Would You Like Some Cheese With That Whine?

Ms. PACS: When Radiologists, PACS admins, IT folks, students and residents hit a show like SIIM, they leave each session chattering about what peaked their interest in the discussion or they compare notes on their own workflow issues – all the while happy to know they are accumulating CME credits. Below the mumbles, gurgling hunger pains instinctively steer them toward the exhibit hall floor where the herd bee-lines for coffee and donuts or lunch boxes, depending on the time of the day. Can you blame them after enduring imaging bootcamp?

Once appetites are calmed, they meander through the exhibits, sheepishly revealing interest amidst fears that they will be roped into trying out a workstation by a charming marketing guy/lady with a big bright grin and long legs. After a 10-15 minute attention span, they regroup, check their watches/iphones/blackberries and scurry back to the sessions to listen to experts discuss "economic stimulus package funding opportunities," or to argue over "who owns imaging" – radiologists, cardiologists or IT – and to ponder the convergence of radiology and pathology PACS. Why, because that’s what they came for, and they seemed pretty content too. That's the attendees' version.

The reality is, however, it’s not just about the attendees' needs. Whether they like it or not, the trade shows have to cater to the vendors too.

Now, here’s the vendors' version. At most shows, while attendees are off the floors, the press are the ones buzzing from booth to booth, "talking shop" with vendors on the latest and greatest in PACS and IT. Inevitably, they end up talking about the status of the show. Gum cheeewing: “So, how’s the show’s going?,” i.e., "Are there any attendees?" "Did you get any new orders?"

In the last two years, the resounding response among vendors has been: “There were more people last year,” “I don’t know if we’ll be back next year,” “Why do we have to come here?” After all their moaning and groaning, a light goes off, they remember it’s a trade show – and decide what the hell, let’s have some fun. “So, where are you going tonight?” The next day, the same thing, whining…maybe it has more to do with their hangover, but let me tell you, it’s never enough. Or have they just had enough?

How effective are the trade shows for the vendors? One PACS vendor veteran noted:
“I used to go to these shows to learn about the latest in PACS innovation. Now it’s an educational session, and you can’t demo workflow on your workstation. I’d rather sponsor an educational grant than bring down 20 people.”

Well, maybe that’s a good idea. The attendees want CME credits and they seem to pay a lot more attention to the educational panels than to the vendors’ new gadgets. Ergo, educational grants may get you some attention.

SIIM just released a statement on their show (6/12/09), saying: "While attendance was less than in previous years - mostly due to a decrease in international and corporate registrants - vendors in the exhibit hall had a successful show as far as quality of interactions and ability to have substantive meetings with customers and partners....Feedback from attendees indicated that they found the educational program and sessions highly engaging and practical."

You can blame the show organizers all you want, but there were attendees, albeit less. Quality of interactions for vendors? You'll have to poll the vendors. What does seem clear is that it's time for a tactical marketing move. Here’s a suggestion to the vendors – change your approach in reaching your audience. Give the buyer what they want. If it’s education, educate them or at least sponsor popular sessions. If show attendees tend to stick around at these sessions a lot longer than the booths, if you see them high-tailing it back to imaging bootcamp mid-marketing speak, then learn to speak their language.

PACSman: I didn’t attend SIIM this year. Truth be known I haven’t attended any SIIM meeting since it was held in my hometown of Orlando a few years ago. The same holds true for HIMSS, AHRA and most other shows. If I can drive there, if I’m speaking there, or someone is paying my way I’ll go, but if not, I’ll read about it in the trade journals. The RSNA is the only exception to the rule and that is because people look forward to reading my tongue-in-cheek PACSMan Awards® and have made it one of the top read pieces from the show on another e-journal I write for.

So why don’t I go? For the same reason many don’t. How you spend your time and money is getting harder to justify. You go where you will get the most bang for your buck. Frankly the smaller shows just don’t seem to provide that any more. TEPR (Towards the Electronic Patient Record) pulled the plug this year when their crowds failed to materialize once again. I’ve been to TEPR before - I even spoke there once - and sadly its time has come and gone.

