Diffusing Innovation in Times of Disaste

Journal of Convention & Event Tourism
ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wcet20
Diffusing innovation in times of disasters:

considerations for event management
professionals
Alana Dillette & Sandra Sun-Ah Ponting
To cite this article: Alana Dillette & Sandra Sun-Ah Ponting (2020): Diffusing innovation in times
of disasters: considerations for event management professionals, Journal of Convention & Event
Tourism, DOI: 10.1080/15470148.2020.1860847
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/15470148.2020.1860847
Published online: 27 Dec 2020.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 57
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=wcet20
JOURNAL OF CONVENTION & EVENT TOURISM
https://doi.org/10.1080/15470148.2020.1860847
Diffusing innovation in times of disasters:

considerations for event management professionals
Alana Dillette and Sandra Sun-Ah Ponting
L. Robert Payne School of Hospitality and Tourism Management, San Diego State University, San
Diego, CA, USA
ABSTRACT KEYWORDS
The COVID-19 pandemic has overwhelmed the world, with con- COVID-19; diffusion of
firmed infections threatening the health and lives of millions. innovation; event
Consequently, many hospitality and tourism organizations ceased management professio-
nals; pandemic
operations temporarily, including the cancelation or postpone-
ment of large and small events. As lockdown measures begin to
ease, events will be some of the last to re-open due to their
non-essential categorization. Utilizing the diffusion of innovation
theory from crisis management literature, nineteen in-depth
interviews were conducted with senior event management pro-
fessionals to explore how the events industry is innovating its
service offerings in response to COVID-19. As the industry is
forced to change its practices radically during the pandemic,
findings reveal an interconnected innovation web modeled
through the lens of diffusion of innovation theory. As a result,
this research implies the need to develop a new type of innov-
ation theory for the events industry that can be applied during
extraordinary unprecedented disasters.
Introduction
On December 31st, 2019, an unknown pneumonia like sickness was detected and
reported to the World Health Organization (WHO, 2020). This virus termed as
COVID-19 spread uncontrollably across the globe, and, by mid-March, it had
been established in 146 countries (G€ ossling, Scott, & Hall, 2021). In a matter of
weeks, COVID-19 had overwhelmed the world, with confirmed infections more
than doubling, threatening the health and lives of millions. Many blamed the
supersonic spread of the virus on global air transport and a number of super-
spreading events such as the ski destination Ischgl in Austria and mega cruise ships
(Anderson, Heesterbeek, Klinkenberg, & Hollingsworth, 2020; Chinazzi et al.,
2020). Consequently, countries all around the world imposed unprecedented stay-
at-home and lockdown orders, ceasing operations of many hospitality and tourism
organizations (Baum & Hai, 2020), including the cancelation or postponement of
large and small events around the world (Jamal & Budke, 2020).
CONTACT Alana Dillette [email protected] L. Robert Payne School of Hospitality and Tourism
Management, San Diego State University, San Diego, CA, USA.
ß 2020 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
2 A. DILLETTE AND S. S-A. PONTING
Although convention and event tourism has been exposed to major crises
and disasters in the past – the September 11 terrorist attacks (2001), the
Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) outbreak (2003), the global
economic crisis (2007-2009) and the Middle East Respiratory Syndrome
(MERS) outbreak (2015), none of these crises and disasters have reached
the level COVID-19 has already surpassed (G€ ossling et al., 2021; Lee &
Goldblatt, 2012; Mason, Grabowski, & Du, 2005; Smeral, 2010; Tew, Lu,
Tolomiczenko, & Gellatly, 2008). According to the United Nations World
Tourism Organization (UNWTO), evidence so far suggests that the impacts
and recovery from COVID-19 will be unprecedented as 100% of worldwide
destinations have introduced travel restrictions in response to the pandemic
(UNWTO., 2020). Impacts on the broader hospitality and tourism industry
project international tourist arrivals may decline 58-78% depending on the
speed of containment and the duration of travel restrictions (UNWTO.,
2020). Before the worldwide spread of COVID-19, the events industry had
made a significant impression on the global economy and were a draw for
business and leisure travelers alike (Getz & Page, 2020; Raj, Walters, &
Rashid, 2017). The disruption in the economy spurred on by COVID-19
will undoubtedly leave a lasting impact on the hospitality and tourism
industry, and more specifically, the event industry.
As lockdown measures begin to ease, hospitality and tourism businesses,
especially group gatherings for events will be some of the last to re-open
due to their non-essential categorization (Baum & Hai, 2020). Furthermore,
social distancing measures and other safety protocols required by many
government agencies during the pandemic will significantly impact the
operation of most events. Therefore, this paper explored how COVID-19 is
impacting event management professionals (EMPs) as they prepare to
resume operations in a pandemic and post-pandemic world. Utilizing the
diffusion of innovation (DOI) theory as a theoretical lens, in-depth inter-
views were conducted with eighteen senior EMPs to explore how they have
dealt with the impacts of the pandemic, and how they are innovating their
service offerings in preparation for reopening of the economy. Interviewees
represented multiple sectors of the industry including venues, third-party
planning, in-house corporate planning, incentive travel, event design and
production, event suppliers, convention and visitors’ bureaus, event staffing
agencies, and destination management companies.
Literature review
Disaster management in events
Humanity has lived through crises and disasters, whether it be economic,
environmental, social, or political for all of eternity. The complex nature of
JOURNAL OF CONVENTION & EVENT TOURISM 3
these occurrences leaves long lasting impacts on individuals, families, busi-

