Generalizing about Trade Show Effectiveness: A Cross-National Comparison

Dekimpe, Marnik G.; François, Pierre; Gopalakrishna, Srinath; Lilien, Gary L.; Bulte, Christophe Van den

doi:10.2307/1252086

Cited by 94 publications

(117 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

111

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…An exception is multi-stage selling approach and subsequent studies that built on it (e.g., Dekimpe et al, 1997;Sridhar et al, 2015). According to this approach, the three activity stages interact with each other to achieve optimal sales performance.…”

Section: Trade Show Activity Stagesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Sales-related performance assesses the extent to which trade show efforts result in selling outcomes (Gopalakrishna & Williams, 1992). Sales-related performance relies on such metrics as booth attraction efficiency, booth conversion efficiency, lead efficiency and actual sales (Dekimpe et al, 1997;Smith et al, 2014), which are computed using data from participants' trade show efforts, and are readily comparable across firms (Gopalakrishna & Williams, 1992). However, their narrow focus on selling outcomes often constrain their applicability to non-selling outcomes.…”

Section: Trade Show Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Of these, 90 percent are focused on the exhibiting mode, eight percent are focused on the visiting mode, while only two percent are focused on the organizing mode. In the exhibiting mode, both sales-related and behavior-related metrics are employed (e.g., Dekimpe et al, 1997;Lee & Kim, 2008), while in the visiting mode, only behavior-related metrics are employed (e.g., Gottlieb et al, 2014;Smith et al, 2003), and in the organizing mode, only sales-related metrics, based on exhibitor and visitor traffic, are employed (Tafesse, 2014).…”

Section: Trade Show Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A systematic review of the trade show marketing literature: 1980–2014

Tafesse

Skallerud

2017

Industrial Marketing Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The trade show marketing literature has been growing over the past decades, attracting a steady stream of research and journal publications. However, this body of research has not been subject to a systematic literature review. Accordingly, the purpose of this article is to provide a systematic review of the trade show marketing literature with the aim of delineating its current state, trends, gaps and inconsistencies. To this end, multiple electronic databases were searched and 91 trade show articles published in 24 marketing journals were extracted.The extracted articles were carefully analyzed with the help of a comprehensive classification framework focusing on broad thematic, theoretical and methodological dimensions. The

show abstract

Section: Trade Show Activity Stagesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Trade Show Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Trade Show Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A systematic review of the trade show marketing literature: 1980–2014

Tafesse

Skallerud

2017

Industrial Marketing Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To reduce the skew in the data, and to avoid having a small number of extreme observations driving our empirical findings (Hamilton 1992), we took the natural log of the installed base as explanatory variable (see Dekimpe et al 1997 for a similar practice). 9 Finally, the time of trial (the extra covariate in r3 to test H4b) is measured relative to 1979, the year the technology became available.…”

Section: Operationalization Of the Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Global Diffusion of Technological Innovations: A Coupled-Hazard Approach

Dekimpe

Parker

Sárváry³

2000

Journal of Marketing Research

Self Cite

146

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper proposes a new methodology called the "coupled-hazard approach" to study the global diffusion of technological innovations. This coupled approach addresses several methodological challenges arising from the global nature of the considered diffusion process and the intricacies of the type of innovations studied. First, a global diffusion process is typically composed of two conceptually different, yet inter-linked, processes: (1) diffusion across countries, and (2) diffusion within each country. Second, due to network externalities and/or the presence of central decision makers, technological innovations often exhibit diffusion patterns that cannot be captured by traditional models. In particular, within-country adoption often occurs in "blocks" or "packets" of various size (with sometimes the whole country adopting at once), which prevents the use of S-shaped (Bass-type) diffusion models. Finally, technological innovations may complement or substitute existing ones, which raises the issue of how the size of the installed base of the old technology affects the new diffusion process.The "coupled-hazard approach" is well-suited to address all three issues. Beyond the capability of describing discontinuous diffusion patterns, the method explicitly recognizes the conceptual difference between the timing when a country tries or "pilot tests" the new technology, called "the implementation stage" by Rogers (1983) and the timing of when the innovation is adopted on a national or ubiquitous basis within the country (referred to by Rogers as "the confirmation stage"). In addition to testing the separate influence of exogenous and endogenous country characteristics on these two stages, it also allows us to assess their interrelationship. To illustrate the method, and in order to generate substantive insights, we apply the approach to the global diffusion of digital telecommunications networks across over 160 countries.

