One of the biggest issues any association show organizer has is that their client's events are generally only as healthy as the industry from which they draw exhibitors and attendees. Many industries have taken huge hits over the past 20 years and especially in the past four. Here's a look at how several are taking steps to ensure their continued survival. The lead:
The nation's 71,000 trade groups are the voices of their industries. A cattlemen's group courts consumer confidence, marble producers promote remodeling projects, appliance makers tout testing standards.
But in a declining economy, those voices can grow hoarse.
As steel companies declared bankruptcy, the American Iron and Steel Institute cut its staff. With textile makers failing, a defunct trade group and another that was about to disappear joined forces in a new, lobbying-driven National Council of Textile Organizations. Even the Marble Institute of America, which has actually grown in membership, still is working to cut costs by working with a floor coverings trade show, which has underwritten the institute's training videos. Other groups are outsourcing their magazines or annual shows.
That "floor covering show" is Coverings, which by interest of disclosure, is a TWG client. While the Marble Institute of America has its own show, StonExpo, which actually competes with Coverings, the Coverings event is a much larger focal point for the industry. It makes sense for the two groups to cooperate.
In our own industry, The Convention Industry Council (CIC) is a worthwhile cause, providing a lobbying voice and standards umbrella on convention issues for everyone from exhibit designers, to hotel marketers.
But how about combining PCMA and IAEM while having SISO (not currently a CIC member) as a SIG (special interest group) within the combined entity? (Same could be said for a TSEA with HCEA, CEMA and ICPA organized as SIGs).
By combining the three large event one BIGGER group for trade shows under one voice, one agenda and more power, CIC's job becomes easier, resulting in more effective lobbying. Plus this new entity would provide more value to members and fewer costs for organizations and individuals who pay multiple dues to multiple groups for essentially the same benefits.
What could be wrong with that?
Flame away, if so inclined.
Recent Comments