audience if they participate in vertical shows rather than horizontal shows. The

same study showed that attendees intending to purchase locate exhibitors easier

at smaller, regional shows (Dekimpe et al, 1997). Kerin and Cron (1987) and

Heifen Fu et al (2007) also found that exhibitors choosing between horizontal and

vertical shows found that horizontal shows bring a less satisfactory outcome

compared to vertical shows.

6

Exhibitors surveyed shared that the biggest way they are cutting their

budgets is by show selection (Skyline & Tradeshow Week, 2009). Rather than

participating in all of the shows companies have participated in previously,

companies are selecting their shows more carefully in order to have increased

success at the shows they attend.

Return on Investment

Return on investment (ROI) can be defined as the gain or loss from the

money invested in various efforts (in this case, trade shows) that drive sales

(Lorimer, 2005). In order to calculate ROI for trade shows, you divide the gross

sales dollars resulting from the trade show by the cost of the trade show.

CEIR research has shown that 64.2% of exhibitors want to generate leads

at trade shows and 42% want to sell their products or services (2009). What this

means is that some companies will attempt to measure ROI by sales at trade

shows whereas other companies will attempt to measure ROI by sales from

leads when the trade show is completed.

While exhibitors surveyed most often selected “awareness” as their

justification for trade show attendance, exhibitors that justified their trade show

attendance with “sales” were more likely to see an increase in their trade show

budget (Skyline & Tradeshow Week, 2009). Therefore, if exhibitors put more of

an emphasis on measuring their ROI, they will get a positive response. In an

analysis of the trade show industry conducted by Skyline Exhibits and

Tradeshow Week, exhibitors surveyed showed that only 40% measured the

7

results of the trade shows they attended based on their return on investment

(2009).

The CEO of CEIR, Douglas Ducate admits that measuring return on

investment for trade shows is a challenge (Orlando CAB Meeting, 2009). While it

is clear that sales can be a tangible return on investment, companies can gather

hundreds of leads at a single trade show – some leads will not purchase at all

whereas other leads will purchase large quantities of products in months to come

after the show. However, it is still necessary for companies to attempt to measure

the return on investment at trade shows. There are other ways of calculating ROI

in addition to using gross sales. Jane Lorimer (2005) lists the following three

ways of calculating ROI:

Estimating ROI from collected sales leads

Projecting ROI from distributor recruitment

Projecting ROI from sales conversions

When estimating ROI from collected sales leads, Lorimer suggests

knowing the average number of qualified sales it takes a company to present to

possible buyers and how many of these potential buyers will actually buy. After a

company knows this data, the company will be able to calculate an average close

ratio.

Calculating ROI from distributor recruitment is similar in principle to

estimating ROI from collected sales leads. The formula is as follows:

8

Number of dealers (or sales reps) recruited x Average annual revenue per

dealer (or new sales rep) = Potential gross sales for this objective.

Potential gross sales ÷ Cost of the Event = Estimated ROI (Lorimer,

2005).

For calculating ROI from sales conversions, Lorimer suggests conducting

a sales conversion study via telephone or email and utilizing professionals with

experience in conducting these studies (2005).

Return on Objectives

One way of measuring trade show effectiveness is by measuring return on

objectives (ROO). In several studies conducted by many researchers, objective

setting has been proven to be an important and vital precursor to successful

trade show performance (Cavanaugh 1976; Bellizzi and Lipps 1984;

Gopalakrishina and Lilien 1995).

An analysis of trade show exhibitors showed that the primary guidelines

used to measure trade show results by exhibitors are as follows:

Lead counts: 58%

Sales revenue generated: 44%

Return on Investment (ROI): 40%

Client contacts: 40%

Booth traffic: 40%

Brand awareness: 26% (Skyline and Tradeshow Week, 2009)

9

When measuring ROO, exhibitors will take these guidelines and compare

their actual results to the objectives that they set.

CEIR conducted a survey among sales and marketing managers across

all industries that participated in trade shows and asked, “Annually, how many

people visit your trade show displays?” The average response was over 20,000

visitors annually (2009). Another CEIR survey showed that 81.9% of exhibiting

companies attend trade show because they want to brand their company or

present a positive company image (2009). Trade shows allow for that kind of

branding: face-to-face interactions with an average of 20,000 people a year can

positively affect brand image in the minds of retailers and consumers alike.

Cost of Trade Shows

Exhibitors surveyed showed that those who have cut their budgets greatly

outnumber those who are increasing their budgets by 4 to 1 (Skyline and

Tradeshow Week, 2009). The same survey showed that the average change in

the exhibit budget for 2009 is -9.2%.

