First, let’s start with the math. This year I took seven FoodSpace colleagues with me to The NAFEM Show. That’s a total cost of approximately $25,000 once you factor in travel, hotel, and food expenses. For a small business like mine, this is our largest single expenditure in the entire year. By some margin. And that’s without considering the opportunity cost of us being out of office for an entire business week.
It’s all money out of the door, without an immediate, tangible return – even for a good event such as NAFEM. So, why do I make that investment – and could my money be better spent elsewhere? Certainly, there is a pressure to attend trade shows. To be present and represent our community. And, while it’s great to network with our peers at these shows, we primarily attend to see the latest equipment from the exhibitors. Some of those manufacturers are spending millions of dollars on their booths. Again, could their money be better spent to get a more meaningful impact?
If I’ve got four or five big events to choose from each year, how do I decide which of those events are more valuable for us to attend? I’m not looking for somebody to foot the bill for me, but I’d probably rather reposition that money into more meaningful team training. Otherwise, we usually leave these shows with a handful of ‘what-if ’ ideas and follow-ups. We don’t leave these shows with a truly deep understanding of anything new. That’s where I question their value.
I want to send my folks to events that create a deep understanding of something new. That, I will happily spend money on because it’s way more valuable than walking 11 miles across a trade show floor and haphazardly bumping into something. Otherwise it’s mostly a lot of handshaking and baby kissing, and the financial requirement of attending creates a tug of war status for our time on the show floors.
It’s certainly worth reassessing. For manufacturers who are trying to get face time with consultants like me – who might specify their new equipment on projects – I do wonder if the investment is bearing fruit. That kind of outlay throughout the year must feel like death by 1,000 cuts. Many manufacturers attend because they’re keeping up with the Joneses. But comparing which brand has the biggest booth is a race to the bottom.
Education, education, education
Trade shows have a lot to offer though, I just don’t believe they are being positioned in the right way. Yes, it’s cool to see everybody and hang out with industry friends. The FCSI TAD Symposium is always fantastic value, and seeing the consultant community get together in person is priceless. So, having The NAFEM Show immediately after that gives us more bang for our buck because of the additional learning and networking. But I’d like to see more structured learning and networking at the show too. Right now, it strikes me that smaller, regional trade shows that create meaningful education content – especially where consultants have inputted into the program – are a better investment.
Attending shows can offer tremendous team building. It can make the investment worthwhile, as can the opportunity to break bread with Allied members. That’s of high value, but I am increasingly struck that these events could be better catered towards us consultants. The old ‘walking the floors’ model isn’t working for me any more. It’s time to rethink these “tried and-true” ways and make them fit for our purposes. I hope you enjoyed NAFEM this year, and any other shows you go to, but let me know how they could offer better value for us as you wear down that shoe leather.
Joe Schumaker FCSI
About the author:
Based in Idaho, Joe Schumaker FCSI is the founder and CEO of FoodSpace
So what do you think? Join the debate by contacting Joe: joe@myfoodspace com
