EVENT ENGAGEMENT

ACCELERATING THE CUSTOMER LIFECYCLE

TABLE OF CONTENTS
3 Introduction 22 Events Importance & Satisfaction

4 Executive Summary 25 Analyst Bottom Line

6 Catalog of Events 27 Acknowledgements

9 Customer Engagement 28 About Attend

14 Enabling Event Engagement 29 About Demand Metric

20 Event Metrics & ROI 30 Appendix – Survey Background

INTRODUCTION
Marketing has experienced a massive, evolutionary shift in the past decade. Today, marketing effectiveness is synonymous with
exploiting current technology, being data driven and emphasizing customer engagement. Technology is the enabler of marketing
performance, customer engagement is the objective and data provides the scorecard. Engagement is the common
denominator of many marketing goals: greater conversion rates, advocacy, shorter sales cycles and better ROI. The
modern marketer does many things, but most of them are in some way, shape or form linked to driving better engagement.

Many marketing and sales teams believe that events are a strategy for accelerating the development of customer
engagement. Events provide all the ingredients necessary to achieve desired levels of engagement: face-to-face or at least
interpersonal interaction with customers, in a controlled setting that is designed to showcase the brand. Sales teams have
historically relished the opportunity to interact with customers at events because they can advance relationships and engage
more effectively. Events are the broadest, deepest touchpoint for many customers during their buying journeys.

With the appeal of events come some unique challenges. No other marketing strategy is as varied, and few others have the
logistical burdens of producing successful events. Attend, a provider of online software that simplifies and automates event
management processes, and Demand Metric collaborated to determine how effective events are as a strategy for
customer engagement and if the resulting ROI meets expectations. The report details the findings of this study.

3
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A majority of this study’s participants were in marketing roles in B2B or mixed B2B/B2C organizations that reported revenue
growth in the most recently completed fiscal year. Study data was collected only from participants that acknowledged using
events as a marketing initiative.

The analysis of this study’s data provides these key findings:

 Conferences, tradeshows and webinars are the top three event types in which organizations host or participate.

 63% of participants utilize four or more types of events, and 21% utilize seven or more types.

 The average percentage of the marketing budget that is allocated to events falls between 30 and 39%.

 Relative to all event goals, almost 80% of respondents identified improving customer engagement as the most or one of
the most important goals for event marketing.

 Almost two-thirds of participants report that less than half of their new customers encounter them at an event during
their buying journeys.

 Less than half of event staffs in this study have access to tablet or smartphone devices/apps to research attendees at
events and log interactions.

4
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
 Just 28% of companies are using an event management platform to assist with event registration, check-in, email and
metrics tracking/reporting.

 The number of leads generated – largely a vanity metric – is the top events success measure in use. Less than one-third of
surveyed firms measure ROI, and less than half measure engagement or revenue generated.

 Those firms that use event management technology are twice as likely to be satisfied compared to those who are not
using this technology.

 The average ROI for events measured by this study falls within the 25 to 34% range. When events management
technology is in use, the average ROI ranges from 36 to 45%.

This report details the results and insights from the analysis of the study data. For more detail on the survey participants, please
refer to the Appendix.

5
CATALOG OF EVENTS
Figure 1: Conferences and tradeshows top the list of event types.

Event Type Hosting or Participation

Conferences 80%
A characteristic of event marketing is the diversity of types
Tradeshows 69% in which an organization can produce, host or participate.
Webinars 55%
Partner events 44% Figure 1 shows many of the event types marketers are
Company-hosted field events 39% exploiting, and to what degree.
User group meetings 29%
Receptions 28% In addition to identifying the types of events in which
Entertainment (e.g. stadium
suite, golf tournament) 26% participants use, this study also analyzed the simultaneous
Product launches or
announcements 25% use of event types. Just 10% of those who took the study
Charity events/fundraisers 25% survey host or participate in a single event.
Executive briefings 15%
Press conferences 10% It’s much more common to see multiple types in use,
Other events 5% as 63% of the respondents are utilizing four or more
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% event types, and 21% utilize seven or more.

