May, 2011

Authors:

Todd M. Hanson, CPIM, CRPPresident and Founder

ROI of Engagement

Michael DoyleExecutive Director

Virtual Edge Institute

Measuring and Maximizingthe Impact of a

Hybrid Event– Year two of a first-of-kind study

Virtual Edge InstituteTM

Virtual Edge SummitTM

Executive Summary

— 1 —

IntroductionVirtual Edge Institute is an organization dedicated to advancing the development and adoption of digital event and meeting technology and best practices for collaboration and marketing. The third Virtual Edge Summit was held in January 2011. The summit isa unique event for industry suppliers, producers and practitioners focused exclusively onproviding education, training and solutions for planning and producing digital events, meetings and communities. The Summit itself was a “hybrid event” which mirrored the fastest growing meeting and event segment of this industry – those events which serve an in-person and a remote audience simultaneously.

In 2010, results were measured relative to participant and Virtual Edge Institute objectives. The study represented a first of its kind comparative evaluation of the impact of in-person vs. remote audiences. The data collected also provided summit management with a detailed action plan forimprovement of future summits.

This 2011 study represents the second consecutive year of evaluation and provides continued insight into the workings of hybrid events, why people attend in-person versusremote, a comparative analysis of in-person versus remote attendees, interesting generational observations and noteworthy trends.

“Hybrid event strategies have been rapidly adopted in the past couple ofyears. The burning unanswered question is do they work? We are trying to help explore the business use for digital event and meeting solutions and share best practices that earn them a place as a legitimate tool used to movepeople to action!”

- Michael Doyle, Virtual Edge Executive Director

Benefits of measurement include:

• Document the impact of the investment• Build the case for future investments• Gain insight into barriers to success• Identify gaps• Develop immediate solutions to fill gaps• Harvest best practices• Create continuous improvement strategy• Provide transparency and accountability when necessary

Measurement MethodologyROI Methodology was utilized by the ROI of Engagement Team to collect and analyze impacton Level One (reaction and satisfaction) and Level Two (learning and understanding) criteria. The evaluation was designed to identify barriers and enablers to performance, provide accurateand credible evidence of business impact, reveal fundamental differences in the experience of in-person vs. remote audiences and conclude with the development of an action plan to fuel continuous improvement of the Summit and guide the design and delivery of future hybrid events.

Measurement is of utmost importance to the virtual event industry. Continued success and thepace of adoption in part relies on the ability to prove the impact, defend existing programs, justify future programs, and continue to improve their effectiveness.

— 2 —

ROI Methodology is a comprehensive measurement process that evaluates �ve levels of results and is used in morethan 50 countries and thousands of studies each year.

Compliments ROI Institute

OverviewYear One of this study conducted in 2010 revealed a high level of success in accomplishingLevel One and Level Two objectives. Results from both in-person and remote audiences indicated a high degree of satisfaction in virtually all areas and the event was deemed an excellent investment of time by an overwhelming majority. Insight was obtained that enabled organizers to create a detailed list of improvements and future changes. This action plan included items such as: location, venue, networking, audience integration, production quality, technology platform considerations, presenter effectiveness and partnership/sponsor opportunities. More than a dozen recommendations were actually implemented for the 2011Summit. The study also revealed five key best practices which included maximizing networking opportunities between in-person and virtual audiences, integrating in-person andvirtual audiences for better communications, evaluating the use of multiple platforms, providing a consistent virtual experience and preparing speakers for a hybrid event.

Year Two, the subject of this report, revealed continued success in meeting both Virtual Edge Summit and attendee objectives. The study revealed once again that both in-person (cumulative average score of 3.83) and remote participants (cumulative average score of 3.74) expectations were being met with surprising similarity in ratings. When responses differed significantly, powerful insight was gained that will make the remote attendee’s experiencemore impactful.

The study provided new findings regarding why participants chose to attend either in-person or remote. We learned how the two available options for attendance impacted overall attendance. Lastly, this study also considered generational differences and provided surprising insight into how the summit content resonated with people in different age groups.

— 3 —

Key FindingsThe Summit was again highly successful in accomplishing event objectives with amazingly similar results from both in-person (cumulative average score of 3.83) and remote audiences (cumulative average score of 3.74). We learned why people chose the manner in which they attended and how adding a virtual option positively impacts total attendance.

