Breaking the UI Mold - Guest Post by Dennis Shiao

Introduction

Previously on this blog, Jim authored a post titled “Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.” In the post, Jim raised the question of whether it was still appropriate for virtual platforms to mimic the experience of attending an event in person. Jim asked, “I really think we need to at least offer a option to get us away from a 'literal' view of an exhibition hall, conference centre, networking lounge and so on.”

Let’s Focus on the User Experience

Jim, my good friend, I couldn’t agree with you more.  I happen to love physical conferences and trade shows. They have a certain “user experience” and it works great.  On the web, we don’t need to mimic that same experience.

On the web, I like to say that “E(X)perience is the X Factor in UX.” In other words, to create a great virtual event, you need to focus on the experience.  And for many virtual events, the two most critical elements are content and brands.

My INXPO colleague Sean Keen wrote an excellent post titled “How Virtual Event Platforms Can Allow Content and Brands to Take Center Stage.”  I encourage you to read this post, as he lays out the case far better than I can.

Make Navigation and Content Discovery Easy

At INXPO, we’ve moved precisely in the direction that Jim inquires about in his post. With our INXPO VX Platform, we’ve eliminated many of the “3D-like” images of lobbies, auditoriums and exhibit halls. We’re left with “spaces” that bring content and brands to the forefront.

Some ways you can make navigation and content discovery easy:

1.       “You had me at hello.” To quote the memorable line from the movie Jerry Maguire, focus on the “entry area,” commonly referred to as the “lobby.” I’d argue that if visitors are not “sold” within the first 2 minutes, they won’t have a meaningful visit – or, you’ll lose them entirely.

2.       List featured content right away.  Visitors shouldn’t need to navigate “one level down” to find featured content.  Give it to them on initial entry, in the same way a supermarket hands you the day’s sales circular the moment you step foot in the store.

3.       Minimize clicks.  Related to the point of giving visitors content right away, don’t let navigation get in the way.  Put more content into fewer spaces.  I once read a comment from an online event attendee who said, “Get me to the content I want. Fast.” Well said.

4.       Provide automated recommendations.  Amazon taught us that automated recommendations work (for us and for them).  Match interest categories (in an attendee’s profile) with topical categories in your event’s content.  Let me tell you, it can be a match made in heaven!

3D-Like Experiences

The world isn’t “black and white,” and I’d never argue that the simplified, 2D experience is the right solution for all occasions.  In fact, I believe there are some experiences where 3D and 3D-like experiences are appropriate.  And that’s a case where the core value proposition is defined by the experience itself.

Let me explain by way of example.  If I were designing a “Virtual Disney World,” which afforded visitors a digital experience that simulated the in-person experience, I’d look to use images directly from the physical theme park.  I’d want the entrance, the rides, the characters, etc. to provide you with the same emotional connection you get when you visit the park in person.

And I can accomplish that (in theory) by incorporating the look and feel (of the park) into the digital experience. However, if I was designing a conference for Disney World partners and suppliers, I’d focus more on the 2D look, so that the content and brands take center stage. I’d incorporate imagery from the theme park, so long as it didn’t take away from the core content of the event.

Conclusion

My mother has an account on Facebook and never required training or instruction on how to use the site. Can my mom navigate most virtual event platforms today?  I’m not so sure.  For digital events, we need to make the user experience so intuitive that my mom could find her way around. In fact, she’s already told me that digital theme parks suit her just fine.

About the Author

Dennis is Director of Product Marketing at INXPO and author of the book “Generate Sales Leads With Virtual Events.”  At INXPO, Dennis is responsible for go-to-market strategy and execution, and for shaping product and platform evolution via the “voice of the customer.” Dennis has managed virtual event campaigns for Cisco, HP, Oracle and Microsoft, among others.  Dennis blogs about virtual events at INXPO, and on his personal blog, “It’s All Virtual.” Dennis can be found on Twitter at @dshiao.

Venues: Dinosaurs or Potential Kings of the Virtual Event Industry?

During my time working for an event organiser we owned and ran a large number of exhibitions, conferences and awards events.

The venue always talked to us about the same things:

1. Space.

2. Catering.

3. Security.

4. Cleaning, and occasionally....

5. Shell-scheme providers, carpets, AV equipment and electrics (although in UK venues the organiser usually sorted out these contracts separately).

Now, I believe that little has changed with this offering for decades (except with the provision of internet connections in the 90's maybe).

Venues do not have a reputation as a hotbed of innovation.
Tvenuesaurus-rex, take a bow (or a nap)!

On the other hand, we in the virtual events community like to think of ourselves as at the digital cutting edge, technological developers and in tune with social media and the evolution of the internet.

How could venues possibly be better placed to talk to event organisers about virtual or hybrid events?