Despite the decline in trade show participation in the last couple of years,

Browning and Adams found that when you compare the average cost of a sales

call versus the cost of a face-to-face interaction with a customer at a trade show,

the cost per customer of the trade show was much less than the sales call

(1988). In 2009, CEIR found that the cost to simply identify a potential customer

without an exhibit lead is $443 per customer whereas the cost of identifying a

potential customer with an exhibit lead is $96. This cost includes exhibit

construction, storage and transportation, exhibit space, salesperson salary, travel

10

and entertainment (CEIR, 2009). The same study showed that the cost of an

initial face-to-face interaction or appointment with a prospective customer would

cost an organization $1,039 without an exhibit lead and only $96 with an exhibit

lead (CEIR, 2009).

A similar study by CEIR showed the cost of closing a sale with an

exhibition lead and without an exhibition lead. The cost of closing a sale with an

exhibition lead was $2,188, whereas the cost of closing a sale without an

exhibition lead was $3,102 (CEIR, 2009). Additionally, the average number of

field sales calls to close a sale with an exhibition lead was 3 or fewer versus

closing a sale without an exhibition lead took more than 3 field sales calls (CEIR,

2009).

Exhibit Design

One of the most important physical elements of a trade show for an

exhibitor is the exhibit design. Exhibitors as a whole seem to place importance on

the size of the booth space: 47% of exhibitors surveyed showed that they would

rather cut shows than booth size (Skyline & Tradeshow Week, 2009). In the

cross-national study conducted by Dekimpe et al, exhibitors have a better chance

of attracting their target market if they have a larger booth space (1997).

In an analysis conducted in 2006-2009 by Skyline Exhibits & Tradeshow

Week, exhibitors surveyed showed that exhibitors’ budgets for exhibit

refurbishment/design/replacement increased every year in 2006-2008 but in

2009, exhibitors saw a decrease in their exhibit design budgets. One survey

question asked exhibitors, “How serious is the issue of rising exhibition and event

11

costs (excluding travel and lodging related costs) to your organization?” 50% of

exhibitors surveyed responded that the issue was very serious/critical. 46%

responded that the issue was moderately serious.

The same group of exhibitors said that the following changes improved

their trade show results:

Graphics:

o Brighter

o Clear/straight to the point

o Simple/less clutter

Changing booth layout:

o More open space

o More entry points

o Less clutter

o Greater focus on specific products (Skyline & Tradeshow Week,

2009)

As budgets decrease, the trade show industry has seen a decrease in

custom exhibit designs and an increase in hybrid custom or custom modular

designs – where pieces of the booth are custom and other pieces are not

custom. 67% of exhibitors who moved from custom exhibits to hybrid custom

designs reported that their exhibits had a “similar impact”. 27% of exhibitors

reported that the hybrid custom exhibit had a “greater impact” than the custom

design and only 7% of exhibitors felt that the previous custom design had a

greater impact (Skyline & Tradeshow Week, 2008).

12

Trade Show Staff

According to Gopalakrishna and Lilien, the amount of salespeople at a

trade show booth should have a positive impact on the amount of potential

customers contacted (1995).

In a cross-national study on the effectiveness of trade shows, Dekimpe et

al confirmed that companies will attract a higher percentage of their target market

when they increase their booth staff per square foot (1997).

An industry analysis by Skyline Exhibits and Trade Show Week showed

that over half of the exhibitors surveyed confirmed that “salespeople” make the

best trade show staffers (2009). The same survey indicated that exhibitors get

better results from their booth staffers when they have improved personnel

selection and clearly communicate to the staffers their goals prior to the show.

Heifen Fu et al found that half of exhibitors surveyed had not provided any

form of training for their trade show staff and the exhibitors that did provide

training did not provide formal training (2007).

Pre-Show/Post-Show Efforts

In the previously mentioned cross-national study conducted by Dekimpe et

al, the researchers found that organizations will attract their target audience more

if they spend more time and money on pre-show efforts than those organizations

that do not (1997). Bellizzi and Lipps found that pre-and-post-show efforts are

vital in making a well-designed exhibit space pay off (1984).

Exhibitors surveyed said that their primary pre-show efforts included direct

mail and email blasts (Skyline Exhibits & Tradeshow Week, 2009).

