Differential effects of determinants on multi-dimensions of trade show performance: By three stages of pre-show, at-show, and post-show activities

Transcription

1 Available online at Industrial Marketing Management 37 (2008) Differential effects of determinants on multi-dimensions of trade show : By three stages of pre-show, at-show, and post-show activities Chang Hyun Lee a,1, Sang Yong Kim b, a Institute of Convention and Exhibition Management, Daechi-dong , Gangnam-gu, Seoul, Republic of Korea b Korea University, Business School, Anam-dong, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul, , Republic of Korea Received 29 June 2006; received in revised form 10 April 2007; accepted 28 January 2008 Available online 25 March 2008 Abstract Although there have been several studies dealing with trade show recently, most of these research measured only overall success or sales of trade shows and failed to capture other dimensions of trade show such as image-buildings, informationgatherings and so on. In this research, we study the differential effects of determinants on each dimension of trade show considering the multi-stage nature of trade show management. We suggest and verify a conceptual structure that captures multi-dimensions of trade show (i.e., sales-related, image-building, information-gathering, and relationship-improvement) and relate each dimension to tactical variables such as quantifying show objectives, pre-show promotion, booth staff training, follow-up and so on. More importantly, we have categorized these variables by three stages of pre-show, at-show, and post-show activities. Thus, we developed a set of models linking tactical variables in each stage with the appropriate dimension. Results suggest that the variables we considered in each stage have a significant and differential impact on each dimension of trade show. Managerial implications of the findings are considered and limitations along with future directions discussed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Keywords: Trade shows; Performance; Pre-show; At-show; Post-show 1. Introduction Trade shows are increasingly important as a promotion medium and constitute a multibillion-dollar business in the United States and Europe (Dekimpe, Francois, Gopalakrishna, Lilien, & Van den Bulte, 1997; Trade Show Bureau, 1994). The importance and usefulness of this medium have been well known in the many literature (American Business Press, 1990; Bello & Barczak, 1990; Business Marketing, 1996; Cartwright, 1995; Godar & O'connor, 2001; Hansen, 2004; Kaminer, 1992; O'Hara, 1993; Rosson & Seringhaus, 1995; Sind, 1996). Such Corresponding author. Tel.: addresses: chlee@dreamwiz.com (C.H. Lee), sangkim@korea.ac.kr (S.Y. Kim). 1 Tel.: as in the case of US and Europe, trade shows held in Korea have demonstrated an annual growth of 14% to 45% since 1999 (Song, 2003). In order for companies to utilize trade shows more effectively, they need to gain a clear understanding about trade show, and knowledge about influence factors that can enhance. Only then, will they be able to deduce methods that can enhance their trade show, and apply them in their work. Recently, there have been several studies dealing with trade show (Dekimpe et al., 1997; Gopalakrishna & Lilien, 1995; Kerin & Cron, 1987; Seringhaus & Rosson, 2001; Tanner, 2002). Most of these research measured only overall success or sales of trade shows and failed to capture other dimensions of trade show such as image-buildings, information-gatherings and so on even though trade show is multidimensional and includes both /$ - see front matter 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi: /j.indmarman

2 C.H. Lee, S.Y. Kim / Industrial Marketing Management 37 (2008) selling and non-selling (or promotion) dimensions. Trade shows can help identify buying influences, boost corporate image, provide product demonstration, generate qualified leads for salespeople, handle customer complaints, yield competitive information, etc. (Hutt & Speh, 2001). If the exhibitors' most important objective is enhancing the image of the company than sales-related outcomes, how should they do? It is difficult to find the answer from the previous research since they examined trade show dimensions by limiting their scope to sales-related or overall. And previous research cannot tell which factors exhibitors should manage more carefully for accomplishing their unique show objectives among various success factors for trade shows. In this research we study the differential effects of determinants on each dimension of trade show considering the multi-stage nature of trade show management. We suggest and verify a conceptual structure that captures multi-dimensions of trade show (i.e., sales-related, image-building, information-gathering, and relationshipimprovement) by modifying a structure presented by Hansen (2004). And we relate each dimension to tactical variables such as quantifying show objectives, pre-show promotion, booth staff training, booth size, booth location, atshow promotion, booth staffing, follow-up, and measurement. More importantly, we have categorized these variables by three stages of pre-show, at-show, and post-show activities. Thus, we developed a set of models linking tactical variables in each stage with the appropriate dimension. Our estimation results suggest that the variables we considered in each stage have a significant and differential impact on each dimension of trade show. We hope to provide exhibitors what actions they should take to enhance each dimension of trade show. 2. Related literatures 2.1. Trade show activities with stages Pervious research has examined the role of trade shows in the communication mix through the industrial buying and selling processes (Smith, Gopalakrishna, & Smith, 2004). Most of the work has generally characterized these processes as being sequential the buying process progresses from the need recognition stage to post-purchase evaluation (Robinson, Faris, & Wind, 1967; Wind & Thomas, 1994), while the sales process proceeds from generating awareness to closure of the sale (Churchill, Ford, Walker, Johnston, & Tanner, 2000). There has been a research stream with a three-step process of exhibiting (Gopalakrishna, Lilien, Willams, & Sequeira, 1995; Gopalakrishna & Lilien, 1995; Herbig, O'Hara, & Palumbo, 1994; Rosson & Seringhaus, 1995; Smith et al., 2004; Tanner, 2002). The first step is pre-show activities, the step two is atshow activities and the third is post-show activities. This framework makes sense conceptually and has long been in use by the industry (Tanner, 2002). Rosson and Seringhaus (1995) also used a three-step process model in their study of visitor behavior and visitor exhibitor interaction at trade show. They provided the most useful explanations why a three-step process is important to verify its effect on trade show. They found that trade show visitor behavior varies before, at, and after the trade show since the trade show is a temporary event and visitors have different needs by each stage. It is consistent with Morrow (2002) that trade show is a temporary, timesensitive marketplace where exhibitors and visitors interact for the express purpose of purchasing displayed goods or services, either at the time of presentation or at a future date. Thus, we believe this framework is helpful for exhibitors to plan and prepare for the trade show program to interact effectively with visitors whose behavior varied by each step. For example, visitors' behavior at pre-show stages is characterized by learning about trade shows through various information sources and making a decision whether to attend or not before the show. In response, exhibitors should send their actual and prospective customers private invitations known as most influential in the decision to attend. In addition, exhibitors do many things such as published exhibitor information, free registration, advertisement in trade publications, trade association promotion (Hough, 1988), and setting written show objectives (Kerin & Cron, 1987) to interact effectively with visitors at pre-show stages. Likewise, exhibitors should manage different factors at-show and post-show stages since the behavior of trade show visitors varied by the stages. Thus we believe a three-step framework is very useful to study trade show Trade show There have been many studies dealing with trade show (Dekimpe et al., 1997; Gopalakrishna & Lilien, 1995; Kerin & Cron, 1987; Seringhaus & Rosson, 2001; Tanner, 2002), but most of these research measured only overall success or sales of trade shows. Kerin and Cron (1987) carried out analysis of companies that participated in trade shows by dividing those who showed high and those who didn't. But this study has limitations that it viewed trade show s through just one category of overall. Gopalakrishna and Lilien (1995) examined the variables that influenced trade show by using three-level measurement model (attraction efficiency, contact efficiency, conversion efficiency) that takes exhibitors' booth traffic into consideration, but this evaluation was mostly focused on salescentered approach (Blythe, 2000). Gopalakrishna et al. (1995) and Seringhaus and Rosson (2001) also considered only salesrelated. So did Tanner (2002) with a view of overall success. However, it is well understood that marketing attained by participating in trade shows is significant in relation not only to the sales-related but also to the non-sales (Bonoma, 1983; Kerin & Cron, 1987; Sharland & Balogh, 1996). In this respect, almost all previous research on trade show are not free from the limitations of focusing just on sales-related s, and ignoring other s that are available through trade shows such as corporate (brand) image reinforcement and customer relationship-improvement. As one exception, Hansen (2004) developed