nesses, communities, and entire industries in their wake. There are various
characterizations of crisis and disaster (Faulkner, 2001; Parsons, 1996;
Stafford, Yu, & Armoo, 2002), however, key definitions agree that a crisis
is internal while a disaster is external. Crises are the result of something
stemming from within an organization (Tew et al., 2008), while disasters
are a result of occurrences happening outside the organization (Stafford
et al., 2002). More specifically, Parsons (1996) suggests that a disaster is a
situation “where an enterprise is confronted with sudden unpredictable
catastrophic changes over which it has little control” (p. 136). Based on
this definition, there is no doubt that the COVID-19 pandemic meets the
characteristics of a disaster. Economies and industries around the world
have been impacted by COVID-19, however, the impact of this pandemic
on the events industry has been catastrophic.
Prior to the pandemic, EM played a significant role in local, state, and
national economies (Draper, Young Thomas, & Fenich, 2018; Getz & Page,
2020; Raj et al., 2017). In fact, a report by Oxford Economics published in
2018 affirmed that events not only played a crucial role in connecting peo-
ple, but, that the industry also supported 5.9 million jobs and generated
$845 billion in economic impact (Oxford Economics, 2018) up from $115
billion in 2012 (Sox, Kline, Crews, Strick, & Campbell, 2017). According to
Forbes (last updated April 222,020), over 83 million event attendees have
been affected after events around the world were canceled or rescheduled
as a result of the pandemic to date (Coudriet, 2020). Some of the most not-
able events include South by Southwest, the 2020 Tokyo Olympic Games,
Coachella, and Burning Man (Coudriet, 2020)
Over the years, events have been described as “animators of destination
attractiveness” that are a “core element of the destination system” and a
“bridge between the market for visitor attractions created by tourists and
the use of events to fill the gap” (Getz & Page, 2016, p. 593). More import-
antly, events have been touted as a tool to develop economies and lift desti-
nations out of recessions (Lyck, Long, & Grige, 2012). Although there is
little published information on EM in the midst of COVID-19, previous
work on EM and the economic recession of 2007-2009 can lend insights.
In 2010, Smith and Kline explored meeting planners’ perceptions around
the need for crisis planning and revealed that training and professional
development activities were the key predictors in differentiating planners
who had a written crisis plan versus those who did not. Devine and Devine
(2012) used a critical case sampling technique to explore how the recession
stimulated creativity and innovation for stakeholders of the Northern
Ireland Milk Cup Youth Football Tournament. Results revealed innovations
geared toward generating extra revenue through gate receipts, corporate
hospitality, merchandizing, programing, sponsorship, and marketing. Also,