Shortly following the Summit, participants were asked to provide their evaluation of the event and provide comments about their experience. A total of 247 completed responses were received, 149 in-person attendees and 98 remote attendees. The questionnaire used a five point scale with one (1) being the lowest rating and five (5) being the highest. A summary of findings and a complete reporting of all data and comments was presented to Summit management. What follows is a brief summary of results and key findings.

Results

MethodologyOnline questionnaire247 completed responses149 in-person attendees 98 remote attendees

— 4 —

Level One - Reaction & Satisfaction, Planned ActionKey findings for Reaction and SatisfactionThe results from direct observation, responses to the questionnaire and written comments provided by participants revealed valuable insight into how participants think and feel about their experience.

• Both audiences reported a gain in knowledge and ability to use virtual solutions.• Confidence in accomplishing business objectives with the use of virtual solutions was good to excellent.• Both groups of participants rated the relevancy of the content as “Good.”• An overall increased confidence in recommending virtual solutions was reported.• The vast majority of attendees agreed or strongly agreed that the Summit was a good investment of time.

Key Findings for Planned ActionAn important measure of success is whether attendees plan to use the information obtained and skills gained once they return to the workplace. Participants were asked several questionsrelating to the action they planned to take following the Summit.

• 86% of participants plan to present virtual solutions to their company/clients.• 74% plan on using virtual solutions with an existing program.• 67% plan to use virtual solutions to create a new program.• 66% plan on using new technology platform in the following year.

Why People Choose to Attend - In-Person or RemoteSeveral questions were asked in order to determine what motivates the decision on how to attend the meeting. Attendees were asked to select from a list of reasons for attending and provide comments.

— 5 —

Level 1, Reaction – In-Person AudienceWhy did you attend in-person instead of attending remotely? (Check all that apply)

— 6 —

When asked why they attended in-person versus attending remotely, common themes included the following.

• It was a good experience with rich networking opportunities. • Face-to-face networking was important. • Having a break from work and not having distractions from the office was a benefit.

When asked to identify the downsides of attending in-person, common themes included the following.

• The time/time out of the office.• The cost of attending in-person.• The travel and weather hassles.

I want to expand my professional networkOtherI prefer in-person interaction with presenters and/or attendeesI learn better when attending in-personI want to build better, deeper relationships with my existing network

43.38% 43.38% 41.18%30.15% 25.74%

Level 1 - Reaction, Virtual AttendanceWhy did you decide to attend remotely instead of in-person? (Check all that apply)

— 7 —

When asked to identify the benefits of attending virtually, common themes included the following.

• The virtual option saved time and attendees were able to multi-task.• Cost savings.• Eliminated travel time.• They could experience more, liked to do screen captures of slides, can view sessions again.

When asked to identify downsidesto attending virtually, common themes included the following.

• Participants missed the face-to-face interaction.• It is easy to become distracted.

I saved money

I saved time

I can attend just the sessions I want to

I wanted to try a virtual event

Other

I learn better this way55.68% 53.41%

39.77% 36.36%29.55%

4.55%

The Issue of CannibalizationOne of the major concerns surrounding hybrid events is that once a remote option is introduced to a traditional, in-person event, in-person attendance will decline. Reduced in-person attendance can negatively impact the overall business impact of events and, where applicable, reduce revenue for event organizers.

A key finding of this study is that 93% of virtual attendees would not attendin-person if the virtual option was eliminated. This dramatically confirms thepower of a virtual option when it comes toextending the reach of an event.

Level 1 - Reaction, In-Person AttendanceIf there wasn’t an in-person option, would you have attended remotely?

Key Finding93% of virtual attendees would not attend in-person if the virtual option was eliminated. This dramatically confirms the power of a virtual option when it comes to extending the reach of an event.

— 8 —

YES

NO

77.94%

22.06%

Level 1 - Reaction, Virtual AttendanceIf there wasn’t a virtual option, would you have attended in-person?

Virtual Edge had eighteen percent (18%) of virtual attendees in 2010 attend in-person in2011. In a separate poll of those attendees, 82% indicated that attending virtually was “very helpful” in making the decision to attend the 2011 Summit and all respondents indicated attending virtually was “helpful.”

YES

NO

6.82%

93.18%

— 9 —

Largest Comparative Difference Results from the study revealed some important differences between the in-person audience and the remote audience. One of the largest differences between the two audiences was not totally unexpected, and came from the responses to related statements about relationships and networking.