3 786 C.H. Lee, S.Y. Kim / Industrial Marketing Management 37 (2008) the construct and measure of trade show based on the marketing literature's outcome- and behavior-based control system taxonomy. The measure of trade show construct includes both selling (sales-related) and non-selling (information-gathering, image-building, relationship-building, and motivation) dimensions. We believe that this recent construct model is theoretical and useful in studying trade show. Thus, we start our research from the construct developed by Hansen (2004). 3. A framework of this study The purpose of this study is to examine the differential effect of determinants on each dimension of trade show. Based on tradition on time-based classification of trade show activities, we categorized determinants that affect each trade show into three stages of pre-show, at-show, and post-show activities. And we examined the relationship between determinants and trade show at each stage. We classified the factors, identified by many researchers (Blythe, 2000; Dekimpe et al., 1997; Gopalakrishna & Lilien, 1995; Kerin & Cron, 1987; Seringhaus & Rosson, 2001; Tanner, 2002; Tanner & Chonko 1995), that affect trade show effectiveness and by the stage: quantifying show objectives, pre-promotion and staff training were selected as variables at the pre-show activity stage; booth size, booth location, at-show promotion and booth staff density were selected as variables for at-show stage; and for the post-show stage follow-up and measurement were chosen as variables to examine their relationship with trade show. To establish dimensions of, this study takes four dimensions from the five presented by Hansen (2004). Motivation, the fifth dimension, was excluded since Korean companies consider it little important. Thus, we have four dimensions of image-building, sales-related, information-gathering, and relationship-improvement. We believe it is not against Hansen (2004) since he mentioned the possibility of dimension modification under the different environments. Therefore, our conceptual model for analysis is the following shown at Fig Basic assumptions The effect of determinant on trade show depends on which step trade show activity happens and whether the determinant is impersonal or personal nature. We explained why the effects of determinants become different by the stage of trade shows and their characteristics of impersonal or personal nature in following sections Differential effects of determinants on trade show by the stage The effect of determinants can be different by the stage because the target groups who interact with exhibitors are varied in each stage (Rosson & Seringhaus, 1995). Exhibitors communicate and interact with the prospects who didn't decide yet whether to go or not a trade show, which booths to visit, what persons to meet at pre-show stage. On the other hand, they interact with the prospects who already attend a trade show atshow stage. Although the common purpose of both pre-show and at-show promotional activities is to increase booth traffic, pre-show promotional activities are more important than atshow ones. The reason is that business buyers generally plan their trade show time in advance and they use pre-show information for this purpose (Stevens, 2005). According to Siskind (2005), Center for Exhibition Industry Research reports that 76% of attendees come to a show with an agenda and they have already decided whom to see and what booths to visit. The purpose of pre-show promotion is to secure a place on their agenda because exhibitors compete with other exhibitors for the Fig. 1. A conceptual model of determinants and outcomes of trade show.

4 C.H. Lee, S.Y. Kim / Industrial Marketing Management 37 (2008) time of attendees. On the other hand, at-show promotion targets those who already attend a show and has less impact on the attraction to the booth and attendee's agenda. This difference between pre-show and at-show activities makes their impact on trade show be different. In other words, the effect of pre-show promotion is more extensive and deeper than at-show promotion. According to Siskind (2005), a study of Deloitte & Touche commissioned by CEIR proves that those exhibitors who conducted a pre-show promotion raised by 46% their attraction efficiency, meaning the quality of the audience they were able to attract to their booths. Similarly, the conversion of booth visitors to qualified leads rose 50% when a pre-show promotion was used. This means that pre-show promotion has not only an impact on image-building and but also other such as sales. Pre-show promotion has an impact on attracting more visitors to the booth and provides more opportunity to communicate and contact with these planned visitors and converse booth visitors to sales leads. Exhibitors can strengthen brand awareness and preference (image-building), collect more information about their current or potential customers those visit their booths (information-gathering), build and raise their relationship with them through more communication and contact activities (relationship building and improvement), and result in the conversion of booth visitors into sales lead (sales-related ). At-show promotion has also an impact on the image-building and information-gathering with attracted visitors in such a case of pre-show promotion. But it is weakly linked with other trade show such as relationship and sales because it has little impact on the agenda and schedule of the pre-planned visitors under the limited time at show. It is not easy for exhibitors to build deep relationship with the visitors through at-show promotion and converse them into sales leads especially when they have already planned their schedule with other exhibitors. By this reason, the effect of atshow promotion has limited to image-building and informationgathering. The purpose of post-show activity is to extend the impact of the event over a longer period of time and deepen the resulting connections with customers and prospects who visited the booth (Stevens, 2005). Post-show follow-up includes a personal e- mail thank-you note from the individual staffs who met with the contact at the trade show, a personalized letter with the further information requested at the show, a reprint of your press coverage or another article relating to the trade show, reminder of the final expiration date for the trade show special offer, conversion sales lead created at trade show into actual sales, and so on. These activities strengthen the impact of pre-show and atshow activities on image-building, sales-related, informationgathering, and relationship of trade shows Differential effects of determinants on trade show by the characteristics of their impersonal and personal promotional activities Trade show promotional activities can be classified into two categories: impersonal and personal (Gopalakrishna & Lilien, 1995). According to Smith et al. (2004), impersonal communication tactics are generally more cost-effective for selling objectives earlier in the process (e.g., awareness and interest generation), while personal communication is more cost-effective for objectives later in the process (e.g., offering customization, negotiation). Impersonal promotional activities include the variables such as pre-show promotion, at-show promotion (attention-getting technique), booth size, and booth location (Gopalakrishna & Williams, 1992; Gopalakrishna & Lilien, 1995; Ling-yee, 2007). These