The smaller shows seem to be the most impacted by a bad economy, but no one is immune. Attendance at HIMSS, the big IT show, was down 6% this year, yet still drew nearly 27,500 attendees and 907 exhibitors. The RSNA had 58,800 attendees yet showed a 5% overall decline. Interestingly they had only a 1% drop in professional attendance, with 12% vendor declines making up the difference. Still they pulled in over 27,500 professional attendees.

So can the smaller shows survive? And will the vendors continue to pony up the bucks to exhibit at shows that bring in less than 1,000 attendees? If the bigger shows are in trouble, you know the smaller ones will be too. Meditech pulled out of HIMSS this year citing the expense for the company and attendees. Total exhibit square footage declined 4% at RSNA this year with a concomitant reduction in the number of vendors. And Fuji, one of original founders of SIIM back when it was called SCAR, pulled out from the show it helped organize, this year as well.

Most of the feedback I got from attendees at SIIM was that it was fairly good show content-wise…but the vendors weren’t so sure if they really got the bang for the buck they wanted. From a sales perspective one needs to ask: does SIIM deliver the right people? Information in the 2009 exhibitor prospectus shows indicated that 81% of the attendees are involved in the purchasing decision, 68% plan on purchasing, replacing or upgrading their equipment next year, and 65% will spend $1M or more. On the surface that sounds great, but is it reality? Seven out of 10 SIIM attendees were either PACS Systems Administrators, Researchers, Technologist, or Vendors/Consultants. Yes, they may be involved in the decision-making process, but few carry any decision making clout. The true PACS decision makers - Health Care Administrators (including C-suite level), IT managers and Physicians (I assume they mean radiologists) made up the remaining 30%. That means out of 800 total attendees only 240 were in decision-influencing positions. When you figure out booth space costs (>$3K for a 10x 10, over $12K for a 20 x 20), exhibition-related costs, personnel costs, travel and entertainment costs, etc., you are talking a minimum $20K for even the smallest booth and a six figure investment for the majors, all to reach fewer than 250 people over thee days with a mere 17 hours exhibition time (two full, one half day). Is it worth it? Many are asking that very same post-show question - are we getting the most bang for our buck.

As an industry we tend to focus on quantity over quality. Why else would more and more PACS vendors sign up to exhibit at HIMSS when the show virtually ignores PACS, at least from a presentation standpoint. Out of 300+ presentations at HIMSS this year only two – TWO – focused on PACS, and one was from a vendor. So why do PACS vendors exhibit there? Because it attracts IT people, the people who are being pinged about PACS at the C-suite level and will ultimately have a major role in the decision-making process. The same can be said about RSNA, which attracts a high percentage of radiologists. These are the primary users of PACS and will have a major role in the decision-making process, even though their time at the show might be divided among 4,000 other entities. And SIIM? It’s PACS-centric to the max, yet each year we can barely scrape together 1K attendees…

SIIM is a great organization and puts on a good show. Unfortunately, many would say it doesn’t target the right demographics for exhibitors who want to sell products. Or does it? It only takes one sale to pay for itself, but how many sales are made or even influenced by SIIM? I would venture to say very few.

I personally recommended SIIM attendance to several clients who are looking at PACS. It is the only place where you can see most of the PACS vendors’ products side by side, unimpeded by other products that might redirect your attention. But it just doesn’t seem like that’s enough to drive people to the show. Those who attended the educational seminars seem to have been PSA’s looking for CEU’s. Interactive sessions are a plus. But exhibits? Who knows…..

SIIM needs to reinvent itself as the PSA-centric organization. Perhaps the answer is piggybacking itself with other shows like HIMSS. After all, the II in SIIM does stand for imaging informatics so…. Or doing a virtual conference like HIMSS is doing….or a Webinar…Why you ask? I counter with why not?

Like many smaller standalone shows, SIIM will continue to be hard pressed to draw the right crowds year after year. I hope the show - and organization - stays alive, I truly do. To do that though SIIM needs to take a closer look in the mirror on how it is received by the market, what it’s doing right, and what needs to be changed. As a former SIIM (SCAR) member, I have some definite ideas. They can call me - my contact information hasn’t changed since I was a member years ago - or they can just look in the book under PACSMan….