in 2012, Lee and Goldblatt conducted a survey with festival and event
industry professionals about their financial performance during the reces-
sion and strategies for coping in the short and long term. This study found
that 50% of event professionals reported that their profit margins had
decreased and were using marketing strategies to increase business and
working to reduce expenses by using better technologies. Lyck et al. (2012)
published an academic book “Tourism, Festivals and Cultural Events in
Times of Crisis” in which studies provide evidence that festivals and events
can in fact provide innovative avenues for communities to counteract an
economic crisis and prosper once again. Examples of innovations included
the use of locally engaging events such as historical reenactment festivals
and participatory sport events to increase local participation. Additionally,
the book highlighted the importance of exploring the relationship between
visitors and destination image prior to events and after events as a method
for understanding the impact of events on a destination. Artistic expression
and preservation of cultural heritage were also revealed as an attractor to
events for both local residents and tourists (Lyck et al., 2012).
In addition to the studies on the economic recession, there has been
some work conducted on the hospitality and tourism response to health
epidemics and natural disasters. Chien and Law (2003) investigated the
impact of the SARS epidemic on the hotel industry in Hong Kong.
Findings suggest hotels assemble a task force to handle the cancelation of
bookings, enforcing environmental hygiene and personal health, cleaning
and disinfecting of guest rooms and public areas, acquisition of protective
equipment and controlling of preventive measures, and handling the media.
In 2004, Pine and McKercher identified the major impacts of SARS on
Hong Kong’s tourism industry which highlighted cost cutting initiatives by
hotels and airlines to deal with the steep decline in air travel and occu-
pancy rates. Conclusions revealed that tourist numbers began to rise fairly
quickly once the epidemic was under control (Pine & McKercher, 2004). In
2007, Cetron et al. developed detailed strategies on how convention centers
can transform into staging centers for the sick when, and if, natural and
manmade disasters occur. In 2008, Tew et al. used a crisis management
model to assess the impact of the 2003 SARS epidemic on Toronto area
tourism. Results suggest that crisis management planning and implementa-
tion should include an organization specific plan integrated with a stake-
holder plan that address both internal and public brand management for a
stronger, more unified approach to the emergence of an organization (Tew
et al., 2008).
As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to ravage the global economy,
and EM in particular, exploring the innovations that are derived in response
to this disaster is of great importance for understanding how EM will evolve