impersonal promotions affect attracting the target audience to the booth (Gopalakrishna & Lilien, 1995; Ling-yee, 2007). Personal promotional activities, on the other hand, include the variables such as the number of booth staffs and booth staff training. These promotions affect making contact with the target audiences who have visited the firm's booth and conversion of those contacts into sales leads (Gopalakrishna & Lilien, 1995; Ling-yee, 2007). By this reason, determinants can play a different role in several stages of trade shows, attributed the personal and impersonal nature of the communication involved. For example, booth space is an at-show impersonal promotional variable and an increase in booth size results in a greater number of visitors attracted from the potential audience (Gopalakrishna & Lilien, 1995). On the other hand, booth staff density is an at-show promotional variable and more booth personnel can make more contacts with the visitors attracted to the booth and also have a higher degree of persistence of selling effort, resulting in a greater number of leads (Gopalakrishna & Lilien, 1995). These characteristics between booth space and booth staff density make a difference of their effects on trade show. An increase in booth size attracts more visitors to the booth and results in the increased exposure to them. It allows exhibitors to enhance the image-building. But there are no direct communications with the visitors attracted to the booth. On the other hand, a great number of booth personnel can have more opportunities to communicate directly and improve the relationships with the visitors attracted to the booth. They can provide the explanations about the company, product demonstrations, and promotional materials more actively and these allow exhibitors to enhance their corporate and brand image among the visitors. They can also build and improve the relationships with the visitors more effectively and collect the information about their potential customers who are attracted to the booth through more contacts and interactions with them. It enables exhibitors to enhance their relationship and informationgathering. Thus, the characteristics of independent variables which are either impersonal or personal promotions make a great difference in their effects on trade show. Generally, impersonal promotional activities affect attracting target audiences to the booth and increasing exposure to them. This is helpful for exhibitors to enhance their company's image and brand image. But its impact on trade show is limited to such image-building. On the other hand, personal promotional activities make exhibitors more contact, communicate, and interact with the visitors attracted to the booth and affect multi-dimensions (image-building, sales-

5 788 C.H. Lee, S.Y. Kim / Industrial Marketing Management 37 (2008) related, information-gathering, relationship-improvement) of trade show than impersonal promotional activities The effect of quantifying trade show objectives on trade show In order to enhance trade show, setting up show objectives is important. Kerin and Cron (1987) showed that those companies that established participation objectives demonstrated tendencies to evaluate trade show more highly than those that did not, and displayed greater satisfaction for non-sales goals than sales goals. Also, according to CEIR (1997), companies that evaluated their trade show to be successful were more likely to record their trade show objectives on paper. Therefore, in order to enhance trade show, it is important to select participation goals carefully, and especially, to set-up the goals in configurations that are measurable (Blythe, 2000; Lee & Kim, 2003). This stresses the importance of quantifying show objectives. Among trade show, quantifying show objectives is especially important for sales-related and relationshipbuilding. Since sales-related is measured in terms of number of sales leads, contracts made and so on, the objectives need to be quantified before the trade show in order to determine variables such as booth size and booth staff number, which would be needed to achieve the goals. Concrete measurement categories for relationshipimprovement are composed of relationshipimprovement with existing customers, relationship-improvement with core customers andsoon,andinordertoachievethegoals companies must create special programs for such customers for example hosting a separate promotion event by renting a hotel suite and inviting them. But such programs require a great deal of expense. So, a company hosting such an event needs to decide on the list of customers to be invited and be aware of the approximate budget that will be required beforehand. Therefore, quantifying relationship-improvement objectives prior to the trade show becomes a very important component in allocating budget, number of guests and so on. In contrast, quantifying show objectives seems to be relatively less important in image-building and informationgathering. In the case of image-building, quantifying a goal of improving company's or a brand's image through trade show participation must be measured with surveys with the trade show visitors before and after the show. However, almost no Korean companies carry out such surveys. Similarly, information-gathering is also considered to be a less important component in terms of quantifying objectives measurable and visible. Therefore, quantifying show objectives seems to be closely connected with sales-related and relationship-improvement s, but less likely related with image-building and information-gathering s. Thus following hypothesis is established. H1. Quantifying show objective has a positive effect on salesrelated and relationship-improvement of trade shows The effect of pre-show impersonal promotion on trade show Pre-show impersonal promotion is known for attracting the target audience to the booth (Gopalakrishna & Lilien, 1995; Ling-yee, 2007). And it can secure a place on the target's agenda since the prospects plan their trade show time in advance based on the pre-show information. According to Siskind (2005), a study of Deloitte & Touche commissioned by CEIR proves that those exhibitors who conducted a pre-show promotion raised by 46% their attraction efficiency and by 50% the conversion of booth visitors to qualified leads. This implies that pre-show promotion has not only an impact on image-building and but also other such as sales. Pre-show promotions such as personal invitations, direct mail, advertisements, internet etc. have an impact on attracting more visitors to the booth and provide more opportunity to communicate and contact with these planned visitors and converse booth visitors to sales leads. Exhibitors can strengthen brand awareness and preference (image-building), collect more information about their current or potential customers those visit their booths (informationbuilding), build and raise their relationship with them through more communication and contact activities (relationship building and improvement), and result in the conversion of booth visitors into sales lead (sales-related ). Successful exhibitors are more likely to make use of preshow promotion (Tanner, 2002). Dekimpe et al. (1997) also demonstrated that pre-show promotion has a positive effect on booth attraction effectiveness. Further empirical evidence (CEIR, 1997) was reported companies that combined other promotional tools pre-promotion including DM, on-site promotion on so on with trade show participation, tend to evaluate their trade show to be successful in reaching their participation goals. Therefore, it is hypothesized here that: H2. Pre-show impersonal promotion has a positive effect on image-building, sales-related, information-gathering, and relationship-improvement of trade shows The effect of pre-show personal promotion on trade show Booth staff training is a pre-show and personal promotional activity of trade shows from the exhibitor's management point of view (Gopalakrishna & Lilien, 1995; Ling-yee, 2007). As mentioned earlier, these two (pre-show and personal promotion) characteristics make booth staff training affect all four dimensions (image-building, sales-related, information-gathering, and relationship-improvement s) of trade shows. With so many companies participating in a trade show, the competition for attracting visitors is very fierce. Therefore, it is important for exhibitors to meet as many customers as possible to create sales leads (Hatch, 1991) and, through proper training, it is necessary for booth staff to distinguish a buyer quickly and carry out their mission effectively through proper training.