Event Engagement Benchmark Study, Demand Metric, October 2015, n=202

6
CATALOG OF EVENTS
The Figure 1 data was further analyzed to determine if there are significant differences in event type usage based on company
size. Company size was determined using annual revenue:

 Small: $24 million or less in annual revenue

 Medium: $25 million to $499 million in annual revenue

 Large: $500 million or more in annual revenue

There were no differences in the top three event types based on company size: conferences, tradeshows and
webinars. Figure 2 shows the event type usage for places 4 through 6.
Figure 2: Divergence in event type usage.

Small Firms Medium Firms Large Firms

4 Partner events Partner events Company-hosted field events

5 Company-hosted field events Company-hosted field events User-group meetings

6 Receptions User-group meetings Product launches or announcements

Event Engagement Benchmark Study, Demand Metric, October 2015, n=202

CATALOG OF EVENTS
Figure 3: 20% allocate half or more of their marketing budgets to events.

% of Marketing Budget Allocated to Events

90% or more 2%
80 to 89% 4%
70 to 79% 3% Events represent an investment of time, resources and
60 to 69% 5% marketing budget.
50 to 59% 6%
40 to 49% 7% Figure 3 shows the percentage of marketing budgets that
30 to 39% 11% are allocated to events.
20 to 29% 26%
10 to 19% 14% The average budget allocation for participants in this
study falls within the 30 to 39% allocation range. The
Less than 10% 11%
study found no relationship between the budget allocation
None 1% for events and the size of the company.
I don't know 10%
0% 10% 20% 30%

Event Engagement Benchmark Study, Demand Metric, October 2015, n=202

8
CUSTOMER ENGAGEMENT
Figure 4: Improving customer engagement is one of the most important event goals.

Importance of Improving Customer Engagement

50%
As a marketing strategy, events enable the pursuit of
48% multiple, important objectives: lead generation, brand
40% awareness and relationship building, to list some of the
perennial favorites.
30%
30% One goal of this study was to determine the following:
relative to all other goals for events, how important is
20%
20% improving customer engagement?

10% Events would seem to offer an ideal forum for doing this,
2% and Figure 4 shares this relative importance data.
0%
0%
Least important One of least Equal One of most Most important Improving customer engagement is one of the most
important importance important
important event goals for 78% of study participants.

Event Engagement Benchmark Study, Demand Metric, October 2015, n=202

9
CUSTOMER ENGAGEMENT
Figure 5: Events are perceived as a better approach for engaging customers.

Events v. Other Tactics for Engagement

80%

73%
60% Events provide a forum or otherwise facilitate the
opportunity for customer engagement better than most
sales and marketing approaches, as Figure 5 shows.
40%
This study finds that improving customer engagement is the
most or one of the most important goals for events
20% participation, and that events are one of the better sales
21% and marketing approaches that a firm can employ to
6% engage customers.
0%
Worse Same Better

Event Engagement Benchmark Study, Demand Metric, October 2015, n=202

10
CUSTOMER ENGAGEMENT
Figure 6: Almost two-thirds of study participants report that less than half of new customers
encounter them at an event.

% of New Customers w/ an Event Encounter

More than 75% 8%

With the validation that comes from Figure 5, it would be
50 to 74% 14% logical to assume that many of a firm’s new customers
have an encounter with the firm at an event during
25 to 49% 25% their buying journey.

Figure 6 shows the percentage of new customers that have

1 to 24% 39%
an encounter with a firm at some point during that journey.
None 1% Despite the apparent effectiveness of events at driving
engagement, as Figure 6 shows, a majority of prospects
I don't know 13% have not encountered the firms they ultimately become
customers of during their buying journeys.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Event Engagement Benchmark Study, Demand Metric, October 2015, n=202

11
CUSTOMER ENGAGEMENT
Large firms are experiencing a higher percentage of new customer encounters at events than small or medium-sized
firms, as Figure 7 summarizes.