13

Heifen Fu et al found that exhibitors considered pre-show activities as more

effective in trade show success than pre-show promotion (2007). Pre-show

promotion would be considered efforts such as mailers, e-mail blasts and

telephone calls to attendees. The exhibitors listed pre-show activities as

including:

Analyze product features; and define target market

Discover economic and cultural traits of the geographic and

demographic target markets

Analyze trade shows characteristics (e.g. audience quantity and

quality) for right selection

Make a detailed plan for participation in a trade show

Budget for participating in a trade show

Translate names of the company, products and brochure into

the popular language of the target market (Heifun Fu et al,

2007)

Analysis

Show Selection

Show selection is an important part of measuring trade show

effectiveness. Exhibitors need to exhibit at trade shows where the attendees are

potential customers. In many ways, show selection, ROI and ROO go hand-in-

hand. As exhibitors focus in on measuring ROI and ROO, there will be a natural

progression toward exhibiting at fewer shows – but those few shows will be the

most efficient and effective shows for the exhibitor. So instead of a company

14

attending 400 trade shows a year, a company might attend 200 trade shows but

spend more money at those 200 trade shows so that they can have a bigger

impact where it matters.

Return on Investment (ROI)

Measuring ROI is critical to trade show effectiveness for exhibitors.

Previously, ROI was not emphasized because “awareness” at trade shows was

considered more important than ROI. However, due to the recession, every

marketing expenditure must have a tangible justification that can be proven

through hard data. “Awareness” is no longer an acceptable justification for most

companies to participate in trade shows. Instead, companies need to measure

ROI in order to justify their participation in trade shows.

If exhibitors put more emphasis on ROI, they will see more of a return on

their investments. As was noted previously, the exhibitors that closely measured

ROI for the trade shows they participated in saw an increase in their budgets. As

exhibitors put more of an emphasis on ROI, they will exhibit at fewer shows but

they will participate at the shows where they get the biggest return on their

investments. As a result, those exhibitors’ budgets will increase and we will see

more money channeled into fewer shows rather than money evenly disbursed

between many shows.

Return on Objectives (ROO)

In many ways, measuring return on objectives can be less tangible and

more difficult than measuring ROI since an objective can be anything from

15

“gathering 100 leads with name, address, phone number and buying authority” to

“raising brand awareness.”

The key to measuring ROO is by setting objectives that can actually be

measured. For example, rather than setting the objective of “raising brand

awareness,” a company could set the objective of “having a face-to-face

conversation with 500 trade show attendees regarding our company.”

While ROO has been emphasized in the past by companies justifying

trade show attendance with “raising brand awareness,” measuring ROO can be a

great tool for corporate exhibitors to rate their trade show effectiveness.

Measuring ROO can be a particularly effective tool for shows that do not have as

much of an emphasis on sales or events that do not have a sales aspect at all.

Cost of Trade Shows

Based on the cost of trade shows versus the cost of field sales calls, it is

clear that trade shows are a more effective tool for finding potential customers,

interacting with those customers and either closing sales or moving toward

closing sales. Combined with other forms of measurement, the cost of trade

shows can be made more effective, making the trade show expenditure an

effective and efficient spend.

Exhibit Design

As previously discussed, exhibitors will attract their target audience more if

their exhibit space is larger. If exhibitors attend fewer shows, they will have more

money to put toward the shows they do attend in order to expand their booth

space, thus attracting more potential customers.

16

Also, as a result of decreasing exhibit budgets, the trend toward hybrid

custom exhibits has increased. If exhibitors take advantage of this trend, it can

increase their efficiency and effectiveness by decreasing their budget.

By making changes to exhibitors’ booth designs – having lighter, simpler

designs with more space – exhibitors can spend less money, energy and time

and therefore increase their effectiveness at trade shows.

Trade Show Staff

The benefits of carefully selecting trade show staff and training those staff

members are clear. Well-trained booth staff will attract exhibitors’ target audience

better than staff that have not been trained. Trained trade show staff members

will compliment other areas of trade show effectiveness measurement such as

trade show costs and ROO. A highly trained staff member with clear objectives in

mind will more than likely be more effective and efficient than two or three staff

members that have not been trained and that do not know the corporation’s

objectives and goals for the trade show. Therefore, if a company selects their

trade show staff carefully and effectively as well as trains their staff members,

this will increase the trade show revenues and decrease the trade show

expenditures.

Additionally, trained booth staffers who have clear goals and objectives in

mind for a particular trade show will do a better job of meeting those objectives

and goals, thus increasing the effectiveness of the trade show for the corporate

exhibitor.

17

Pre-Show/Post-Show Efforts

There is clear evidence that pre-show and post-show efforts can increase

trade show effectiveness for corporate exhibitors. When exhibitors participate in

pre-show efforts, it increase their trade show effectiveness by doing the following:

Prepare and train trade show staff

Set objectives and goals

Research the best solutions for exhibit design, shipping, electric,

travel and accommodations

Reach out to potential customers who will be attending the trade

show and set up appointments before the trade show

When exhibitors participate in pre-show efforts, it allows them to utilize

their time and budget more efficiently and effectively. Likewise, with post-show

efforts, it is important for exhibitors to follow up with the leads they generated at

the trade show. According to a 2009 CEIR report, 29% of exhibit leads close on

the 5th sales call following the exhibit so it is vital for exhibitors to continue to

follow up with their sales leads from trade shows.