6 C.H. Lee, S.Y. Kim / Industrial Marketing Management 37 (2008) Booth staff training was shown to have positive effect on increasing contact with the target audiences who have visited the firm's booth (Gopalakrishna & Lilien, 1995) and achieving trade show objectives (Ling-yee, 2007). Booth staffs provide the explanations about the company, product demonstrations, and promotional materials more actively and these allow exhibitors to enhance their corporate and brand image among the visitors. They can also build and improve the relationships with the visitors more effectively and collect the information about their potential customers who are attracted to the booth through more contacts and interactions with them. It enables exhibitors to enhance their relationship and informationgathering. Booth staffs can make more contacts with the visitors attracted to the booth and also have a higher degree of persistence of selling effort, resulting in a greater number of leads (Gopalakrishna & Lilien, 1995). Therefore, training the staff about carrying out such responsibilities strengthens the impact of booth staffs' activities on imagebuilding, sales-related, information-gathering, and relationship of trade shows. Based on such arguments, following hypothesis is established. H3. Pre-show personal promotion of booth staff training has a positive effect on image-building, sales-related, informationgathering, and relationship-improvement of trade shows The effect of at-show impersonal promotion on trade show The at-show impersonal promotions which have no direct communications with the visitors attracted to the booth include booth size, booth location, and at-show promotion (Gopalakrishna & Williams, 1992; Gopalakrishna & Lilien, 1995; Ling-yee, 2007). At-show impersonal promotion has an impact on the of image-building and information-gathering. Although Ling-yee (2007) reported that impersonal booth promotion such as booth space, booth location, and at-show promotion (attention-getting techniques) is related positively to achievement of trade shows' objectives, they are weakly linked with other trade show such as relationship and sales since they have little impact on the agenda and schedule of the preplanned visitors. An increase in booth size results in a greater number of visitors attracted from the potential audience (Gopalakrishna & Lilien, 1995). With larger number of potential customers, the exhibitor can enhance corporate and brand image and gather information about the visitors attracted to the booth. Dekimpe et al. (1997) also demonstrated that pre-show promotion has a positive effect on booth attraction effectiveness. Booth location is also an at-show and impersonal promotional activity (Gopalakrishna & Lilien, 1995; Ling-yee, 2007). It affects the firm's visibility and familiarity among the target audience and serves to attract the target audience to visit the booth. Thus, booth location is expected to have a positive effect on image-building and information-gathering since good booth location places the exhibitor in a better position to exposure them to the attendees and gather information about the market and customers. At-show promotion including sampling, giveaways, product demonstrations, etc. is also an at-show and impersonal promotional activity which attempts to selectively attract the attention of interested visitors to make them enter the booth and ask for more information (Gopalakrishna & Lilien, 1995; Hatch, 1991). Under the limited time of at-show promotion, it is difficult for exhibitors to build up the relationship with visitors especially attracted to the booth only through at-show promotion and it is very difficult to converse them into sales leads since most of them have already planned their schedule with other exhibitors (Stevens, 2005). By this reason, the effect of at-show promotion has limited to image-building and informationgathering. H4. At-show impersonal promotions of booth size, booth location, and at-show promotion have a positive effect on image-building and information-gathering s of trade shows The effect of at-show personal promotion on trade show Booth staff density is an at-show and personal promotional activity of trade shows (Gopalakrishna & Lilien, 1995; Lingyee, 2007). The average number of salespeople at the booth should affect contact and conversion efficiency (Gopalakrishna & Lilien, 1995). Clearly, for a given number of interested visitors attracted to the booth, more booth personnel can make more contacts with the visitors attracted to the booth. Also, for a given number of contacts, a greater number of booth personnel can have a higher degree of persistence of selling effort, resulting in a greater number of leads (Gopalakrishna & Lilien, 1995). A great number of booth personnel can have more opportunities to communicate directly and improve the relationships with the visitors attracted to the booth. They can provide the explanations about the company, product demonstrations, and promotional materials more actively and these allow exhibitors to enhance their corporate and brand image among the visitors. They can also build and improve the relationships with the visitors more effectively and collect the information about their potential customers who are attracted to the booth through more contacts and interactions with them. It enables exhibitors to enhance their relationship and information-gathering. In addition, booth staffs can make more contacts with the visitors attracted to the booth and also have a higher degree of persistence of selling effort, resulting in a greater number of leads (Gopalakrishna & Lilien, 1995). Dekimpe et al. (1997) has also reported that booth staff density, expressed as the number of salespeople relative to the area of the booth, has a positive effect on attraction effectiveness. Further empirical evidence (Ling-yee, 2007) was reported that booth staff density is related positively to achievement of trade shows' objectives.

