search.noResults

search.searching

dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
Inside ICI


Continued from pg 5 • Decision to go 3D: Delegates


who had previously attended 2D virtual trade shows felt that the 3D environment was by far more engaging, offering an enriching experience. They commented that the 2D events were little more than glorified websites, which were far less interesting and offered little more content than could be ascertained with a web browser.


But, unlike the technical conference,


survey results indicated a high degree of dissatisfaction in several areas. The following are areas identified as being in need of improvement:


• Booth Content Specifications:


Specification received from the service provider changed without notification and content numbering between the service provider and their 3D event subcontractor was inconsistent, causing confusion with booth design and set up.


• Booth Customization: The


service provider promoted 3D booths as offering a “choice of color” and being “very flexible”, allowing exhibitors to choose their company’s color scheme. This was not the case, which resulted in exhibitor disappointment even before the event started.


6 ❘ November 2020 ®


• Exhibitor-Delegate Communica-


tions: The platform’s chat feature provid- ed poor notification when a conversation request was missed. Notification would momentarily flash across the screen and disappear. The chat history feature was not fully operational until the latter half of the event, and exhibitors did not have the ability to erase chat data. • Booth Traffic: The level of


participation in the 3D environment was lacking, with a majority of attendees viewing the presentations, but spending little or no time in the exhibition hall. • Hyperlinks: Hyperlinks did not


conform to normal convention where clicking on booth would redirect the delegate. Instead, a “Go to Website” link was displayed on the screen and was not integral to the image being viewed. Positioning of this link was inconsistent and, depending on the background color, was difficult to see. • Delegate Identification: There


were a number of instances where delegates were identified as employees of the wrong company. • Lead Retention Accuracy: The aforementioned “Delegate Identification” issue corrupted lead retention files, requiring ICI staff to review and correct before distributing to exhibitors. • Lead Retention Availability:


Leads were not available on demand as they were generated by batch reports run by the platform provider.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32