into the future. According to a systematic review conducted by Seraphin
(2020), publications related to COVID-19 and tourism are beginning to take
shape across two broad categories, namely – negative impacts of the pandemic
and considering the pandemic as an opportunity for the tourism industry
(Benjamin, Dillette, & Alderman, 2020). Research focused on the negative
impact resultant from COVID-19 highlight struggling local economies, mental
health of tourists, destination perceptions and the performance of various tour-
ism enterprises. Alternatively, research highlighting the pandemic as an oppor-
tunity explored training for future leaders, the relationship between tourism
and capitalism, sustainability and tourism, and models to evaluate the impacts
of tourism. Amongst this growing body of work on COVID-19 and tourism to
date, very few studies have explored the impact of COVID-19 on the events
industry. Namely, Rowen (2020) used the example of the Burning Man festival
to explain that the future of events will play a significant role in educating cus-
tomers. Ludvigsen and Hayton (2020) provided perspectives on the “post-pan-
demic” organizational aspects of mega sporting events with a focus on
volunteering and security. Seraphin (2020) argued that, although COVID-19
has made a detrimental impact on EM, the fundamental human need to gather
and connect will drive the resurgence of the events economy. Miles and
Shipway (2020) conducted a systematic review of the literature to explore how
international sporting events and EM studies could be best informed by disaster
management and resilience studies. Results highlighted eight themes to drive
discussion around how EM can become more resilient to disasters – (1) critic-
ality of venue resilience (2) risk perceptions (3) social, community and individ-
ual resilience (4) crowd management and control (5) cascading disasters (6)
private and public partnerships (7) crisis communication, and (8) simulating
disaster scenarios. In reference to COVID-19, the researchers argued “the global
responses to the COVID-19 pandemic illustrated the increasingly important
role of community based, bottom-up approaches to dealing with global crises
and fostering greater resilience” (Miles & Shipway, 2020, p. 539). Though these
studies do have some findings that may be useful in response to COVID-19,
an empirical study exploring how the EM industry is innovating their opera-
tions in response to the unique circumstances precipitated by the pandemic is
crucial. Therefore, based on the lack of research on EM and COVID-19 to
date, this study is filling a gap in the literature by exploring how EMPs are
innovating through the COVID-19 pandemic.
Diffusion of innovation
Diffusion of innovation (DOI) is nonlinear and complex, especially during
times of disasters (Robertson, Swan, & Newell, 1996; Van de Ven, Polley,
Garud, & Venkataraman, 1999; Wolfe, 1994). This study uses DOI as a the-
oretical lens to offer a structure for the themes related to the innovation
process derived from the data. Originally developed by Everett Rogers
(1962), the theory of DOI provides a framework for exploring how innova-
tions are communicated within organizations. DOI clarifies the process and
factors influencing the adoption of new innovations. Diffusion is defined as
“the process in which an innovation is communicated through certain
channels over time among the members of a social system” while commu-
nication is described as “the process in which participants create and share
information with one another in order to reach a mutual understanding”
(Rogers, 2003, p. 5). More specifically, there are four dimensions that make
up DOI: the innovation; communication channels; time; and social systems
(Rogers, 2003).
An innovation is an idea, thing, procedure or system that is new, or per-
ceived to be new by whoever is adopting it. Characteristics of an innovation
include relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, trialability, and observabil-
ity (Rogers, 2003). Communication channels refer to the process by which peo-
ple share information about an innovation and include the unit of adoption
(an individual or organization) that is familiar with the innovation as well as
other units of adoption who are not familiar with the innovation. The element
of time refers to three components, the innovation decision process, adopter
categories and the rate of adoption (Rogers, 2003). The innovation decision
process incorporates the timeframe when an individual or organization
becomes aware of an innovation until they either adopt or reject the innov-
ation. Five steps within this process include knowledge, persuasion, decision,
implementation, and confirmation (Rogers, 2003). Adopter categories refer to
the level of inclination an individual or organization has toward the innovation.
Categories of adoption include innovators, early adopters, early majority, late
majority and laggards. Finally, the rate of adoption considers the speed at
which an innovation is adopted in a social system. According to Rogers (2003),
the rate of adoption tends to occur following an S-shaped curve, in that, early
on only a few will adopt the innovation, with numbers growing as time pro-
gresses and eventually declining. The final element of DOI is the social system.
All diffusion occurs within social systems. The social system may be individu-
als, groups, organizations or sub-systems that all share a common goal (Rogers,
2003). In the case of this research, the social system includes EMPs in the
United States. Within organizations specifically, the characteristics of an organ-
izational structure will have significant impacts on its ability to innovate. These
characteristics include centralization, organizational complexity, levels of formal-
ity, interconnections within an organization, and the size of the organization
(Lundblad, 2003). Centralization refers to the amount of power that resides
with a small number of people – which is most often negatively correlated with
innovativeness. Organizational complexity considers the knowledge levels and