7 790 C.H. Lee, S.Y. Kim / Industrial Marketing Management 37 (2008) H5. At-show personal promotion of booth staff density has a positive effect on image-building, sales-related, information-gathering, and relationship-improvement of trade shows The effect of post-show follow-up on trade show Post-show follow-up includes a personal thank-you note from the individual staffs who met with the contact at the trade show, a personalized letter with the further information requested at the show, a reprint of your press coverage or another article relating to the trade show, reminder of the final expiration date for the trade show special offer, conversion sales lead created at trade show into actual sales, and so on (Stevens, 2005). The purpose of post-show follow-up, as mentioned earlier, is to extend the impact of the event over a longer period of time and deepen the resulting connections with customers and prospects who visited the booth (Stevens, 2005). After the show, exhibitors have to see if their objectives were met. If exhibitors' sales objectives were to gather leads, write orders, or sell products, they may need to wait as many attendees make their purchasing decisions after the show. According to Siskind (2005), CEIR reports that 57% of attendees will make a purchasing decision within twelve months, but depending on the product or service, it could be longer. If exhibitors' communication objectives were to reinforce their brand, create awareness, or introduce a new product, they need to be assured that messages delivered at their booth were received and understood by the right people. Tanner (2002) has demonstrated that more successful exhibitors are more likely to follow-up on prospect and customers after the show. Ling-yee (2007) has also reported that follow-up effort is related positively to achievement of trade shows' objectives. Further empirical evidence (Smith et. al., 2004) was reported that overall sales productivity and profits are greater when the trade show is used in conjunction with optimal levels of follow-up sales effort after show. Therefore, post-show follow-up activities strengthen the impact of pre-show and atshow activities on image-building, sales-related, informationgathering, and relationship of trade shows. Based on such argument, following hypothesis is established: H6. Post-show follow-up has a positive effect on imagebuilding, sales-related, information-gathering, and relationshipimprovement of trade shows The effect of measurement on trade show Measurement and evaluation of trade show require specialized knowledge, and such evaluative results must be shared with other sales or marketing managers to reinforce future trade show (Kijewski, Yoon, & Young, 1993). Measurement naturally calls for use of quantifying methods, and such measurement as in the case of quantifying show objectives has a positive effect on salesrelated and relationship-improvement s. Tanner (2002) has demonstrated that successful exhibitors use more methods to measure success than do less successful exhibitors. Based on such argument, following hypothesis is established: H7. Measurement has a positive effect on sales-related and relationship-improvement of trade shows. 4. Research methodology 4.1. Data collection method and sample characteristics Before starting the survey, its content validity was evaluated through in-depth interviews with responsible personnel in companies that participated in trade shows, show organizers of related trade shows and exhibition marketing managers of COEX, who are considered as specialists in this field. During this process, majority opinion was that motivation was unnecessary since it is hardly ever taken into consideration among trade shows in Korea. Consequently, this component was deleted from the survey. Data for this study were collected over the period of approximately 40 days from November 10th to December 20th, Three trade shows held in Korea during early half of 2005, were selected and the targets of this survey were companies that participated in those shows. Trade shows selected for this research are as follows: 1) 21st Korea International Medical & Hospital Equipment Show (KIMES 2005) (Organizer: Korea E & Ex/Mar. 17 Mar. 20, 2005/Venue: COEX) 2) 15th, Korea International Broadcast, Audio & Lighting Equipment Show (KOBA 2005) (Organizer: Korea E& Ex/ May 17, 2005 May 20/Venue: COEX) 3) 3rd Korea International Dental Exhibition (KDX, 2005) (Organizer: Korea Dental Trade Association/June 22 June 25, 2005/Venue: COEX) With the help of organizers that hosted the selected trade shows, official letters written by host organizations were sent together with survey questionnaire by and fax to the persons at the companies that participated in the above listed trade shows. One week after sending the survey questionnaire, telephone calls were made to confirm whether survey targets (personnel in charge of trade show participation) received the questionnaire. Their cooperation in answering the survey was cordially requested, and separate explanations were provided when there were questions about the survey content. Total of 568 surveys were sent, and 121 were returned. After excluding 10 returned surveys with some unfaithful responses including no responses, the final 111 answered surveys were used for this study. Characteristics of sample companies used for this study were categorized according to number of employees, company size (total sales), grade of the respondent, and trade show participation experience during the last three years ( ). Frequency analysis was carried out and the results are presented in Table Measurements Most of variables and concepts used in this study were taken from already proven studies. Of the variables related to trade show determinants, pre-show promotion, booth size, at-show promotion, booth staff number and measurement were measured using the actual data received from companies that participated in

8 C.H. Lee, S.Y. Kim / Industrial Marketing Management 37 (2008) Table 1 General characteristics of sample companies Category Freq. Rate (%) No. of employees Less than Less than 1.5 Over 30 less than Over 1.5 less the trade shows, and quantifying show objectives, booth staff training, booth location and follow-up were measured using 7- point Likert scale. Variables related to trade show were also measured through subjective self-report by respondents of the surveyed companies, and 7-point Likert scale that measures agreement degree of corresponding questionnaire was used as response scale. Operational definition and measurement methods for each measurement variables can be summarized as in Table Research results 5.1. Reliability and validity Category Freq. Rate (%) Annual sales volume billion than 5 billion Over Over 5 billion Total Total Grade Trade show participation during last 3 years Executive Director and higher None General Manager and Deputy Less than General Manager Level times Manager Over 3 less than 5 times Others Over 5 times Total Total Component analysis of 17 variables that were used to measure trade show was carried out in order to consolidate them into several significant dimensions. In the analysis results, variance generally tended to group together in similar ways as in existing studies. However, it is noticeable that among the components that were grouped together as relationship-building in Hansen's (2004) research, relationship-building with new clients and discover new distributors were grouped under sales-related, and contacts with major decision makers was put under information-gathering. Also looking at measurement components grouped under relationship-improvement, it can be noticed that only those components related to relationship-improvement are grouped together, and those components related to relationship-building have moved to sales-related. It can be interpreted that the respondents seem to have regarded relationship-building with new clients and discover new distributors as discovering new clients, and therefore recognized them as sales. Likewise, it also seems that respondents regarded contacts with major decision makers as gathering information about the client through such contacts, and therefore recognized the component as information-gathering. The fact that only relationship-improvement components were included under relationship seems to demonstrate that companies participating in trade shows in Korea only recognize components that fall under relationship-improvement as relationship. Therefore, different from relationship-building in Hansen's (2004) research, this study renamed it as relationship-improvement reflecting such characteristics. Cronbach's alpha coefficient was used to verify reliability of measurement variables. As presented in Table 3, analysis results showed that alpha coefficient for each variable all surpassed 0.7, and can be safely said to be reliable (Nunnally, 1978). On the other hand, for more strict validity verification, discriminant validity verification using