Hospitality Insights / Conference & Event Venues
Planners Need a Shared Property Reference
A venue reached the planning team through photographs, floor plans, proposals, and calls—each useful, none capable of holding the complete event.
The planner should lead the decision, not serve as the only person able to reconstruct the property.
Article contents5 sections
Article navigation
Contents
The venue arrived in pieces
By December 2020, the venue arrived in pieces. The ballroom was a photograph. Capacity lived in a spreadsheet. The current configuration might be an email attachment, and the explanation belonged to whichever call had happened last.
PCMA and MPI had documented cancellations, redesigns, and continuing uncertainty across business events. Remote work did not make the underlying information fragmented. It exposed how often the planner had been joining the pieces by memory.
The planner became the translation layer
A production lead could receive the latest diagram while an accessibility specialist saw an earlier floor plan. Both documents might be accurate within their dates. Their conclusions still differed because the qualification connecting them was absent.
The planner then explained the venue again. That work consumed attention and made the event depend on one person's recollection of which condition belonged to which room.
Evidence used in remote venue selection had to survive this handoff. The property needed to remain beside the decision instead of disappearing into the proposal that introduced it.
The property became the common language
Within SiteSee, the represented property could carry approved information, open questions, and controlled collaboration. Specialists worked at the point their judgment mattered while the underlying geography remained consistent.
That continuity became more valuable as hybrid events added another audience and production layer. Complexity did not require everyone to read every exchange. It required each dependency to remain findable.
The files could stop depending on memory
A useful test followed one event transition—arrival to registration, loading to stage, session to meal—and identified every file needed to explain it. If the planner had to supply the missing relationship from memory, the reference was not yet shared.
The files and calls of 2020 were unavoidable. The obligation to carry the entire venue in one person's head was not.
Sources and evidence
- PCMA, “COVID-19 Impact on Events Research: Top-line Results for Planners” (opens in a new tab), April 7, 2020.
- PCMA, “COVID-19 Recovery Dashboard Results, Survey 4” (opens in a new tab), May 27, 2020.
- Meeting Professionals International, “Meeting Pros Uncertain, Anxious and Optimistic” (opens in a new tab), June 1, 2020.
- Tussyadiah and colleagues, “Virtual reality, presence, and attitude change” (opens in a new tab), Tourism Management, 2018.
- Bogicevic and colleagues, “Virtual reality presence as a preamble of tourism experience” (opens in a new tab), Tourism Management, 2019.
Last updated: 2026 08 22