Less than half of meeting planners operate under a centralized meetings structure, according to new MeetingNews research, but proponents of strategic meetings management claim such an environment—a key tenet of their meetings philosophy—is gaining ground and soon would thrust centralized meetings adopters into the majority, particularly among corporations. Others bemoan an excessive focus on cost and in some cases an arranged marriage between procurement professionals and meeting planners.

"People like to control their own meetings without being monitored," said Mary Boone, president of Essex, Conn.-based Boone Associates. "If I am in a different part of the organization, there has to be a compelling reason to be willing to allow that decision making process to be influenced by somebody from a centralized location."

Boone cautioned management to tread carefully in growing efforts to centralize meeting planning functions, likening a quickly imposed SMM program to "changing the tires at 120 miles per hour while trying to keep your meeting schedules going."

President and chief strategist for meetings consultancy KK Strategic Solutions Kari Kesler, who helps corporations develop SMM programs, noted an evolution of the traditional meeting-planning role—and a growing chorus of strategic meetings management proponents. "All of these different things that used to be a part of this one stop shop—and some programs are more mature than others—are being separated out into specialty areas like SMM, meeting architecture and ROI. It's good news for meeting professionals, because the options are so many. They can focus on what they do best. They don't have to do it all anymore."

Kesler said to avoid a turf battle that can emerge when organizations centralize processes, successful SMM programs often begin with planner buy-in. "How would you feel if you were a very successful meetings planner and in walks this bull in the china shop—Kari Kesler—who says, 'I'm here to fix meetings? 'We spend a lot of time focusing on stakeholder management and strategies to put planners at ease and get their buy-in, but it is a constant battle. The lack of doing that is the number-one reason strategic meetings management efforts fail."

That said, she continued, "Laying a blanket of centralization on everything is not the right answer. Some key categories should be centralized, like data. That should go through one place, but other pieces, like planning, totally depend on what assets the company already has."

Boone lamented procurement's laser-like focus on "efficiency and cost savings and very little examination of what the effectiveness of doing this is. It's a harder sell, particularly higher up, if you can't demonstrate that effectiveness."

Susan Radojevic, president of the Toronto-based meetings consultancy Peregrine Agency and a self-described event alignment strategist, agreed that viewing meetings solely as a cost center belies the core reasons they are held. "There's too much emphasis on the cost aspect of the meetings," Radojevic said. "There needs to be a better balance. We need to introduce the reason why the meeting is being held, not looking at continuously tightening that corporate belt so we can come in cheaper. One of the things with which I vehemently disagree is aligning the meeting support system with procurement, because if you concentrate only on costs, then you're failing to contribute to organizational success. Meetings are similar to marketing- and communication-driven initiatives. They focus on messaging, branding and visibility. These decisions should be made based on what is the most effective approach for improving organizational performance."

Though Radojevic said procurement should not be in the driver's seat, she agreed there is room on the bus. "We've worked very hard and diligently to align the meetings with communications and marketing, and we always include procurement because they have a role to play when it comes to contractual obligations and the risk factor."

StarCite vice president of enterprise strategy Kevin Iwamoto said strategic meetings management is "still an emerging business practice, but it is really gaining momentum," claiming 30 percent of the Fortune 500 as adherents. "Even among companies that have implemented programs, very few have truly managed to apply them companywide for all types of meetings," including smaller meetings, Iwamoto said.

Microsoft has been using strategic meetings management principles in its corporate events program for several years, with a centralized team handling all sourcing and logistics in conjunction with procurement. This has given the company a "highly leveraged vendor sourcing process," said Microsoft director of event marketing Kati Quigley.

Respondents to the MeetingNews survey who operate under a fully consolidated and centralized meetings program are in the minority, but planners are more widely adopting procurement practices.

Of the 214 respondents, 68 percent have contracted with a preferred hotel for multiple events. In addition to cost benefits, Iwamoto said, "planners also engage in preferred suppliers to provide a guarantee of service level."

Still, only 43 percent of the respondents said they have been successful in leveraging spend across multiple events with audiovisual providers, 38 percent with catering providers and 36 percent with transportation providers. Yet, meetings consultants note that is because such suppliers do not have similar national footprints as hotels, not due to any philosophical aversion.

Originally published Feb. 15, 2010 This page is protected by Copyright laws. Do Not Copy