expertise of organization members, which is positively correlated with innova-
tiveness. Levels of formality refer to the degree to which an organization follows
specific rules, which is negatively correlated with innovativeness.
Interconnectedness refers to the level at which organizations are connected to
its wider network and social system – which is positively correlated with inno-
vativeness. Finally, the larger an organization, the more innovative it tends to
be (Lundblad, 2003).
Though not used widely across event management research with a focus on
disasters, DOI has been used in other fields to address innovations across infor-
mation systems (Fedorowicz & Gogan, 2010) strategic management (Groh,
2014), management studies (Robertson et al., 1996), healthcare (Currie &
Spyridonidis, 2019), hospitality and tourism education (Goh & Sigala, 2020),
and business research (Vargo, Akaka, & Wieland, 2020). Most closely related to
this paper, Vargo et al. (2020) explored DOI using a service-centered ecosystem
and an institutional lens. Results revealed a framework that does not privilege
just one actor as an innovator, but instead considers all actors as integrators of
the innovation(s). In relationship to strategic crisis management, Groh (2014)
argued “modern literature about corporate management during crisis events
does not properly cover studying and classifying the actions carried out by a
corporation’s senior managers at different stages and levels of a crisis, or find-
ing out what constitutes timeliness and the value of the research conducted”
(p. 2). Therefore, this paper utilizes DOI as a theoretical lens to understand the
emergent innovations within the EM industry birthed as a result of this unpre-
cedented pandemic.
Methodology
A qualitative investigation was deemed appropriate to understand the
impact of COVID-19 on the EM industry and how EMPs are preparing for
post-pandemic events. The interpretive nature of qualitative research
enabled an exploration of innovation directly with industry professionals
(Creswell & Creswell, 2017). By conducting 18 semi-structured interviews,
rich descriptive accounts of EMPs’ experiences were collected and inter-
preted to unpack the ways innovation is diffused over communication
channels, time, and social systems (Rogers, 2003).
Interview protocol
The interview protocol followed a four-phase framework to strengthen reli-
ability (Castillo-Montoya, 2016). Interview questions were structured to fol-
low the literature on disaster management in events and the DOI theory,
including: “What was your work like before the pandemic?” to evaluate the
participants’ work environment prior to the pandemic; “What does your
work look like now?” to grasp how individuals and organizations are deal-
ing with the pandemic; and, “How are you or your organization preparing
for a post-pandemic world?” to explore EM innovations. In order to create
an inquiry-based conversational setting, the researchers (faculty members
in EM education) used their knowledge of industry contexts and work
practices to develop interview questions. To enhance reliability and trust-
worthiness (Castillo-Montoya, 2016), the interview protocol was evaluated
by one industry expert and one other academic in EM. Necessary amend-
ments were made to ensure that the interview questions were clear and
relevant for participants. Finally, two interviews with EMPs were conducted
to pilot the interview protocol. These pilot interviews led to editing the
sequence of questions.
Selection of participants
The target population was comprised of professionals with significant work
experience in the EM sector within the United States. Specifically, a past-
president of a professional association was solicited for participation and
access to a purposeful sample. Based on the past-president’s years of indus-
try experience and network, ten professionals were initially contacted via
email to participate in the research project. Seven professionals in in-house
corporate planning, third-party corporate planning, venue management,
and event design agreed to be interviewed. These professionals were pur-
posefully selected to ensure access to a thorough description of the phe-
nomenon under study by exploring a variety of perspectives from EMPs
across the industry (Yardley, 2015). Eleven additional EMPs were inter-
viewed based on snowball sampling recommendations. Thus, a total of
eighteen interviews were completed. Participant descriptions are illustrated
in Table 1. To maintain confidentiality, participants are identified
using pseudonyms.
Data collection
All interviews were conducted using Zoom due to health and safety con-
cerns resultant from the pandemic, a video/audio communications soft-
ware, in May and June 2020, a time when the U.S. events industry was
dealing with the aftermath of event cancelations and postponement. During
this time, the employment status of participants varied. Twelve EMPs were
employed, four were furloughed, and two were recently laid-off. Those that
were employed spoke about the work they were doing and strategies to
Table 1. Profile of interview participants.

Industry Employment-
Pseudonym Title Organization Type experience (yrs) status Location
Maya National Venue 15 Furloughed California
Sales Manager
Kate Global Venue 31 Laid-off California
Sales Director
Bailey Vice President Third-party 21 Employed California
corporate planning
Darlene Meeting Planner Incentive Travel 25 Employed California
Blake Senior Venue 6 Furloughed California
Sales Executive
Callie Senior In-house 11 Employed North Carolina
Event Manager corporate planning
Andrea President Event design 14 Employed California
and production
Joan Director of Events Venue 14 Furloughed Montana
Melanie Director Incentive Travel 13 Employed California
of Accounts
Emily Owner Third-party 21 Employed California
corporate planning
Dana Owner Third-party 23 Employed California
corporate planning
Tara Owner Staffing 15 Employed California
Darren Founder Supplier - brand 25 Employed Colorado
merchandise
Greg Owner Event design 22 Employed Tennessee
and production
Sabrina Executive Meetings In-house 20 Laid-off Arizona
& corporate planning
Events Manager
Thomas Director of Sales Destination 12 Furloughed New York
management
company
Daphne Director of Convention 21 Employed Montana
Group Sales Visitors Bureau
Courtney Owner Third-party 22 Employed Colorado
corporate planning
adapt to hosting virtual and/or hybrid events. Those furloughed or laid-off

spoke about their experiences leading into and through the beginning of
the pandemic, and their professional outlooks moving forward. Prior to the
interviews, all participants were informed of the research purpose and gave
consent to be audio recorded. Additionally, extensive research notes were
taken during the interviews to substantiate the data analysis process. Except
for two pilot interviews, the researchers conducted the interviews separ-
ately. All interviews were digitally transcribed.
Analysis and coding