Networking – Meaningful Differences Between In-Person and Virtual Audience

Although these results are not entirely unexpected, it supports the need to continue to develop innovative solutions that will overcome this barrier to success for virtual audiences.

Level Two – Learning and UnderstandingBeyond changing the way that people think and feel about Virtual Edge Institute and the industry in general, the event strived to provide the knowledge, tools and contacts necessaryto be successful in the workplace. Results indicated Virtual Edge Institute clearly accelerated the interest in and knowledge of virtual and hybrid meetings.

Attendees stated they could successfully:• Determine when and where to deploy virtual solutions.• Had the tools and contacts to be successful using a virtual solution.• Create effective content.• Prepare presenters properly.• Lower the cost of meetings and events while maintaining effectiveness.• Connect with people that can help them be successful.

- -

— 10 —

Additional Insight from AttendeesIn many cases, a great deal of insight can be gained from comments provided by attendees. What follows is a short recap of recurring themes from the questionnaire.

Recurring themes provided in the comments “what are the two most important takeawaysfrom the Virtual Edge Summit” (In-Person Attendees) include:

• 11 out of 110 or 10% of respondents stated virtual technology enhances face-to-face meetings.• 9 out of 110 or 9% of respondents stated they liked the interactions with the other attendees/networking.• 6 out of 110 or 6% of respondents listed the networking opportunities.

Recurring themes provided in the comments “what are the two most important takeawaysfrom the Virtual Edge Summit” (Virtual Attendees) include:

• 12 out of 79 or 15% of respondents noted the general knowledge gained on the industry.• 11 out of 79 or 14% of respondents stated that a virtual element can enhance a live meeting and that concept is here to stay.• 7 out of 79 or 9% of respondents noted the opportunity to see multiple platforms.

Generational Influences – Real or Perceived GapParticipants were asked to identify the generation they belonged to in the post-event questionnaire. It was thought that findings may reveal generational differences based on the belief that younger generations adopt and use new technologies more quickly. Whenresponses were filtered by generation, they revealed a surprising similarity in results across the generational groups. The average of all responses from Boomers (born 1946-1964) was 3.86, Gen X’ers (born 1965-1981) was 3.73 and Millennials (born 1982 to present) was 3.83.

There were a few noteworthy areas of difference. Specifically, Millennials rated the following areas higher than Gen X’ers and Boomers.

Millennials Rated Highest in These Measures• I am more confident that virtual solutions can accomplish business objectives.• I am more confident that my audience will benefit from virtual experiences.• I have more trust in virtual technology platforms available today.• I am more excited about the future of virtual experiences.

These results appear to support that Millennials are increasingly becoming advocates of virtual technology solutions.

— 11 —

Recommended ActionsThe primary benefit of measuring the results of events is to gain insight that can fuel evidence-based continuous improvement. The following recommendations were developedby the ROI of Engagement Team in collaboration with Virtual Edge Institute. They are based on survey results as well as observations made during the execution of the event.

Enhance attendee experience with best of class event production. Consider partneringwith a firm that can take on the role of Producer and Director for all audio/visual production, content and speaker management.

Add quality control measures to assure high level of quality for content delivery. Consider implementing measures including the following ideas:

• Properly equip presenters to meet the needs of the remote audiences.

• Review presenter’s materials in advance to assure quality, preparedness and relevance for the remote audience.

• Schedule rehearsal time with presenters to assure the development of skills required to interact with remote attendees.

Develop innovative means to connect people, both with in-person attendees, remote attendees and with each other.

Maximize and extend networking opportunities by deliberately allocating time and organizing activities that connect both audiences before, during and following the event. For example, facilitate networking prior to event by providing lists of registered attendees and contact information to allow connections before event.

Develop ways to integrate the in-person and virtual attendees so they can communicate better during sessions, to remove the disconnected feeling of the virtual attendees. For example, consider debrief rooms following educational session where a structured program includes further live Q&A, networking, chats, etc.

Extend the connection opportunities with other innovative strategies to be deployed following the event.

Deliver clearly on a value proposition that focuses on time and money savings when marketing to remote attendees.

Always measure results to at least Level One and Two following the event in order to identify gaps that will allow successful continuous improvement.