Well, let us consider the following:

1. Venues already have a relationship with the organiser.

2. In most cases venues have already successfully delivered a service (let's face it, they are bricks and mortar - they are always in the right place at the right time!).

3. There is trust in the 'brand' (most, if not all, of the larger venues have been around for years and won't run off/go bust with your money like a small software company might).

4. If a venue invests in developing it's own platform (or re-selling one) it is an easy add on to the conversation the physical event organiser must have. Why not replicate your physical event online Mr. Customer? Too complex? Too much hassle? We can handle the whole thing - we are the one stop shop for all your physical/hybrid/virtaul needs.

5. I would imagine the CAPEX required to produce a studio, in venue, shouldn't be prohibitive and staff could be hired on a project basis, minimising/eliminating operational overhead. As such, the studio should be able to offer the best of video production standards: multi-camera, 3D/HD/SD, vision-mixing, captioning, sub-titling, well dressed environment, webcasting, etc. to cope with the most demanding of organisers. Event organisers, even the large ones, won't be able to get near the quality and cost base the venue can offer.

So, a word of warning to platform vendors: Venues aren't 'competitors' or 'irrelevant'. They are potentially the most valuable ally or partner you will ever have.
They could just be the 'kings of the brave new virtual world'.

Don't turn your back on a dinosaur....................he might just eat you!

Let's get brutal!

Having watched videos, read blogs and reviews, and taken part in virtual events group discussions on LinkedIn and face to face, it strikes me what a thoroughly nice, decent and polite bunch of people we are here in the virtual event community!

Now, the ability to 'play nicely' is normally a very good thing (and often a phrase I yell at my kids as the friendly games in the back garden start to become more physical and competitive), but I am starting to question if we need to be a little more critical, or even darn right impolite (sorry to resort to that type of language but that's right, I'm serious here!), to move the debate and the development of platforms and services along at a more rapid rate.

I'm as guilty, if not more guilty, than the next person for worrying that I may be stepping out of line, or offending someone, but maybe we would get better, more insightful debate if we didn't feel that we should pull our punches so we don't upset anyone. If a vendor receives honest, heartfelt opinion, should it not motivate them to examine their product or service offering critically and either defend their position or consider modifications to improve the proposition?

Following a recent discussion thread on the Virtual Events 100 group on LinkedIn, I am hoping to start work on a comparison matrix of virtual event platforms, with hopefully some help and input from others. Now, I am very well aware that this will be time consuming and as soon as it is published it will be out of date as vendors bring out new versions, but at least it will be a start to help marketing people and event organisers find the right companies to approach for further details. In compiling this matrix I'm not too worried about the functionality (is a download required? system requirements? what social media is integrated? communication methods available? etc.), but I also want to add value with a critique of the look and feel, the user friendliness, the level of customer support and other rather subjective attributes. For a valuable critique you need to be able to pull from a resource of open and honest opinion from experts and lay people alike.

So come on, what do you say we all make a concious effort to be a little less considerate and say it like it is, or at least, as it appears to us..............?

I guess my next blog post will prove if I'm willing to take my own advice.

Virtual Event Fatigue & Why Simple is Sometimes Best

I haven't written and published a blog entry for some time. I've started a few.........but never finished them or was never really convinced they added anything to the 'virtual event debate'.
If I'm really honest, I also think I'm a little frustrated with what I see as a lack of innovation in virtual events and the platforms on offer. I read some excellent discussions on industry sites and LinkedIn groups, but I don't seem to find any evidence of implementation - new events approached in an novel way, game changing functionality, experimental user interfaces,etc.
What has prompted me to write again, was an e-mail from a colleague asking what I thought of the experience provided by the following link: http://tradeshow.globalsources.com/TRADESHOW/HONGKONG-SECURITY-PRODUCTS/ONLINE-APR/ONLINESHOW.HTM?source=TSCHKCSFSP_HOME
Please take a look. Let me know what you think.
At first, I must admit, I saw the platform and immediately wrote it off as far too basic, but the more I looked, the more I liked it purely because it is so simple, easy to navigate and so 'literal'. It is not really a virtual 'event' platform but more a 'virtual exhibition hall' that is a photographic record of the physical exhibitor's presence. The platform presents you with a simple carousel (you can see why this made me happy by taking a look at my previous blog entry on 28/11/2010 - 'Beauty is in the Eye of the Beholder') of the exhibitors stands/booths, and by clicking on an exhibitor, you are presented with multiple photos of an actual, physical, exhibition stand. If you see a thumbnail that interests you (view of the stand or product for example), click on it and you are given more information. Want to get in touch with someone? There is a simple 'Inquire Now' button which brings up a contact form.
I'm not saying that the simplest solution is always the best, but, maybe we would do well to remember that that is where we should probably start, and let the needs of our exhibitors and visitors define any additional requirements.

