<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Previous Dilemma: Are &#8216;booth babes&#8217; a honey of an idea?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://mc2talks.mc-2.com/2012/01/a-honey-of-an-idea/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://mc2talks.mc-2.com/2012/01/a-honey-of-an-idea/</link>
	<description>eConnections – A digest for event exhibit professionals</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Apr 2012 17:45:12 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark Jacoby</title>
		<link>http://mc2talks.mc-2.com/2012/01/a-honey-of-an-idea/comment-page-1/#comment-317</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Jacoby</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 14 Jan 2012 00:34:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mc2talks.mc-2.com/?p=2354#comment-317</guid>
		<description>Lena,

Please understand that part of OMC services include providing staffing.

Firstly, &quot;booth babe&quot; is a derogatory reference and an insult to women in general regardless if it it appears in quotes. This reference is a sexist stereotype that needs to be eliminated from our vocabulary. I say this, not to you, but to all readers. Please let this reference go the way of &quot;chic&quot; and &quot;broad&quot; and &quot;dame&quot;, all of which look as bad in print as they sound when spoken.

The decision to hire ancillary staff should never be about what you want. Its about properly staffing your booth per your organization&#039;s resources, per show traffic, and per the requirements of your target attendees. 

Your talent agent&#039;s job is to propose candidates that are best for your needs. Attractive people are generally more successful than unattractive people scientifically speaking. Educated people generally communicate more effectively scientifically speaking. When you can hire talent that embodies both of these attributes, you&#039;re making a good choice. 

Let me site an example. A client has hire someone through our company for the National Retail Association Exposition. The staffer they chose for reception duty was an attractive woman in her mid twenties, of average height (so as not to be intimidating), educated with two 4-year degrees and a masters degree, and fluent in four(4) languages appropriate for the demographic of the attendees. In addition she is experienced with the technology being presented by the client company. She knows how to qualify attendees (press, end users, dealers, etc...), how to make future appointments and how to usher those already scheduled, and how to pair attendees with employees per their needs.  

Her skill level cannot be found within a single individual per company she serves. She lives local to the show and does not require travel and housing. The client need and the talent in this case exemplify why and how to hire ancillary staffing. 

Again, its not about what you want. Ego is often an obstacle to objectivity. Its about what will produce best results. Most companies invest a great deal into their live marketing programs but stop short of making decisions that will ultimately result in positive ROO. 

Reception is a first impression. It is a weigh station. It must be addressed from a professional and objective perspective because the success of your program is at stake. If you cant be effective at public speaking or present fluently, hire a professional if your resources permit.

Thanks for the opportunity to respond. 


Respectfully,

Mark Jacoby</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lena,</p>
<p>Please understand that part of OMC services include providing staffing.</p>
<p>Firstly, &#8220;booth babe&#8221; is a derogatory reference and an insult to women in general regardless if it it appears in quotes. This reference is a sexist stereotype that needs to be eliminated from our vocabulary. I say this, not to you, but to all readers. Please let this reference go the way of &#8220;chic&#8221; and &#8220;broad&#8221; and &#8220;dame&#8221;, all of which look as bad in print as they sound when spoken.</p>
<p>The decision to hire ancillary staff should never be about what you want. Its about properly staffing your booth per your organization&#8217;s resources, per show traffic, and per the requirements of your target attendees. </p>
<p>Your talent agent&#8217;s job is to propose candidates that are best for your needs. Attractive people are generally more successful than unattractive people scientifically speaking. Educated people generally communicate more effectively scientifically speaking. When you can hire talent that embodies both of these attributes, you&#8217;re making a good choice. </p>
<p>Let me site an example. A client has hire someone through our company for the National Retail Association Exposition. The staffer they chose for reception duty was an attractive woman in her mid twenties, of average height (so as not to be intimidating), educated with two 4-year degrees and a masters degree, and fluent in four(4) languages appropriate for the demographic of the attendees. In addition she is experienced with the technology being presented by the client company. She knows how to qualify attendees (press, end users, dealers, etc&#8230;), how to make future appointments and how to usher those already scheduled, and how to pair attendees with employees per their needs.  </p>
<p>Her skill level cannot be found within a single individual per company she serves. She lives local to the show and does not require travel and housing. The client need and the talent in this case exemplify why and how to hire ancillary staffing. </p>
<p>Again, its not about what you want. Ego is often an obstacle to objectivity. Its about what will produce best results. Most companies invest a great deal into their live marketing programs but stop short of making decisions that will ultimately result in positive ROO. </p>
<p>Reception is a first impression. It is a weigh station. It must be addressed from a professional and objective perspective because the success of your program is at stake. If you cant be effective at public speaking or present fluently, hire a professional if your resources permit.</p>
<p>Thanks for the opportunity to respond. </p>
<p>Respectfully,</p>
<p>Mark Jacoby</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