Guided by the theory of DOI, a deductive thematic analysis was adopted to
inform the coding, theme development, and analysis of the data (Clarke,
Braun, & Hayfield, 2015). Firstly, for data familiarization, each researcher
independently listened to the interview recordings and read transcriptions
twice. Notes on interview observations and insights were made during this
process. Secondly, the researchers coded the interview transcripts separately

using NVivo version 12, a qualitative data management software, to
enhance validity (Yardley, 2015). The systematic and rigorous coding pro-
cess led the researchers to create 40 and 53 free codes respectively. Thirdly,
the researchers continued to work separately and moved on to searching
for themes from the free codes and identified overarching themes (9 and
15 respectively) and sub-themes (18 and 21 respectively) (Braun & Clarke,
2012). During the fourth stage, the researchers worked together to review
each other’s collated and coded data under each theme. Central organizing
concepts were discussed and how the themes relate were revised to create
the final 4 overarching themes and 3 sub-themes. To capture the essence of
the data, the last stage entailed defining and naming the themes to solid-
ify findings.
Findings
To provide context on how innovation emerged among EMPs, a timeline
of how the pandemic influenced the participants must be explained.
Participants explained that EM businesses dealt with the impact of the pan-
demic in “two big waves”. First, in March 2020, when the majority of states
in the United States enforced measurements to prohibit the gathering of
groups, many EMPs dealt with cancelations and postponement of events
originally scheduled between March and May. Immediate actions mainly
involved revisiting the force majeure clauses to protect clients. As Emily
reflected, “March was a disaster”, as many EMPs exhaustively worked on
“revising clauses and renegotiating contracts” (Bailey). The second wave
was in May when event businesses started to work with clients and indus-
try partners to strategize for and reimagine future events. As some states
were planning to re-open venues for small gatherings as early as June 2020,
innovation was brewing within and across event organizations to prepare
for EM in a pandemic and post-pandemic world. The following findings
guided by the theory of DOI, are structured to showcase innovation strat-
egies and the ways these strategies were communicated over time within a
social system. Divergent from the traditional DOI theory, Figure 1 high-
lights the unique nature of the events industry that diffuses innovation
through an interconnected cyclical web during a global pandemic.
Innovations
Shifting from dealing with event cancelations to preparing for events dur-
ing the pandemic, three significant innovation strategies emerged: content
design, safety protocol, and professional growth. Many EMPs have turned
Figure 1. Interconnected innovation web.
to virtual events to conduct business and signaled that content design,

including training speakers, engaging content, event production experience,
and experiential interaction were some of the most critical elements
required to succeed. As an example, Andrea shared:
“We’re aligning ourselves with the partners that we feel would help us deliver the
same caliber of events virtually that we would aspire to have in person. So, the
content that needs to be created for our virtual meeting, the speaker training needs
to look a little different. If there’s someone who is very comfortable speaking in front
of a live audience, it’s a different scenario speaking in front of a computer with
nobody around you. So, reminding clients that speaker training is equally as
important, if not more so, especially according to, what kind of background can the
audience see? What kind of visuals can we put in the lower tier? The content is
more important now than ever because people’s attention spans are 30 seconds or
less these days. So, content creation is crucial.”
The importance of training the speakers was echoed by Callie, an in-

house corporate planner in an engineering firm:
“I’m trying to avoid death by PowerPoint for our virtual event, just because that’s
historically how it was done. Our speakers are engineer minded. They’re very smart
people, but they present with 80 million bullet points in one slide and then graphs
that you can’t see and they read off the slide. You can’t do that virtually. You
shouldn’t do that in person, but it’s even worse if it’s virtual. We’re trying to partner
with our vendors to figure out different ways that we can create our content and
make it engaging.”
Numerous participants emphasized the importance of looking at content

