Management from UBM, Montgomery and dmg have told EW that business size needn't effect performance.
Tim Cobbold, CEO, UBM plc
Comparing large and small organisers is like comparing apples and pears. Both are good; they are just different. Large companies can be nimble, just as small companies can hit challenges as they grow. In some ways, bigger businesses have more opportunity to innovate. Google, though large, sets a standard for innovation. There’s no one way to be big. To achieve dynamic intimacy with millions of customers, as larger organisers have to, takes capital and sophisticated technology beyond most smaller organisers. Rightly, and of necessity, smaller organisers rely on a more personal approach to achieve that intimacy. Both work, they’re both right, they’re just different. But bigger companies try to have the best of both worlds. UBM maintains global norms and technologies, usually for the kind of thing that slows you down if you build it from scratch every time, but combines that with a focus on the requirements of specific markets, engaging with the community, for example through advisory boards. GDC, Black Hat, DesignCon: all huge events built for and by the people who attend. Bigger isn’t always better, but it certainly doesn’t have to mean slower.
Damion Angus, managing director, Montgomery
The speed a company moves at ultimately depends on how it is structured and who is behind it. Those with flat hierarchies, small informal boards and entrepreneurial leadership are on the whole going to be less cumbersome than those with heavier corporate structures. Whether that company is public or private also has an impact. Public companies are generally at a disadvantage as they will be scrutinised and held to account by formal boards and a multitude of shareholders. However this does not necessarily mean large businesses have to be unwieldy. Those with dynamic leaders often find ways to make them more efficient.
The Montgomery Group is not a large company however it is a global business with very diverse interests. To stay nimble we have created a holding company which sets the purpose, identity and values of all businesses within the Group. Each of our subsidiaries is then run by entrepreneurial teams who are given considerable autonomy and independence. These companies all have fewer than 50 specialists in the sectors or countries they work in. They are therefore best placed to evaluate what is best for their business.
Matt Denton, president, dmg events
Years ago when I used to work with a series of smaller organisers I always thought we more dynamic, less risk adverse and able to apply more time to innovation and less to reporting and justification. We were hungrier and had to move quickly to gain an advantage.
However, now with a large portfolio I see that a large organiser can reap the benefits of scale, fund innovation and manage risk. The cash cows allow you to venture further afield, the strong brands offer an umbrella of security for geo-clones and vertical expansion.
Each have their strengths and weaknesses, but the key is having a focused team for every product, be it for your only event or one within a large portfolio. Empower that team, make it accountable, immerse it in its market and set it free. The culture of innovation is everyone’s responsibility, but in a large company this is often forgotten and it is the management that need to create these small pro-active teams and protect them from unnecessary bureaucracy.
With the right culture and teams there is little difference, but maybe the big companies can ride the storm longer and command more credibility.
