Summary
Owen Mumford Pharmaceutical Services sponsored research to gauge delegate opinions about pharmaceutical and medical device industry events that were made virtual during 2020. While participants were often highly critical of virtual events that failed to live up to expectations (like content quality, technical platforms, interactivity, cost, etc.), it was generally agreed that virtual events will play a greater role in the workshops, conferences, and exhibitions of the future. This study serves as a wake-up call for event organizers to rethink the event experience and reinvent business models in order to address the key issues raised by participants.
COVID-19, the events industry and virtualisation
Before COVID-19, the business events industry was a huge economic force. A major analyst’s report found that total direct spending was over $1 trillion, generating over $600 billion in GDP. Based on recent official statistics i, the industry was the world’s 23rd largest economy, sitting between Taiwan and Sweden.
Now, everything has changed. COVID-19 has completely reshaped the landscape. Major event organizers reported drops in revenue as high as 90% ii. Large companies are moving their conferences into the digital space.
Virtual events have taken center stage. Everyone is talking about “pivoting” to online formats, and event organizers are racing to find new ways to make their conferences and exhibitions successful in a virtual environment. That’s good news for software and platform companies—but the big question remains for organizers and attendees: “Can virtual events truly replace face-to-face events?”
To offer some early insights specifically for the pharmaceutical and medical device sector, Owen Mumford Pharmaceutical Services commissioned research with top pharmaceutical manufacturers iii. The study used a qualitative approach, asking participants to share their thoughts—based on their 2020 virtual event experiences—on what worked and what didn’t.
So what was the experience with event attendance in 2020? To help guide their qualitative insights, respondents said:-
Analysis of respondents' qualitative opinions then revealed a number of key themes expressed by a majority of those participating in the study.
“The inability to demonstrate devices is a real challenge. People want to play with toys!” – Denis Marteau, General Manager, Pharmaceutical Services at Owen Mumford
Virtual events in the medtech and pharma industries – key findings
Standards of satisfaction
Most respondents pointed out that virtual industry events they attended in 2020 varied widely in quality: “Some were useful, some were terrible. I’ve been an attendee, panel moderator, presenter, and even served on organizing committees, so I’ve seen the full spectrum.” In short, harshest criticism was directed at events that simply moved face-to-face formats online, with little consideration of whether that would actually work for attendees.
Some believed there’s only a small window of opportunity for virtual events to catch on. As one put it, “I think it’s still pretty new and if it goes badly, people may want to go back to the old way. But logically, I expect to see more events moving online. I don’t think the world won’t change in some way toward being more remote and virtual.”
Technology platforms
Reliable technology is key: “Events should run on easy-to-access tech that anyone can use, no matter their firewall.” But it’s not only about technology. Another shared, “In most cases, you won’t have everyone’s full attention, so conferences need to be more engaging and data-driven to support the points being made.”
Most agreed the whole concept of virtual events needs a strategic rethink. One person said, “If you want a virtual event to engage people, it has to be top-notch. It can’t just be dumping an agenda onto Zoom and hoping for the best. There needs to be creativity to really draw people in.”
There’s a widespread feeling that more thought, research, feedback, and creativity is needed to make future virtual industry events successful. ‘Authenticity’ is highly valued, summed up by this comment: “We’ve all gotten better at using video during the pandemic, so worries about tech glitches were maybe overblown. Still, other things can go wrong that aren’t about whether the speaker is live or interactive. I think our tolerance for less polished video, rather than slick webinars, actually helps these meetings feel more real. The virtual conferences I enjoyed were always 100% live.”
The issue of networking
Nearly everyone agreed that virtual events lack the networking value of in-person events. One person shared, “You lose some networking opportunities, so it’s important to know exactly what an event offers, since you don’t get that organic networking you have in person.” Another added, “What’s missing from digital events is dynamic interaction and networking. We go to events not just to stay informed, but to meet partners and collaborators.” Overall, people wanted to see more effort devoted to helping delegates network online.
“A virtual stand is no way near as effective as the real thing, and the lack of networking opportunities is a challenge.” – Olivia Houselander, Business Development Manager at Owen Mumford Pharmaceutical Services
Quality, actionable content
When considering what kinds of content would draw delegates to virtual events, several themes stood out.
First, people wanted organizers to spend more on participation, presentations, and engagement with real industry thought leaders: “You need to invest in star speakers. These are usually people from big pharma, device suppliers, consultants, regulators like the FDA/EMA, or retired experts with lots of knowledge to share.”