LISREL was carried out. For discriminant validity analysis of each dimension, they were well paired according to concept (Anderson, 1987). Table 2 Measurement variables used in this study Measure Scale description Source Pre-show activity At-show activity Post-show activity Trade show Quantifying show objectives Degree of quantifying goal objectives (7-point scale) Blythe (2000) Pre-promotion Total number of promotional tools used Seringhaus and Rosson (2001) Booth staff training Degree of systematic training implemented (7-point scale) Tanner and Chonko (1995) Booth size Square root value of booth area Gopalakrishna and Lilien (1995) Booth location Satisfaction degree of allocated location (7-point scale) Seringhaus and Rosson (2001) At-show promotion Total number of promotional tools used Seringhaus and Rosson (2001) Booth staff density Staff density for each unit booth area Gopalakrishna and Lilien (1995) Follow-up Degree of post-show follow-up activities (7-point scale) Tanner (2002) Performance measurement Total number of measurement tools used Tanner (2002) Image-building Corporate recognition reinforcement, corporate image improvement, Hansen (2004) and CEIR (1997) brand recognition reinforcement, brand image improvement Sales-related Secure sales leads from existing clients, secure sales leads from new clients, Hansen (2004) and CEIR (1997) secure contracts with existing clients, secure contracts with new clients, create new prospective clients, expectations for sales increase Relationship-improvement Information-gathering Build relationship with new clients, enhance relationship with existing clients, Hansen (2004) and CEIR (1997) contacts with major decision makers, enhance relationship with core clients, create new distributors Collect market information, collect information on competitors Hansen (2004)

9 792 C.H. Lee, S.Y. Kim / Industrial Marketing Management 37 (2008) Table 3 Results of factor analysis regarding variable groups Factor 1 (0.9310) Sales-related Factor 2 (0.9635) Factor 3 (0.8521) Factor 4 (0.8218) Imagebuilding Informationgathering Relationshipimprovement Contract deals from new clients Secure sales leads with new clients Secure sales leads with existing clients Discover new prospective clients Contract deals from existing clients Relationship-building with new clients Discover new distributors Expected future sales increase Brand recognition improvement Brand image improvement Corporate image improvement Corporate image reinforcement Gather information on competitors Gather market information Contact major decision makers Relationshipimprovement with existing clients Relationshipimprovement with core clients Total variance Eigen value Concrete discriminant validity verification underwent the process of verifying conclusive factor twice by pairing the concepts of each dimension concept. For analysis method, the method of verifying the value difference of χ 2 after establishing a constrained model that fixed correlation coefficient between two concepts to 1, and an unconstrained model where correlation coefficient between two concepts are free, was selected. All the pairs were found to surpass the critical value χ 2 (1)N3.87. Therefore, it was verified that the difference of the χ 2 value of the compared two models, all have statistically meaningful difference, and in comparing the models of all pairs, the χ 2 value of the models with applied restrictions was found to be larger. This confirms that dimension concepts presented in this study have discriminant validity. Analysis results of discriminant validity are presented in Table 4. Table 4 Analysis results of discriminant validity gained by comparing constrained and unconstrained models Constrained model Degree of freedom 5.2. Multiple regression analysis results Unconstrained model Δχ 2 (1) In this study, regression analysis was utilized to assess the effect of determinants on each dimension of trade show (see Table 5) Results on determinants of image-building Pre-show promotion, staff training, booth location, and follow-up were found to have significant positive influence on χ 2 Degree of freedom Image-building Sales-related Image-building Information-gathering Image-building Relationship-improvement Sales-related Information-gathering Sales-related Relationship-improvement Information-gathering Relationshipimprovement Table 5 Regression analysis of effect of determinants on trade show Independent variables Trade show Pre-show activity On-site activity χ 2 Imagebuilding Salesrelated Informationgathering Relationshipimprovement Quantifying show objectives Pre-show promotion Booth staff training Booth size Booth location At-show promotion Booth staff density Follow-up Measurement Post-show activity R square Adjusted R square Significant at 0.10 level; **Significant at 0.05 lever; ***Significant at 0.01 level.

10 C.H. Lee, S.Y. Kim / Industrial Marketing Management 37 (2008) image-building, giving support to hypothesis. However, booth size, at-show promotion and booth staff density did not. Booth size did not have significant influence on imagebuilding, whereas booth location did. This implies that with regard to a company's trade show management, booth location rather than booth size is a more important management variable. In addition, pre-show promotion has significant influence on image-building but at-show promotion doesn't, and booth staff training has significant influence on image-building but booth staff density does not. Such results demonstrate that when a company participates in a trade show they need to concentrate on strategic issues such as how to secure best possible booth location within the fiercely competitive trade show environment, or how to systematically train booth staff who will be communicating directly with the visitors, rather than simply expanding outer scale such as booth size and booth staff number. In particular, given that majority of target companies for this survey were small and medium sized companies, whose total sales volume or booth size were not large, it is not surprising that booth location and booth staff training are more useful management variables. Furthermore, compared to at-show promotion, pre-show promotion was found to be a more important management variable in relation to image-building. This means that, rather than simply distributing souvenirs and promotional materials onsite to booth visitors, it is more important for the exhibiting company to gain sufficient knowledge about their present or potential clients, and to notify them well in advance of the company's participation in the trade show to make them remember the company's participation, and induce them to visit the booth at the trade show. Even previous research (Cartwright, 1995; Friedmann, 1992) have also pointed out that visitors have started to spend less and less time at the trade show site. They state that 76% of the visitors already have a pre-planned schedule, so if a company does not notify the visitors of its participation prior to the event, it is highly likely that the visitors will either not be able to find the exhibition booth of the company or pass by without much interest, since there will be so many other exhibitors at the show. Therefore, it makes sense that pre-show promotion is a more useful variable than at-show promotion with regard to image-building. Follow-up activities were also found to have valid influence on image-building, and this result implies that it is important to further reinforce corporate and brand image positioned in visitors during the trade show, by carrying out feed back activities after the trade show Results on determinants of sales-related Quantifying show objectives, booth location, and follow-up were found to have valid influence on sales-related, giving support to hypothesis, whereas booth size, staff training, booth staff number, and measurement did not. Quantifying show objectives was found to be an important variable influencing sales-related. In addition, similar to the analysis result of image-building determinants, booth size and booth staff density did not show significant influence, whereas booth location had significant influence on sales-related. However, unlike imagebuilding research results, we found that booth staff training did not have significant influence. This study measured booth staff training through degree of systematic training implemented, and did not measure the detailed content of the actual training. Therefore it can be inferred that this result was caused by the lack of sales-related training within the training program. Thus future studies should separate training for enhancing image-building and training for salesrelated. Compared to other influence variables, follow-up has a very powerful influence on sales-related (coefficient 0.274), and this is due to the characteristics of trade shows. At trade shows, sales leads are mainly created rather than actual signing of contracts, and the created sales lead can later lead to