differently for virtual events. Examples included working with other
businesses to coach speakers, providing high-technology platforms, and

using multi-sensory experiences for audience engagement. Bailey further
discussed experiential marketing as a strategy to elevate virtual events:
“It’s experiential marketing … some of these companies right now, if you put
together a virtual event, and you want to have your viewer actually have an
experience on the other side on their computer, they’re sending gift boxes ahead of
time to the attendees with some kind of surprise or some kind of tie-in to the
content, and now, that’s an experience.”
To counterbalance the lack of face-to-face interaction, EM companies are

marketing the event experience in new ways. For example, to demonstrate how
virtual events can provide a satisfying audience experience, Darren’s company
is moving forward with working with artists to host virtual art classes.
Furthermore, Greg’s production company enhanced their services by providing
weekly educational broadcasts on music and entertainment for clients.
Another emergent innovation was to implement precautionary health
and safety measures for face-to-face events specifically through food service,
room setup, number of attendees, social distancing, hygiene and risk assess-
ment. Examples in food service included boxed meals, plexiglass on carts
for food and drink service, and single-use utensils. In venues such as hotels,
taping on the floor to mark the six-feet distance and restricting capacity in
venue space were proposed (Kate). However, participants shared concerns
about the feasibility of social distancing:
“It’s crazy. They will only put two people at a six-foot round table, what used to
hold 10. Do the math on them. We’re all just wondering, "How’s that ever going to
work?" To convince a client to come back and spend the kind of money that it’s
going to take to facilitate all of that.” (Greg)
Similar thoughts were shared by other participants, however, some

believed that a decrease in attendees will be inevitable due to people’s over-
all health and safety concerns.
“You also need to look at State regulations, attendees, where they are. If you have a
meeting in California but your attendees are coming from New York, do you want
all these New Yorkers to fly to California? Or, if you have a global audience, do you
want them to come in? Can they come in? Are they comfortable coming in?” (Emily)
Blake further predicted that companies will pre-condition their events

with statements such as “If you’re immunocompromised, if you’re elderly,
if you’re at-risk … don’t travel to this meeting”, to address concerns about
risk. To overcome these challenges, participants felt that hybrid events,
with engaging content design and carefully considered risks, will be the
way forward to increase audience attendance.
From a hygiene standpoint, all audio-visual equipment and furniture will
be sanitized after every break-out session, and hand sanitizer stations will
be located throughout the event space. In line with protecting attendees’

health and safety, Andrea shared that they will be recommending their cli-
ents to employ a medical specialist for events to handle risk assessment:
“We do recommend investing in bringing in what we’re calling an Event Health
Advisor. That is the person that has actual credentials to help scan temperatures and
be onsite to help provide any support, like what a Fire Marshal service would offer.”
Although the majority of participants understood that these creative

measures were necessary to innovate the industry, the time, labor, and add-
itional costs involved worried some participants. Callie specifically men-
tioned the existing difficulty in showcasing the value of events
to companies:
“I feel like that’s going to affect a lot of corporations in how they view events. A lot
of corporations view events as money guzzling, like they spend all this money, what’s
the value?”
Furthermore, many participants worried that innovative health and safety

measures such as “single-use, sterilized, and wrapped everything” (Emily)
will reverse the sustainability efforts of the industry.
During times of lockdown, many participants continued to pursue their
education and professional training to advance their status as EMPs. For
example, they benefited from joining free webinars offered by professional
associations such as MPI, PCMA (Professional Convention Management
Association), EIC (Events Industry Council), SITE (Society for Incentive
Travel Excellence), and ALHI (Associated Luxury Hotels International).
Some participants also took free certification courses at academic institu-
tions, achieved their CVENT certifications or Digital Event Strategist
certification.
One significant theme that emerged from the interviews was the unex-
pected skill of negotiating clauses and heightened empathy that were high-
lighted during the pandemic. When events were being canceled or
postponed, many EMPs faced force majeure clauses that they never exam-
ined or understood in detail:
“When this whole thing first started, we really just did not know how to legally
respond to people canceling, especially when it was just the rumblings in early
March. I talk all the time, and for the first time, I was really just speechless. I’m just
like, “I don’t really know what to tell these clients. I don’t know if I’m even allowed
to let you legally out of this contract over your fears of the Coronavirus. I don’t
know if that’s a legal leg to stand on to get out of a legal document with a large
company.” You go back to the large company, and you’re like, "These people want to
cancel because they don’t feel safe.” They’re like, “Okay. Well, hold on. We have to
contact our legal people and look at some big company stuff.” (Blake)
Smaller companies had to consult legal partners as they “never even