Figure 7: More than half of small firms report less than one-fourth of new customers encounter them at an event.

% of New Customers
Small Firms Medium Firms Large Firms
Encountered at an Event

More than 75% 11% 5% 9%

50 to 74% 12% 15% 26%

25 to 49% 18% 34% 26%

1 to 24% 51% 31% 22%

None 0% 0% 4%

I don’t know 8% 15% 13%

Event Engagement Benchmark Study, Demand Metric, October 2015, n=202

12
CUSTOMER ENGAGEMENT
Figure 8: Higher event budget allocations result in more engagement.

Event Encounter Rate & Budget Allocation

Above average* Average or below*
There is a relationship between the percentage of new
More than 75%
12% customers for which an event was part of their buying
6% journey and the budget allocation (Figure 3) for events,
50 to 74%
27% as shown in Figure 8.
10%
25 to 49%
27% What Figure 8 really says is that you get what you pay for
25% when it comes to events and engagement.
1 to 24%
26%
51% While the study did not explore the ways organizations are
None
2% spending the funds allocated to events, it is likely that
0% higher spending levels go toward participating in a
6% greater number of events, more heavily promoting
I don't know
8% events, event management technology or a
0% 20% 40% 60%
combination. The return on investment in events is
explored later in this report.

Event Engagement Benchmark Study, Demand Metric, October 2015, n=202

*Avg. budget allocation for events ranges from 30 to 39%.

13
ENABLING EVENT ENGAGEMENT
Figure 9: More than half of study participants claim a good or complete understanding.

Event/Sales Staff Understanding of Attendees

Events provide the opportunity for more interpersonal
Complete understanding 10% interaction with prospects and clients than any other
marketing approach.
Good understanding 43%
When advancing the relationship with attendees
through better engagement is the goal, the sales staff
Moderate understanding 38%
can gain a considerable head start with the right
intelligence about attendees.
Poor understanding 7%
Figure 9 shows how well event and sales staffs understand
No understanding 1% who will attend events and where the attendees are in the
customer lifecycle.
I don't know 1%
The level of understanding that Figure 9 depicts is a
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% major predictor of an organization’s overall satisfaction
(Figure 18) with their events strategy and results.

Event Engagement Benchmark Study, Demand Metric, October 2015, n=202

14
ENABLING EVENT ENGAGEMENT
The better that events/sales staff understand attendees and their position in the customer lifecycle (Figure 9), the
higher the satisfaction, as Figure 10 shows.
Figure 10: Better event attendee understanding leads to greater satisfaction.

Poor or No Understanding/ Good or Complete

Satisfaction Moderate Understanding
I Don’t Know Understanding

Satisfied & Very Satisfied 28% 40% 74%

Neutral 43% 48% 24%

Dissatisfied & Very Dissatisfied 29% 12% 2%

Event Engagement Benchmark Study, Demand Metric, October 2015, n=202

When the staff that represents organizations at events has a good or complete understanding of attendees and where
they are in the customer lifecycle, it has a big impact on satisfaction. With such an understanding, almost three-fourths of
organizations studied are satisfied with their event marketing strategy and its results. When the attendee understanding is poor
or unknown, just over one-fourth of organizations report this same level of satisfaction.

15
ENABLING EVENT ENGAGEMENT
Figure 11: Personal knowledge is the primary way sales learns in advance about event attendees.
Understanding attendees and where they are in the
How Sales Staff Learn About Event Attendees customer lifecycle is a major contributor to satisfactory
event results. This study examined how sales learns about
attendees before going to an event. Figure 11 shows the
Personal knowledge 49%
different ways this learning occurs, if it occurs at all.
Reviewing
CRM/Marketing 46% Despite the link between understanding where attendees
Automation data
are in the customer lifecycle and satisfaction with event
Via a briefing packet for
each event 28% results, slightly over 15% of study participants rarely or
never prep in advance. For those that do, over half of
Anecdotal information 24% them use just a single approach listed in Figure 11.