actual contracts through follow-up activities, causing this variable to have a strong influence on sales. On the other hand, measurement did not demonstrate significant results regarding sales-related, and it can be due to the fact that measurement variable was measured as a total number of methods used for measurement. Thus, future studies should measure measurement variable as to what degree was the sales-related measured? Results on determinants of information-gathering Pre-show promotion, booth staff training, booth location, and follow-up were found to have valid influence on informationgathering, giving support to hypothesis, whereas booth staff density did not. It is notable that booth size was shown to have negative influence on information-gathering, but this result needs to be interpreted more carefully. A company with a bigger booth also tends to be a bigger company, and a company that is bigger in size usually gathers information about its competitors and the market through its everyday work. Therefore, it can be estimated that this result came about because larger companies place greater importance to other trade show s such as imagebuilding or sales-related rather than information-gathering. After carrying out additional analysis in order to examine whether there are differences in evaluation regarding information-gathering in terms of booth size, results showed a tendency for companies with larger booth to give lower evaluation of information-gathering, but statistically significant results were not found. So, it would be problematic to interpret this result simplistically and conclude that booth size can have negative influence on informationgathering. Instead, it should be considered that this finding requires further research in the future Results on determinants of relationship-improvement Quantifying show objectives, pre-show promotion, booth staff training, and booth location were found to have significant influence on relationship-improvement, giving support to hypothesis, whereas booth staff number, follow-up, and measurement did not. Similar to other research results on

11 794 C.H. Lee, S.Y. Kim / Industrial Marketing Management 37 (2008) trade show determinants, booth staff training was significant whereas booth staff density was not. Quantifying show objectives was also found to have positive influence. However, follow-up activity, which was found to be significant in all other determinants, was insignificant in this case. The follow-up variable was only measured as degree of follow-up activities implemented (7-point scale) without any analysis on concrete types of follow-up activities, and we think that respondents of this study probably did not carry out sufficient follow-up activities related to relationshipimprovement. Therefore, future research would need to further measure what types of follow-up activities were carried out, and examine their relationship with trade show. Measurement was also insignificant, and we think that it is because measurement variable was measured by total number of methods used for measurement. Future research would need to measure measurement variable by asking to what degree was sales measurement carried out? In summary, research results on pre-show activities showed that quantifying show objectives had a significant effect on salesrelated and relationship-improvement. It was also found that pre-show promotion had a positive effect on image-building, information-gathering and relationshipimprovement s. In particular, it was found that pre-show promotion had the greatest effect on relationshipimprovement (coefficient value comparison: relationship-improvement (0.244)Nimage-building (0.221) N information-gathering (0.198)). Booth staff training was found to have positive impact on image-building, informationgathering and relationship-improvement s, but not on sales-related. Second, research results related to at-show activities showed that booth size did not have positive influence on any of the four dimensions, and in fact had a negative effect on information-gathering. However, booth location had positive influence on all four dimensions. In addition, atshow promotion and booth staff number also did not have any impact on the four dimensions. Finally, research results related to post-show activity found that follow-up had positive influence on image-building, salesrelated and information-gathering s. In particular, follow-up was found to have a very strong effect on sales-related (coefficient value comparison: sales-related (0.274) N information-gathering (0.242) N image-building (0.187)). In contrast, measurement was shown not to have any significant impact on sales-related and relationship-building as established in the hypothesis. 6. Discussions, implications, and limitations 6.1. Discussions and implications The purpose of this study was to find the factors that differentially affect on each dimension of trade show. In addition, this study highlights the importance of understanding the multi-stage nature of trade shows. Consequently, we believe this research contributes to trade show studies in several ways. First, we provide a conceptual structure that captures multidimension of trade show (sales-related, imagebuilding, information-gathering, and relationship-improvement). In doing so, we modify and verify the construct of identified by Hansen (2004). While Hansen's (2004) study was based on two food shows in Paris and Cologne, we apply his structure to different settings of industry and country like three equipment shows held in Korea. Second, we relate each dimension to tactical variables such as quantifying show objectives, pre-show promotion, booth staff training, booth size, booth location, at-show promotion, booth staffing, followup, and measurement. More importantly, we categorize these variables by three stages of pre-show, at-show, and post-show activities. Thus, we develop a set of models linking tactical variables in each stage with the appropriate dimension. Our estimation results suggest that the variables we considered in each stage have a significant and differential impact on each dimension of trade show. We also suggest how exhibitors should manage trade show activities to enhance each dimension of trade show. Managerial implications presented by this research are as follows: First, in order for a company to enhance its trade show, it needs to focus on strengthening the pre-show activities. Our results showed that management variables of preshow activities such as pre-show promotion and booth staff training were far more important than at-show activity variables such as booth size, booth location, at-show promotion, and booth staff density. This means that strategic approach (preshow promotion) of in-advance notice company's participation in the particular trade show, induces clients to remember and visit the company's booth is much more important than simply distributing souvenirs and promotional materials on site (atshow promotion). Second, in order to enhance trade show, strategic activities such as securing good booth location and providing systematic booth staff training are much more important than simply expanding outer size such as booth size and booth staff number. In particular these results are highly significant for small and medium sized companies. Compared to larger companies, materials and personnel resources that are available to small and medium companies for trade shows are limited, and they can experience certain restrictions in increasing booth size and booth staff density. However, they can get good booth location by applying to the trade show early, or by establishing good relations with the organizer since in the case of trade shows held in Korea, the trade show organizer has rights of allocating booth location regardless of booth size. Furthermore, rather than just allocating large number of staff at the trade show, it would be a much more effective strategic approach to enhance work efficiency of the booth staff through systematic training programs. Note that more companies nowadays have a tendency to get part-time local people to staff the booth. In this respect, our finding is important since lots of representatives at the trade show are ill-informed with locally employed part-timers. In many trade in Korea, staff can actually be seen just gossiping at the booth, without making much effort to attract visitors to the