— 12 —

— 13 —

SummaryThe Virtual Edge Summit was a large success for a number of reasons, not the least of which was bringing together the industry’s best and brightest thought leaders, technologists and practitioners for a unique hybrid event. The simultaneous distribution of valuable contentfor in-person and remote audiences coupled with a measurement system in place transformed the event into an industry laboratory.

Results from the evaluation clearly demonstrated the ability to successfully accomplish event objectives for both the in-person and remote audiences, with surprisingly similar results in most areas of measurement.

Disparity in results for the two attendee types was noted, primarily as it related to the abilityto network, build better relationships and follow up after the conference with other attendees.Ways in which to bridge these gaps will rely on the ability to enhance the overall experiencewith remote attendees.

Valuable insight was gained into why people chose to attend in-person versus remote. Itseems apparent that meeting and event organizers could benefit from understanding theunique needs of these two distinct sub-groups and refine the offerings to them. Furthermore, we drew the conclusion that, in this instance, offering a remote attendanceoption did not cause a reduction of in-person attendance, otherwise known as cannibalization. This is consistent with other research that has taken place on this topic.

Overall success of the conference did not appear to be related to generational influences.The average responses were nearly identical across all generations. Noteworthy differences were noted as it relates to confidence, trust and excitement with Millennials rating higher in these areas.

The ROI of Engagement Team and the Virtual Edge Institute are pleased to serve as a focal point for understanding and enhancing the effectiveness of virtual and hybrid events. We foresee the development of innovative strategies and technology solutions that will further position this type of event as a very effective business tool for use by leading companies and organizations of all types.

— 14 —

About The Authors Todd Hanson, CPIM, CRPPresident and Founder, Catalyst Performance Group and ROI of Engagement

Todd has 25 years of experience helping organizations achievepeople performance goals with the use of incentives, rewards and recognition, loyalty programs, meetings and events. He brings personal experience in product launches, corporate reorganizations, marketing communications strategy and fulfillment, web-site strategy and development, sales and non-sales incentives, channel partner campaigns, loyalty programs, medical symposia, training meetings, sales meetings, events, team-building, board meetings, technology solutions and now virtual events.

He has attained two professional designations; CPIM, Certified Performance Improvement Manager and CRP, Certified Return on Investment Professional. Both require the acquisition of knowledge and its application to meet needs in the marketplace. He speaks, blogs and tweets frequently on ROI. Website: www.roiofengagement.comTwitter: www.twitter.com/roiofengagement

Michael DoyleExecutive Director of Virtual Edge Institute

Michael is the founder of the Virtual Edge Institute, an industry organization dedicated to advancing the development and adoption of virtual event and meeting technology and best practices for collaboration, marketing and learning. He is a 20-year veteran of trade shows, magazines and online publishing with extensive marketing, content and business development experience. Doyle has also served as Publisher at Reed Business Information's Cahners Publishing Company, Director of Business Development and Publisher for Interex’s HP World, General Manager at Online Market World, Executive Director of the Solution Provider Institute, and Group Publisher at Gordon Publications.

He is a frequent speaker and blogger on topics related to the use of virtual technologies for business. Website: www.virtualedgeinstitute.comTwitter: www.twitter.com/virtualedge

About ROI of Engagement

About Virtual Edge Institute

ROI of Engagement is a collaborative effort of organizations with a mission to help build the business case for engagement and in so doing, help businesses grow more profitably. Services include workshops, certification courses, webinars, keynote speaking, consulting and ROI evaluation. The initiative is led by Catalyst Performance Group, Inc. and has been joined by the Enterprise Engagement Alliance, The Motivation Show, Virtual Edge Institute and others.

The initiative utilizes ROI Methodology™ a highly developed, refined and worldwide accepted method of measuring results including ROI. The system includes isolation techniques and strict guiding principles, all in an effort to create results measurement that is credible with C-Level executives. ROI Methodology™ is used to conduct literally thousands of studies each year in more than 50 countries. The ROI of Engagement model meets the specialized needs of engagement initiatives and helps companies confidently deploy programs knowing that they have credible ways to forecast and measure ROI.

The Virtual Edge Institute is an organization dedicated to advancing the development and adoption of digital event and meeting technology and best practices for collaboration and marketing. Founded in 2008 by Michael Doyle, the Institute does this by supporting and contributing research, education, thought leadership, promotion, and professional networking.

— 15 —