This research focuses on evaluating factors that maximize visitor attendance at exhibition stands at a language event. Specifically, it aims to analyze exhibitor behavior, evaluate stand design elements, and assess the impact of stand location on visitation. The researcher observed four exhibition stands over two hours on a Friday afternoon to collect both quantitative data on visitor numbers and qualitative data on visitor and exhibitor behaviors. Preliminary results found that exhibitor engagement with visitors, stand design including use of space and colors, and stand location influencing visibility were key factors in attracting visitors.

1. Conclusions and recommendations
References
Introduction
This research focus on the stands of the
Language Show Live and, in particular, it aims to
evaluate the factors that maximise participants
visitation to a stand.
In order to do so three objectives have been set:
1. Analyse exhibitor behaviour and its effect on
visitors
2. Evaluate the design elements that contribute
to make a stand successful in terms of attracting
participants
3. Assess the impact of stand location in relation
to visitation Method
Knowing the importance of the exhibitors for
both the event and participants, this research
could help improving stands performance and,
therefore, increase visitors level of satisfaction.
Methodology
What makes a stand attractive to visitors?
Stands observed:
• Category 1 “Learning a language”
• Category 2 “Job seeker”
Results
Objective 1, exhibitors behavior:
• importance of front/back areas which need to be
understood by exhibitors (Grove and Fisk, 1992)
• importance of engaging with customers (Pine and
Gilmore ,1999)
• exhibitors need to be trained
Objective 2, stand design:
• colours
• use of the stand space
• consistency
If well managed these factors can change the
perception of participants in relation to the quality of
the service delivered (Grove and Fisk, 1992)
Objective 3, stand location and participant
circulation:
• stand location can affect its visibility. Category 1
busier than 2, perhaps due to the adjacency with
Piazza
• attendees choice behaviour can be predict by the
“general value principle” (Bitgood 2006).
Instituto Camoes
Co-destructive exhibitors behaviour (Ple’ and Caceres,
2010). They were engaged in conversation among
themselves when participants walked into the stand which
resulted to them making no effort with approaching
potential customers.
Also the space in the stand was poorly used, only one
small table located far from the information material.
Travel Ltd
A solid connection between the stand, the exhibitors and
the products displayed was easy to be perceived. The
attention of a lot of attendees that were walking by the
stand, seemed to be caught by the food and the friendly
exhibitors who managed to create a positive atmosphere.
Mulitingualvacancies.com
The exhibitor was busy on her phone and, like in the
Instituto Cameo, this behaviour can be considered as co-destructive.
This might have deterred participants from
engaging with her. The stand design was really poor
which gave visitors little incentive to come and visit it.
Visitors at the stands
This research is characterised by an
interpretivist approach as the data collected
have been subjectively interpreted (Fox et al.,
2014).
A non-participant observation was conducted
in order to gather both quantitative (No. of
people that approached the stands and
collected a brochure) and qualitative
(participant face expressions and atmosphere)
data.
A convenience sample of four stands was
selected and examined on Friday 17 October
from 4 to 6 o’clock, snap shot.
Due to the sample and time frame adopted
generalisation from this research is not
possible.
Barbara Cerutti
bac0178@my.londonmet.ac.uk
436- Institute Francais 418- Instituto Camoes –
Portuguese Language
CZ11- PGL Travel Ltd CZ21-
Multingualvacancies.com Ltd
category
Institute Francais
This was the most visited stand. The
exhibitors were really professional and
always engaged with participants. Perhaps
at a certain time it became too busy, yet the
overcrowding invited more visitor curiosity
(Bitgood, 2006).
Bitgood, S. (2006), An Analysis of Visitor Circulation: Movement Patterns and the
General Value Principle
Fox, D., Gouthro, M., Morakabati, Y. and Brackstone, J. (2014) Doing Events Research
From theory to practice
Grove, S and Fisk, R. (1992), The Service Experience as Theater. Advances in
Consumer Research, Vol. 19 pp. 455-460
Pine, I and Gilmore, J. (1998) Welcome to the Experience Economy, Harvard Business
Review, 74(4) pp. 97=105
Ple’, L. and Caceres, R. (2010) Not always co-creation: introducing interactional co-destruction
of value in service-dominant logic, Journal of Service Marketing, Vol. 24(6)