First entranced by the novelty factor of virtual fairs, more companies are likely to jump on the virtual bandwagon because of their great economic return.
But are virtual fairs really an effective marketing tool for national organizations?
By “national”, I mean any organization with multiple locations or offices across the country. I’m not sure if the trackable results and great ROI of virtual fairs make up for their lack of human interaction. For companies with locations nationwide, that can have a negative impact on their message.
Ultimately, we know that virtual campaigns work if they’re backed up with “real-world” ones. It would be unwise for companies to let virtual fairs take the place of their ground work efforts, because then it may require too much effort for stakeholders to learn the information they need to know about them.
Virtual fairs are effective when they solve a problem for stakeholders. Virtual university fairs, like the one hosted by Macleans next week, let potential students check out schools on the other side of the country without leaving their homes. In this case, virtual fairs are beneficial-they attract stakeholders who may otherwise pass an organization over because of geographical barriers.
But if the fair is for an organization that’s easily accessible anywhere in the country-lets’ say Rogers Communications as an example-then a virtual fair might alienate stakeholders rather than strengthen relationships with them.
So what are organizations to do? As with any communications strategy, they must choose if virtual fairs suit their message before spending the resources to take their efforts online.