Other approach 10% In most cases, that approach is reliance on personal

knowledge of attendees. Sometimes this knowledge is rich
Rarely/never prep or and detailed, but other times it is vague and incomplete.
learn in advance 16%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Some of the write-in comments provided for the “Other
approach” response option are: “Social media”, “Attendee
surveys at events”, “Review of past event attendee lists”,
Event Engagement Benchmark Study, Demand Metric, October 2015, n=202
“Review of pre-event registration list”, “Advance calling of
attendees”, “Web research” and “Targeted emails to
segments likely to attend.”
16
ENABLING EVENT ENGAGEMENT
Figure 12: Most teams staffing events don’t have technology at their disposal during the event.

Is Technology Provided to Staff During an Event?

Technology provides an avenue to help sales staff at events
gain insights into attendees.

Figure 12 shows the usage of technology, such as a

Yes
tablet device or smartphone app, by sales staff during
42% events to research attendees and/or log interactions.

I don't know In addition to the technology that the event and sales staffs
55% might use during events, there are also event management
technology platforms designed to help event teams better
manage and interact with event attendees.
No
These platforms typically include event registration, email,
3% check-in and reporting capabilities that are integrated with
the user’s CRM system. The goal of these platforms is to
facilitate and optimize meaningful event interactions.

Event Engagement Benchmark Study, Demand Metric, October 2015, n=202

17
ENABLING EVENT ENGAGEMENT
Figure 13: Most organizations are not currently using event technology.

Figure 13 shows the current adoption rate for event

Use of Event Technology
management technology.

Large companies are more than twice as likely to have

event management technology in use than small or
medium-sized companies.
Yes 28%
There are several key relationships in the study’s data
between the use of event management technology and
I don't know other study variables:

63% 9%  Relative Engagement (Figure 5): 80% of event

management technology users report that events help
No
engage customers and prospects better than other
approaches, compared to 69% for non-users.

 Event Encounters (Figure 6): for event management

technology users, the percentage of all new customers
that encounter the firm at some point during their buying
Event Engagement Benchmark Study, Demand Metric, October 2015, n=202 journey is higher than for non-users.

18
ENABLING EVENT ENGAGEMENT
 Satisfaction: Those firms that use event management technology are twice as likely to be satisfied compared to those
who are not using this technology.

 ROI: the ROI for events experienced by event management technology users is almost 50% higher than the ROI realized by
those not using technology for events.

19
EVENT METRICS & ROI
Figure 14: Event success metrics shown by use of event management technology.
Events have historically been problematic when it comes to
Events Success Measures in Use accountability due to the difficulty tracking engagement,
Event Tech in use Not in use and then properly attributing it to revenue. Figure 14 shows
the metrics being used to track the success of events.
Leads generated 67%
80%
Pipeline opportunities 53% Establishing a set of success metrics is always
56%
51% recommended, for any marketing endeavor. However,
Customers contacted
49% certain measures are far better success indicators than
47%
Revenue generated
31% others. In Figure 14, the most popular metric is the
Level or quality of 43% number of leads generated, but it provides no indicator
engagement 30%
31%
of quality, just volume, and as such has a loose
ROI
25% relationship to revenue.
Referrals 25%
16%
0% In Figure 4, 78% of participants indicated that engagement
Other measures
5% was the most or one of the most important goals for events.
4%
None
6% Yet in Figure 14, we see a “disconnect” from this goal,
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
as the measurement of engagement doesn’t come
close to matching its importance. Those using event
management technology are, however, doing a much better
Event Engagement Benchmark Study, Demand Metric, October 2015, n=202
job measuring it, as is the case with revenue generated and
ROI. Event management technology fulfills an
important function by enabling the tracking of metrics
20 that provide true indicators of the value of events.
EVENT METRICS & ROI
Figure 15: Just 8% of study participants report a loss or break even on events.
ROI is often one of the most important metrics – as
Average ROI for Events well as the hardest to measure accurately – for any
marketing initiative.
100% or more 8%
90 to 99% 0% This study asked participants to share the average return
80 to 89% 0% on investment in events, above the costs. Figure 15 reveals
70 to 79% 2% this study’s ROI findings.
60 to 69% 2%
50 to 59% 8%
The data in Figure 15 is encouraging in terms of the
40 to 49% 2%
percent of responses that report positive ROI for events.
30 to 39% 4%
20 to 29% 21%
The average ROI for events measured by this study
10 to 19% 17%
falls within the 25 to 34% range. What is discouraging is
Less than 10% 9% that the second most frequently provided ROI response is “I
Breakeven 6% don’t know,” indicating that too many organizations don’t or
None - events are a loss 2% can’t measure it.
I don't know 19%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
The average ROI for events measured by this study
when events management technology is in use ranges
from 36 to 45%. The use of this technology helps produce
Event Engagement Benchmark Study, Demand Metric, October 2015, n=202
a greater return on events and allows measuring that return
with greater precision
21
EVENTS IMPORTANCE & SATISFACTION
Figure 16: Engagement at events is perceived as an important way to progress customers
through the buyer’s journey.

