Buying/decision-making process

From the point of view of those supplying and promoting meetings facilities and venues, one of the most striking contrasts between the corporate and the associ­ation markets is the way in which their respective buying processes and buying patterns differ so extensively.

In seeking to attract new business, two key questions that suppliers must endeav­our to answer are who within the buyer organisation is responsible for organising meetings, and how is the decision as to where the meeting will be held actually taken within the buyer organisation?

The first question raises the issue of the meetings planners or meetings organisers who have a degree of influence on which venues are considered for conferences, seminars and other events. Who are they? To whom within organisations should suppliers and destination marketing organisations, for example, direct their mar­keting efforts? Identifying exactly who the meetings planners arc is often far from simple.

Part of the complexity of the issue arises from the fact that large organisations, whether in rhe corporate or the association sector, may either have a single, special­ist meetings planner - one person with the responsibility for all decisions on meetings-related matters for that organisation - or, alternatively, following a more decentralised system, each branch, division or chapter of the organisation may be responsible for purchasing its own meetings facilities and services, in which case there will he a number of different individuals with responsibility for planning meetings.

A third option for both corporate and association organisations is to give the responsibility for arranging meetings to an external intermediary, who will under­take all or some of the planning of the event on behalf of the buyer. The use and role of intermediaries will be examined later in this chapter. First, however, it isimportant to return to the questions posed earlier: who within the buyer organisa­tion is responsible for organising meetings, and how is the decision as to where the meeting will be held actually taken?

Regarding the buyers encountered in the corporate sector, Rogers (1998) notes that, in the UK at least, relatively few companies have a dedicated conference or event management department, and that staff involved in organising meetings appear in a whole range of guises and job titles.

Greenhill (2000) develops this issue:It is very difficult to establish the actual universe of [meetings planners]. The chang­ing nature of companies' structures affects the number of organisers. There are many people who organise a meeting or conference just once a year, and their main profes­sional responsibility is entirely different. However, there are also those for whom it is a full-time responsibility. They are very experienced events organisers and have specialist skills that contribute greatly to the success of their events.

Those responsible for planning meetings for the companies who employ them can have any one of a wide range of functions within their organisations, as shown by the variety of their principal professional responsibilities:

Source: UK Conference Market Survey 2000, published by the MIA

It is clear that those marketing venues and destinations need to be able to iden­tify the people within companies who are responsible for organising meetings in order to target their marketing efforts directly at those corporate buyers. However, the question is complicated further by the fact that often it is not the actual meet­ings planner who has the final say on selecting the venue or destination.

Finding out, therefore, exactly who within companies has the power to decide on where corporate meetings will take place is a complex yet crucial matter for sup­pliers. The situation is, if anything, more complex in the case of associations.

One feature hardly ever encountered in the corporate sector but that often char­acterises the buying process in the international association sector in particular is the bid process. This arises from the fact that, in the association market, the hosting of a meeting in a particular city or venue often takes place as the result of an initiative taken by a local or national branch or chapter of the association in question. This is particularly the case for the international association meetings market. When several chapters of the same association are in competition to host the same event, each is invited to bid for the privilege of doing so. In that case, each one will compile a bid proposal detailing the advantages of the event being hosted in their particular city or country, in very much the same way as, on a grander scale, countries bid to be the venue for the Olympic Games.

An example of an event won in this way is seen in the successful joint bid made by Edinburgh and Glasgow in 1999 to host the four-day international Vel­ocity 2001 conference of the European Cyclists' Federation. The bid, put together by a consortium including the two cities' councils and local cycling campaign groups, made a convincing enough case for the two Scottish cities to be selected in preference to the competing bids submitted by Dublin, Gothenburg and Strasbourg.

As the local authorities of each competing destination usually have a clear inter­est in their city being the winner in this process, they usually support the bid by contributing to the proposal document. Rogers (1998; p.30) outlines the content of a typical bid proposal:

A bid document is likely to contain a formal invitation, often signed by the Mayor or other civic dignity, a full description of the destination highlighting its attractions, access and communications details... information on the support services available in the destination... a list of the services provided by the convention and visitor bureau or conference office, details of hotel and other accommodation and, of course, full details of the venue being proposed to stage the conference. Assistance with any presentations and/or the inspection visits that can also form part of the bid procedure may also be provided by the destination's own marketing organisation. The need to provide such support and assistance can add up to a substantial investment in terms of the amount of work and expense. But most destinations understand that it is vital to participate when the consequence of coming first in the competition is such a tremendous boost to their economy and image. Indeed, the more proactive destination marketing organisations do not wait until associations' local contacts contact them for assistance. Understanding that local contacts can be strong allies in getting their city or country on the initial list of possible destinations, and then lobbying for it to be selected, many destin­ation marketeers make active efforts to identify such groups and convert them into valuable conference leads.

The decision-making process in the association market is complicated further by the issue of exactly who within the organisation is responsible for arranging the event and choosing the destination and venue. In common with the corpor­ate sector, many associations have no specific, specialised member or members of staff responsible for organising meetings events. But one difference is that, as Shone (1998; p.28) notes, the organisation of conferences for the association market often relies heavily on the efforts of unpaid volunteers, and that, as a result:

This poses a challenge for venue managers and sales teams, nlot only in identify­ing who, in an association, is likely to be the conference organiser, but also in terms of dealing with organisers who lack the necessary experience and skills. In consequence, sales teams may have to exert greater efforts to ensure an association conference goes smoothly than might be the case when dealing with... a con­tact within a commercial organisation whose specific duties include conference organisation.

Regarding the choice of destination and venue, whereas in the corporate sector it is frequently the case that the decision as to where a meeting is to be held is made by one individual, in associations the decision is more likely to be made by a number of people working together. A Travel 8c Tourism Intelligence (TTI, 2000) report cites research that indicates that association meeting planners have the power to decide upon a meeting venue approximately 40% of the time, but for the remain­ing 60% it is usually the decision of groups of people internal to professional and trade associations. Such groups may take the form of a special organising committee or the association's secretariat, for example. Whatever its composition, in consumer terminology, the group constitutes a 'buying centre'.

Two or even three different, but connected, buying centres may be involved in the different stages of the decision-making process linked to the location and organisa­tion of a large association meeting:

• The destination may be chosen by a specialist committee representing the associ­ation as a whole - typically including the meeting planner, the association's execu­tive, its president, and members of the executive committee.

• The venue and other local suppliers may be chosen by the local organising committee - representing the local branch that won the bidding process, if there was one.

• The actual programme for the event may be organised by a specialist programme committee, which may be part of the local organising committee or a separate body.

Clearly, a much wider range of players may be involved in the decision-making process in associations than is the case for corporate meetings. For those respon­sible for marketing venues and destinations, this inevitably raises the point that while meeting planners are important players in the process, marketing to them alone is unlikely to be entirely effective. The situation is complicated further by the fact that not all players in the process have equal influence over the final decision as to where the event is to be held.