Evolving business models

Image by andreasnilsson1976 via Flickr

Every day we see stories of publishers struggling to come to terms with the new rules of engagement and challenges of revenue generation in the digital arena. Murdoch has erected his pay wall, YouTube is still losing money despite the hefty price Google paid for it, operators are struggling to get a share of the revenues 'over the top' (OTTP) suppliers are generating from their networks, and yet virtual event platforms are still predominantly rented or licensed by the event organiser (publisher) just like they would rent a venue for a physical event.

Of course, there is nothing wrong with that.

However, is there not a real opportunity to embrace the true spirit of partnership? True sharing of risk and reward between event organiser/platform owner and publisher/content owner?

Chris Anderson's The Long Tail: How Endless Choice Is Creating Unlimited Demand shows us that when things are reduced from atoms to electrons our underlying costs are drastically reduced. We, as virtual event enthusiasts, would support this notion and list it as a major advantage over physical events.
When this fact is coupled with an awareness that although Virtual Events are certainly growing in popularity and marketing teams are rapidly adding them to the list of available channels to be considered, there is still fear and trepidation in trying something new.

So, what should we do?

Well, education is certainly one answer: clearly communicate the ease, convenience and ROI benefits of virtual exhibiting and running your own virtual events. But also, as platform vendors, we are in a perfect position to also remove or at least reduce that fear by demonstrating we are in this together - both the person/company commissioning the event and the platform provider have 'skin in the game'. A successful event has a financial upside for both parties, an unsuccessful event encourages deeper collaboration to improve the outcome next time.

Virtual events are growing and are here to stay but we can really help maximise the rate of adoption by introducing innovative business models that make companies want to experiment with virtual events and feel secure that the platform vendor will do everything in their power to help deliver a successful event.
By looking to minimise the initial outlay required from the client and making up (and surpassing) the project AOV (average order value) with a revenue share on stands/booths/sponsorship/etc. sold (or using another measurable KPI like attendance, time on site, number of interactions per visitor for closed events), individuals and companies alike will become far more adventurous.

Come on platform owners, we all believe in the future of virtual events, let's start putting our money where our mouths are and make 2011 not only a year of technical, but also business model, innovation!

Predictions for 2011

I came across a question posed on the Focus website (http://www.focus.com/questions/marketing/virtual-events-trade-show-trends-what-are-biggest-trends/) and thought I would share my response on this blog:
My three predictions for 2011 are:

1. A move away from the 'literal' design of virtual events to a 'slicker', 'cooler' approach with the use of carousels for information (videos and documents) and virtual stands/booths for example.

2. Customisation of the visitor experience where exhibitors and content are displayed in a priority order based on the visitor profile, and access to platforms is integrated with popular social networking sites (primarily LinkedIn for B2B, Facebook for B2C).

3. Increased use of hybrid events by the large exhibition/conference companies leading to acquisition of companies (or partnerships) to bring the experience 'in-house'. Companies that will be targeted will not only be virtual event platform suppliers but players in the video production and webcasting arena.

In addition, I would also make a note that we should also see a greater realisation that the content presented on line should generally be of much higher production value (more like broadcast TV) and more effort will be made to present video in an engaging way (eg. using 2 or 3 camera set-ups rather than 1).

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder

I'm having trouble making a decision.....................if I come right out and say what I think I may very well be dismissed as a platform vendor who is taking cheap shots at the competition or the virtual events industry in general. Believe me, I am not - I believe in virtual events and feel the market will be richer and more likely to succeed with a rich array of platform choices. On the other hand, if I'm too diplomatic or polite, where will I get the feedback to tell me if my opinion is isolated or the general consensus?
So, let me just say I have a problem with what seems to be the generally accepted graphics and user interface we, as virtual event platform vendors, offer to our organisers, exhibitors and visitors.
I vaguely recollect that it was when I was working as a project manager launching a new e-learning conference and exhibition in 2000 that I was first called by a  company who explained virtual events were the 'next big thing' and I should look at a platform they had created around an event at the National Motorcycle exhibition in Birmingham. Needless to say, at that time, the user experience was fairly woeful, but I seem to remember the graphics being not a million miles away from what we see today.
I really think we need to at least offer a option to get us away from a 'literal' view of an exhibition hall, conference centre, networking lounge and so on. Why can't the exhibition stands be displayed on a carousel for example? I understand the linking of visuals to existing functionality so new visitors have a more intuitive experience, but surely we also want a little bit of the 'wow' factor? Virtual events should be cool and look up to date or even 'cutting edge'!
Typically, the back end of a lot of platforms available today are very impressive, delivering statistics and lead generation information for exhibitors that physical event organisers can only dream about. Stretching our imaginations on the way we present the front end can only increase the quality of the concept, product and experience.