Events Engagement & the Buyer’s Journey

60%
60%

This study report concludes by presenting two aspects of

40% importance. The first, shown in Figure 16, shares how
important study participants felt customer engagement at
events is in moving customers through the buyer’s journey
faster or more successfully.
20% 25%
Just 1% of this study’s participants indicated that
engagement occurring during events is unimportant
14% for helping buyers move through their journeys.
1% 0%
0%
Very unimportant Unimportant Neutral Important Very important

Event Engagement Benchmark Study, Demand Metric, October 2015, n=202

22
EVENTS IMPORTANCE & SATISFACTION
Figure 17: Events continue to increase in importance for almost half of this study’s participants.

Changing Importance of Events

Becoming much
more important 11%

Becoming more
important 37%
Figure 17 shows the overall trend for the importance of
Importance
staying the same 43% events as a marketing strategy.

Becoming less
Just 9% of study participants report that events are
important 8% becoming less important.

Becoming much
less important 1%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Event Engagement Benchmark Study, Demand Metric, October 2015, n=202

23
EVENTS IMPORTANCE & SATISFACTION
Figure 18: Over half of this study’s participants are satisfied with their event strategy & results.

Satisfaction with Events Strategy & Results

60%

50%
40% The importance with which events are associated parallels
the overall satisfaction this study measured with event
35% marketing strategy and results, shown in Figure 18.

20% More than half of participants are satisfied or very

satisfied with the results and strategy of their event
marketing programs.
0% 8% 7%
0%
Very dissatisfied Dissatisfied Neutral Satisfied Very satisfied

Event Engagement Benchmark Study, Demand Metric, October 2015, n=202

24
ANALYST BOTTOM LINE
Events are a core part of many organizations’ marketing strategy, with approximately one-third of many marketing budgets
allocated to events. There’s good reason for making events marketing a spending priority: events are better than most other
sales and marketing approaches to creating customer engagement.

Events have a historical role as a lead generation strategy, and they are effective for that purpose. What’s come into clearer view is
the effectiveness of events for driving customer engagement. Few other marketing approaches provide high levels of efficacy
at both lead generation and customer engagement.

As important as events are as an avenue for engagement, this study points to some signs of neglect or simply poor stewardship of
events as a resource.

 Boost participation. Almost two-thirds of study participants report that less than half of their new customers encounter them at
an event. It’s unrealistic to expect that every prospect will have an event encounter during their buying journey. However, it’s
ideal when this happens, and marketers should put enough events in the path of every prospect so the odds of such an
encounter are high. Every marketer wants to maximize customer and prospect participation in events, but how? This study
shows a strong correlation between the use of event technology and increased likelihood that these event encounters
will occur more often.