12 C.H. Lee, S.Y. Kim / Industrial Marketing Management 37 (2008) booth. Also numerous examples can be cited when booth staff were unable to respond appropriately to visitors, and ended up sending them off without giving them proper attention. No matter how many staff there are in the booth, if they cannot carry out their roles properly, their number is meaningless. Therefore, rather than simply increasing the number of booth staff, it would be a much more effective approach to educate booth staff to properly understand their responsibilities through formal training, which will allow them to make effective contacts with the visitors, and draw out marketing results. Third, should a company wish to enhance image-building through trade show participation, they need to focus on strengthening pre-show promotion. This study measured relationship-improvement through components of relationship-improvement with existing clients and relationship-improvement with core clients. The results demonstrated that in order to enhance such s, it is important for companies to inform their existing and core clients of their trade show participation sufficiently in advance, inducing them to visit their exhibition booths. Fourth, in order for a company to enhance its sales-related through trade show participation, post-show activity is the most focal management variable, and booth staff training is the most important variable for enhancing information-gathering. In particular, for the image-building, the feed back activities after the show strengthen corporate and brand image in the minds of booth visitors Limitations and implications for future research Our study has several limitations. The results and findings in this study inherit the problems of being show-specific and limit the generalization power over the trade show effectiveness since our study focused on companies participated at three equipment-related shows. It is possible that the results differ across industries and the replications of this exploratory study in different types of shows and industries should be followed in the future. We attempted to cover all variables that affect trade show by extensively examining the trade show literature. However, we admit that some variables may have been overlooked especially when new trends at trade shows evolve rapidly. For example, the use of the Internet needs be considered as a tactical variable if the visitors are pre-registered at the websites of trade show and/or exhibitors ahead of the actual event for physical trade shows. In addition, the use of technology such as a smart card which is issued at the gate is also an important variable since exhibitors can keep track of all interested visitors in today's trade shows. Such applications of Internet and IT technologies need to be incorporated into the variables for the future research to keep the pace with new trends in trade show management. On net, however, we believe this study has provided a new framework to find the factors that differentially affect on multidimensions of trade show by the stages. And with some useful empirical results it helped understand, assess and improve each at trade show participation. Acknowledgement The second author as a corresponding author acknowledges that this research was supported by a Korea University Grant. References American Business Press (1990). Specialized business publications: The marketing effectiveness study results are in. New York: American Business Press. Anderson, J. C. (1987, April). An approach for confirmatory measurement and structural equation modeling of organizational properties. Management Science, 33, Bello, D. C., & Barczak, G. J. (1990). Using industrial trade shows to improve new product development. Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, 5(2), Blythe, J. (2000). Objectives and measures at UK trade exhibitions. Journal of Marketing Management, 16, Bonoma, T. V. (1983, January-February). Get more out of your trade shows. Harvard Business Review, 61, Business Marketing (1996). The business-to-business census. Business Marketing, 81, S1 S8. Cartwright, G. (1995). Making the most of trade exhibitions. : Reed Exhibition Companies Ltd. CEIR (1997). The Power of Exhibitions II: Success factors among computer/ electronics/telecommunications exhibitors. Bethesda MD: Center for Exhibition Industry Research. Churchill, G. A., Ford, N. M., Walker, O. C., Johnston, M. W., & Tanner, J. F. (2000). Sales force management, 6th ed. Boston: McGraw-Hill. Dekimpe, M. G., Francois, P., Gopalakrishna, S., Lilien, G. L., & Van den Bulte, C. (1997). Generalizing about trade show effectiveness: A cross-national comparison. Journal of Marketing, 61(4), Friedmann, S. A. (1992). Exhibiting at trade shows. California: Crisp Publications, Inc. Godar, S. H., & O'connor, P. J. (2001). Same time next year Buyer trade show motives. Industrial Marketing Management, 30(1), Gopalakrishna, S., & Lilien, G. L. (1995). A three-stage model of industrial trade show. Marketing Science, 14(1), Gopalakrishna, S., & Williams, J. D. (1992). Planning and assessment of industrial trade shows: An exploratory study. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 9(3), Gopalakrishna, S., Lilien, G. L., Willams, J. D., & Sequeira, I. K. (1995). Do trade shows pay off? Journal of Marketing, 59(3), Hansen, K. (2004). Measuring at trade shows: Scale development and validation. Journal of Business Research, 57(1), Hatch, M. J. (1991, Fall). Improving your sales success at trade show. Business Marketing, A26 A28. Herbig, P., O'Hara, B. S., & Palumbo, F. (1994). Measuring trade show effectiveness: An effective exercise? Industrial Marketing Management, 23(2), Hough, J. (1988). Attitudes and opinions of computer executives regarding attendance at information technology events. Research report, audience characteristics #1030 East Orleans, MA: trade show bureau. Hutt, M. D., & Speh, T. W. (2001). Business marketing management, 7th ed. Fort Worth, TX: Dryden Press. Kaminer, David A. (1992, November). Trade shows: How big business does bigger business. Business Marketing, 77, A2 A4. Kerin, R. A., & Cron, W. L. (1987). Assessing trade show functions and : An exploratory study. Journal of Marketing, 51(3), Kijewski, V., Yoon, E., & Young, G. (1993). How exhibitors select trade shows. Industrial Marketing Management, 22(4), Lee, C. H., & Kim, S. Y. (2003). A study on the perception and usage of the trade show as a marketing in Korea. Korea Marketing Association 2006 Fall Conference. Daegu, Korea, proceedings (pp ). Ling-yee, Li (2007). Marketing resources and of exhibitor firms in trade shows: A contingent resource perspective. Industrial Marketing Management, 36(3), Morrow, S. L. (2002). The art of the show, 2nd ed. Texas: IAEM Foundation.

13 796 C.H. Lee, S.Y. Kim / Industrial Marketing Management 37 (2008) Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw Hill Book Co. O'Hara, B. S. (1993). Evaluating the effectiveness of trade shows: A personal selling perspective. Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 13(3), Robinson, P. J., Faris, C. W., & Wind, Y. (1967). Industrial buying and creative marketing. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Rosson, P. J., & Seringhaus, F. H. R. (1995). Visitor and exhibitor interaction at industrial trade fairs. Journal of Business Research, 32(1), Seringhaus, F. H. R., & Rosson, P. J. (2001). Firm experience and international trade fairs. Journal of Marketing Management, 17(7-8), Sharland, A., & Balogh, P. (1996). The value of non-selling activities at international trade shows. Industrial Marketing Management, 25(1), Sind, S. (1996, April). More evidence of the power of exhibitions. Advertising Age's Business Marketing, B-2. Siskind, B. (2005). Powerful exhibit marketing: The complete guide to successful trade shows, conferences and consumer shows. Mississauga: John Wiley & Sons Canada Ltd. Smith, T. M., Gopalakrishna, S., & Smith, P. M. (2004). The complementary effect of trade shows on personal selling. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 21(1), Song, S. S. (2003). Rising trade show industry in Korea. Seoul: Gaul Munhwa Press. Stevens, R. P. (2005). Trade show and event marketing: Plan, promote, and profit. Toronto: Thomson/South-Western. Tanner, J. F. (2002). Leveling the playing field: Factors influencing trade show success for small companies. Industrial Marketing Management, 31(3), Tanner, J. F., & Chonko, L. B. (1995). Trade show objectives, management, and staffing practices. Industrial Marketing Management, 24(4), Trade Show Bureau (1994). A guide to the U.S. exposition industry. : Trade Show Bureau Resource Center, Denver, Co. Wind, Y., & Thomas, R. (1994). Segmenting industrial markets. In Arch Woodside (Ed.), Advances in Business Marketing, 6. (pp )Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Chang Hyun Lee a Director of Research at the Institute of Convention and Exhibition Management, Seoul, Korea and also a Visiting Professor at Seoul University of Venture & Information, Korea. He received his Ph.D. in Business Administration from Korea University. His research interests include industrial marketing, trade show marketing, and service marketing. Sang Yong Kim is a Professor of Marketing at Korea University Business School. He got his degrees of BA from Seoul National University, MSIA from Carnegie-Mellon University, and Ph.D. from Duke University. His research interests lie in the fields of marketing modeling, marketing channel management, and Internet, banking and telecommunications industries.