In order to maximize efficiency and effectiveness for pre-and-post-show

efforts, it’s important for any promotions to have the ability to be tracked. This

way, exhibitors can do an ROI analysis for the pre-show and post-show efforts.

For example, since most exhibitors who participate in pre-or-post-show efforts

use direct mailers or e-mail blasts, these exhibitors should include personalized

URLs (PURLs) in their efforts. A URL stands for ‘Universal Resource Locator’

and is the website address for a specific location on the Internet (such as

18

www.ufl.edu). A PURL is a website address for a specific location on the Internet

that is personalized for one specific person. For example,

www.ufl.edu/robertbeland would be the University of Florida website customized

specifically for Dr. Beland. With PURLs, when trade show attendees receive the

direct mail piece or the email blast, they are directed to a landing page or web

page where the URL is customized to them. This makes it simple to track exactly

which individual viewed the company web page thus expressing their interest in

the company.

Findings

This literature review has found that the trade show industry is evolving

with our society. Although the amount of trade shows have increased over the

years, the amount of corporate exhibitors has stayed the same for the last

decade – perhaps in response to the recession. Despite this trend, trade shows

are still a useful tool in reaching a company’s target market. The research has

shown that trade shows can be a cost-effective means of meeting potential

customers. In response, exhibitors must place more of an emphasis on the

following factors:

Measurement of ROI and ROO

Careful and meaningful show selection

Balance of trade show costs

Maximize exhibit design

Select and train trade show staff

Take part in pre-show and post-show efforts

19

While all of these markers are important in increasing trade show

effectiveness, based on the literature reviewed, show selection, measurement of

ROI and ROO and pre-show efforts seem to have the most impact on trade show

effectiveness. The corporate exhibitors that focus on these particular aspects of

trade show planning will invariably increase their effectiveness at trade shows.

20

References:

Bellizzi, Joseph A. and Lipps, Delilah J. (1984) Managerial guidelines for trade show effectiveness. Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 13, No. 1, pp. 49-52

Browning, John M. and Ronald J. A. (1988). Trade shows: an effective promotional tool for the small industrial business. Journal of Small Business Management, Vol. 26, No. 4, pp. 31-36.

Cavanaugh, S. (1976). Setting objectives and evaluating the effectiveness of trade show exhibits. Journal of Marketing, Vol. 40, pp. 100-103.

Center for Exhibition Industry Research (2009), The Cost Effectiveness of Exhibition Participation: Part 1. Dallas, TX: Center for Exhibition Industry Research.

Center for Exhibition Industry Research (2009), The Cost Effectiveness of Exhibition Participation: Part 2. Dallas, TX: Center for Exhibition Industry Research.

Dekimpe et al (1997). Generalizing about trade show effectiveness: a cross-national comparison. Journal of Marketing, Vol. 61, pp. 55-64.

Ducate, Douglas L. (2009, September 12). Should I Be Worried About Today? Worried About Tomorrow? Or Should I Be Worried At All? Orlando CAB Meeting, Orlando, FL.

Gopalakrishna et al (1995). Do Trade Shows Pay Off? [Electronic version] The Journal of Marketing, Vol. 59, No. 3, pp. 75-83

Gopalakrishna, Srinath and Lilien, G. L. (1995). A three-stage model of industrial trade show performance. Marketing Science, Vol. 14, pp. 22-42.

Heifen Fu et al (2007). Factors Affecting Trade Show Effectiveness for Chinese Small and Medium-sized Exporters. International Management Review, Vol. 3, No. 3, pp. 84-96

Kerin, Roger A. and William, L. Cron (1987). Assessing trade show functions and performance: an exploratory study. Journal of Marketing, Vol. 51, pp. 87-94.

Konikow, R. B. (1983). How to participate profitably in trade shows, rev. ed. Chicago: The Dartnell Corporation.

21

Lorimer, E. Jane (2005). Three Ways to Estimate ROI from Trade Show and Event Leads. Denver, CO: Lorimer Consulting Group.

Skyline Exhibits, Tradeshow Week Custom Research (2008). The Trend to Custom Modular Exhibits. Scottsdale, AZ: Tradeshow Week Custom Research

Skyline Exhibits, Tradeshow Week Custom Research (2009). What’s Working in Exhibiting. Scottsdale, AZ: Tradeshow Week Custom Research

Trade Show Bureau (1994). A Guide to the US Exposition Industry. Denver, CO: Trade Show Bureau.

Weisgal, Margaret (2009). Why Exhibit in a Recession? Chicago, IL: Trade Show Exhibitors Association.

22