show abstract

“…The booth personnel should be judged only on those phases of sales performance over which they exercise control. This enables the manager to eliminate inequities that arise from using simple output measures (Anderson and Oliver, 1987).Trade shows blend some elements of direct selling (i.e., outcome) and other promotional and relational activities (i.e., behaviour) (Dekimpe et al, 1997). Frequently, managers have both effort and outcome goal associated with exhibiting at trade shows (i.e., exhibitors have multiple objectives for participating).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The impact of exhibition activities on the B2B market in the strategy for promotion

Сысоева¹,

Тимохина²,

Khudyakova³

2017

RETP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

EXECUTIVE SUMMARYThis article discusses the existing knowledge about trade show performance and develops, based on the literature, a conceptual framework for assessing exhibitor's performance. Existing measures of performance at trade shows do not adequately include dimensions important to exhibitors. To better understand the nature and dimensions of trade show performance, the marketing literature's outcome-based and behaviour-based control systems are examined. In light of this literature review, a framework for trade show performance is conceptualised. Existing Knowledge about Trade Show PerformanceEfforts to define trade show performance at the theoretical level have been quite limited or non-existent. Five studies that have applied performance measures to test antecedents at the industry, company and the trade show level are identified (Dekimpe et al., 1997;Gopalakrishna and Lilien, 1995;Kerin and Cron, 1987;Seringhaus and Rosson, 1998;Williams et al., 1993). However, these studies claim their measures are indicators of performance, but fail to legitimise those claims with a clear definition of the domain being measured or to provide evidence of validity. Consequently, models are developed and tested at the observational or measurement level rather than the theoretical level (i.e., frame the hypotheses at the observational level). Correspondence between the theoretical and observational level is not demonstrated. Conceptual FrameworkThe general nature of performance within the specific research context is first described. Our research focused on understanding what activities are performed at trade shows that are representative of the trade show performance domain. The description were based on the marketing control literature's outcome-and behaviour-based control system taxonomy (Anderson and Oliver, 1987;Cravens et al., 1993;Jaworski, 1988). A control system is defined as an organisation's set of procedures for monitoring, directing, evaluating, and compensating its employees. Two major control systems are those monitoring the final outcomes of a process and those monitoring individual stages (e.g., behaviour) in the process.Output measures (i.e., equitable measures of sales volume or value) are used because they are simple. Orders can also usually be limited to the individual salesperson responsible for the actual sale. Trade show performance has traditionally been evaluated using outcome-based measures (Cavanaugh, 1976;Gopalakrishna and Williams;Williams et al.,1993). In behaviour-based control systems, subjective and more complex methods, rather than sales outcomes, are used to evaluate and compensate the sales force. If the exhibitors' most important activities are behaviour-rather than sellingbased, sales related outcome measures are not the most appropriate. Behaviour refers to what people do (i.e., the tasks they expend effort on while working). In a behaviour-based control system, the process, rather than simply the outcome(s), is addressed. In this system, the booth personnel are directed to perfo...

show abstract

Generalizing about Trade Show Effectiveness: A Cross-National Comparison

Cited by 94 publications

References 30 publications

A systematic review of the trade show marketing literature: 1980–2014

A systematic review of the trade show marketing literature: 1980–2014

Global Diffusion of Technological Innovations: A Coupled-Hazard Approach

The impact of exhibition activities on the B2B market in the strategy for promotion

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About