 Do your homework. The more the event staff knows about attendees in advance, the greater the satisfaction with the event
strategy and results. This places a requirement on the staff to do their homework on attendees, and no one likes to do
homework. The exception is when the homework is easy to do, and that is the role technology plays. Tablets or smartphone
apps make it easy for event staff to research attendees, know where they are in the customer lifecycle and log
interactions. This technology enables better engagement and simplifies the capture of key success metrics.
ANALYST BOTTOM LINE
 Have an events strategy report card. Every marketing initiative needs a set of success metrics or Key Performance Indicators
(KPIs). This study shows that the top measure in use for events is the number of leads generated. Marketers covet leads, but
measuring the volume an event produces is relatively hollow: there is much more to know than just how many were
captured if a firm wants to know the financial impact of an event. ROI, for example, is a very meaningful metric, but less
than one-third of this study’s participants know what their event ROI is. The problem is usually a lack of data or a reliable way of
collecting it. Technology is once again a solution to this problem. If organizations are spending as much as one-third of their
marketing budgets on events, how can they not know what kind of return they are getting on this spend?

The modern marketer understands that marketing’s work is inseparable from data and metrics. Events, one of the best
ways to create customer engagement and reap the benefits thereof, is one of the last areas of marketing to experience saturation
with marketing technology.

This study provides compelling evidence for using event management technology: greater customer engagement, more
customers at events, higher event ROI and greater satisfaction with results.

26
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Demand Metric is grateful to Attend for sponsoring this benchmarking study and for those participants that took the time to
provide their input to it.

27
ABOUT ATTEND
Attend is an event management and engagement platform that is pioneering the way marketing, sales and customer success
teams manage events and interact with attendees. Attend makes it easy to streamline your event process, make every guest feel
like a VIP and gain real-time relevant data about your attendees to enable smarter conversations.

Attend turns attendees into prospects, prospects into customers and customers into life-long loyal promoters. Some of Attend’s
customers include Applause, Localytics, Northeastern University, CBRE and Seismic. The company is backed by .406 Ventures
and is headquartered in Boston, Massachusetts.

For more information, visit www.attend.com.

28
ABOUT DEMAND METRIC
Demand Metric is a marketing research and advisory firm serving a membership community of over 70,000 marketing
professionals and consultants in 75 countries.

Offering consulting methodologies, advisory services, and 500+ premium marketing tools and templates, Demand Metric
resources and expertise help the marketing community plan more efficiently and effectively, answer the difficult questions about
their work with authority and conviction and complete marketing projects more quickly and with greater confidence, boosting the
respect of the marketing team and making it easier to justify resources the team needs to succeed.

To learn more about Demand Metric, please visit: www.demandmetric.com.

29
APPENDIX – SURVEY BACKGROUND
This 2015 Event Engagement Benchmark Study survey was administered online during the period of August 19 through
September 6, 2015. During this period, 265 responses were collected, 202 of which were qualified and complete enough for
inclusion in the analysis. The representativeness of these results depends on the similarity of the sample to environments in
which this survey data is used for comparison or guidance.

Summarized below is the basic categorization data collected about respondents to enable filtering and analysis of the data:

Annual Sales: Primary Role of Respondent:

 Less than $10 million (37%)  President, CEO or Owner (14%)

 $10 to $24 million (19%)  Marketing (68%)
 $25 to $99 million (19%)  Sales (8%)
 $100 to $499 million (12%)  Other (10%)
 $500 million to $999 million (3%)
 $1 billion or more (10%) Revenue Growth (in most recent fiscal year):

Type of Organization:  Significant increase (24%)

 Modest increase (55%)
 Mostly or entirely B2B (68%)  Flat (14%)
 Mostly or entirely B2C (11%)  Modest decline (5%)
 Blend of B2B/B2C (21%)  Significant decline (3%)

30
 Benchmark Report

For more information, visit us at:

www.demandmetric.com

Demand Metric Research Corporation

584 Forest Creek Place
London, ON, Canada N5Y 5T7

© 2015 Demand Metric Research Corporation.

© 2013 DemandAll Rights
MetricReserved.
Research Corporation. All Rights Reserved.