Participants also agreed that virtual events need to offer clear, practical takeaways to justify the cost (money and time): “As a business, we would step back and ask… how do we get to market faster, gain approvals, benchmark our company’s performance against others… get metrics that show where we stand in our disease area.” Many other specific topics were cited as fitting for virtual events, like slow/release drug delivery, viscous drug delivery, bionic pancreas tech, new standards like ISO11608, connectivity, and more. Nearly everyone emphasized the need for proof points: “It all needs data to back it up, not just opinions…”
Greater specificity
Openness to virtual events came with a demand for specific topics. As one person put it, “If it’s a really niche subject, like biocompatibility with technical detail, I’m fine with virtual instead of traveling. Plus, with sustainability as a driver, companies want to lower travel anyway.” Another added, “We’re most interested in a new technology with obvious performance benefits, or a scientific talk that closely analyzes a problem discovered with an injection device or drug delivery system. If a conference covers a new siliconization method that creates stable break-loose and glide force, I’d like to know who’s doing it, how, and what the benefits are.” Accurate event descriptions are also important: “There’s pressure on organizers to communicate exactly what’s on offer, to get us to attend and return after. If there’s hype or lack of clarity, it wastes our time—and honestly, we won’t be back.”
New ways of working
Besides clinical and technical topics, new ways of working during and after COVID-19 were also a frequent theme. “One big topic is the impact of the pandemic on your business, operations, product development, priorities, and working methods. We’re learning how others are adapting and adopting good ideas! How do you advance combination products, especially if Human Factor studies require patients handling products? How do you manage that mostly virtually, while keeping distance?” Another said, “We really want to exchange ideas on market research with patients. How do we run remote patient-based studies? Those have been really interesting.” It’s not just about patients, either. One observed, “You can look at team dynamics… what are best practices for virtual teams, keeping progress, getting things done? How do you make virtual teams collaborate with lab or manufacturing staff? Same question for launching new products and scaling up manufacturing in this situation—when many teams are working remotely?”
Pricing and cost
A key concern for conference and exhibition organizers is how participants judge cost versus value. There’s a widespread view that virtual events should be much cheaper than in-person ones: “Assuming it’s cheaper to attend a virtual event (without the costs of a conference center, for example), and if they’re flexible so people can jump in and out as their job allows, then virtual events should take off and become popular. If the price is the same, it won’t work… unless there are outstanding new ways to add value.”
Still, most believe virtual events will become the norm in coming years, as long as they’re thoughtfully designed. Content needs to change, too: “I like variety. I don’t want to go to the same event with the same speakers several times a year.” Pricing should reflect attendance choices: “Many companies have strong sustainability goals, so I think there will be more choices to attend virtually as well as in-person. Pricing can encourage more attendees since you don’t spend time traveling, or allow people to join only for the topics or sessions they care about.”
Duration and modularity
Length is also an issue for virtual events, drawing many opinions: “Right now, I’m not interested in spending a full day at a virtual conference. I’d rather do a conference with breakout workshops or informal meetups. Unless I’m truly interested, I wouldn’t attend for more than two hours.” This is a common view, and highlights the value of a modular approach to virtual event scheduling and pricing.
Attention spans were strongly linked to interactivity and involvement. As one respondent said: “People had to get used to, but I think it turned out positive, having a live Q&A box while presentations were happening. Doesn’t matter if it’s one speaker or a panel. For some conferences, someone was screening the questions, which is too much work—people should just type them in live. I led a panel with about 18 attendees and it went great—the feedback was that more questions were answered than in a live setting!”
Emerging models
Finally, this research heard a lot of creative ideas for future event formats. One was from a participant who suggested, “Maybe regionally, you gather 20-30 people in one place, and they connect with other similar groups elsewhere. That way you get some face-to-face benefits without everyone in one big location. We’ve seen that, and it works well. Less travel, but some in-person interaction. I don’t think any of us believe travel will go back to pre-pandemic levels. Most people agree we traveled more than we needed to.”
Conclusions
In summary, those surveyed were unimpressed by the value of many 2020 virtual events, but the majority are optimistic about the future of virtual events overall. Organizers clearly need to put in much more effort than before to redesign virtual events—to attract, engage, and satisfy attendees, while also enabling networking. One particularly positive comment summed up the outlook: “I think virtual events will become more popular and will use higher-value methods in the future. There’s a benefit in lower travel costs and less business disruption from being out of town. If organizers get it right, we might actually be able to attend more events in the future.”
“I miss the spontaneous ‘bumping into people’ conversations you get at conferences, and of course being able to show off new tech in person. But on the plus side—cutting down on air travel has helped us lower our carbon footprint over the past year.” – Sian Eden, Business Development Manager: Drug Delivery at Owen Mumford Pharmaceutical Services
For more information please contact pharmaservices@owenmumford.com
References
i. https://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/countries-by-gdp
ii. EV=NT (Skift). The Future of the Event Industry, 2021 Outlook
iii. Methodology: Owen Mumford commissioned MindMetre Research to conduct research between September 2020 and January 2021 among the global top pharmaceutical companies by turnover. In total, 30 respondents were interviewed by telephone and/or email. Of these 30 respondents, 21 were from the global top 50 pharmaceutical companies. Respondents were asked to give their views on attendance at virtual industry events in 2020, their opinion about those events success or failure, along with their views on best practice, favoured content, facilities and capabilities, shape and price.