looked at a force majeure clause in the contract, it was just a handshake”
(Greg). The unforeseen pandemic was forcing EMPs to train themselves

and their employees to be better equipped for future contract negotiations.
Coincidently, Melanie shared the sentiments of many, that exercising
empathy was a skillset that was being developed during the event cancel-
ation and negotiation process:
“I think one of the things is just empathy and listening and being a voice to your
customers. They’re looking for answers, which we don’t have. I wish we had a crystal
ball to say yes, August 30th, this will be over, but we don’t. I’ve just had to be very
understanding and empathetic and listen, and really let them talk and vent and be
there as a sounding board, but also to feel that they’re not in this alone, that we’re
all feeling the same thing.”
Further, many EMPs played an empathetic role given the time and
money their clients had put into their events. Continuously communicating
and sharing information was a key component in cultivating relationships.
A crowdsourced document spearheaded by MPI emphasized that working
toward a resolution rather than defending each other’s position was a way
to build a more resilient industry (MPI., 2020).
Communication
Roger’s (2003) original DOI theory includes communication as a social
process of sharing the innovation between people (innovation user to non-
user) via a communication channel (mass media or interpersonal). Given
the extreme circumstances resulting from the pandemic, participants
explained all communication was through virtual platforms (e.g., e-mails,
webinars, virtual meetings, etc.). The social processes of communicating
innovation were unique to the EM industry. Rather than innovation being
communicated from users to non-users, as described in DOI theory
(Rogers, 2003), the process was one of collaborative real-time innovation.
Firstly, when the industry was seeking innovative strategies to succeed in a
pandemic environment, Sabrina explained that they turned to each other,
rather than trying to create solutions within their organizations.
“I think it’s been a mixture of great minds coming together. We aren’t necessarily
food and beverage experts. So, we’ve outreached to our catering partners who are
and said, "What are you seeing that needs to be done from a food safety standpoint?
Does it need to be fully enclosed only? Do we need to go bento boxes only for food
service?" So, we’re the puzzle pieces. We’re the event producers that can get all the
different components of an event together, the experts in each arena, share those
ideas and then have kind of created what we then would consider our standards
moving forward because that’s what we do so well. We put all of these pieces of an
event together and we have the capability to think about all of the different
scenarios. And therefore, we can be that trusted resource that’s talked to everybody
collectively.”
As Maya further stated “I mean, everybody in our industry, it’s so inter-

connected, and we’re all so important to each other’s success.” This sense
of community among EMPs appeared strong as a result of their shared
experience. Large organizations such as major hotel brands and profes-
sional associations were convening public webinars to share their upcoming
plans, and other organizations were voicing their experience and creativity
through their networks. Therefore, innovation strategies were not just being
disseminated through the communication channels, but being crowd-
sourced through the communication process, feeding back into the innov-
ation (Figure 1). Technological advancements in communication platforms
were especially crucial in facilitating the interpersonal communication of
innovation as virtual platforms were the only communication method dur-
ing the lockdown. The pandemic changed the industry to include the use
of virtual platforms as a significant component of interpersonal communi-
cation. Secondly through these virtual platforms, EMPs felt empowered to
share the innovation with stakeholders. Tara shared:
“It’s, it’s interesting … in a lot of ways, it’s leveled the playing field a lot more for
people because we’re in this state of, like, "yeah, some things will go back [to
normal] and leaders deal with change all the time … but this is much different than
anything anybody’s been through before and I think it gives people the opportunity
to speak up and to put their ideas out there. The more comfortable we make people
feel with putting their ideas out there and bringing them together to share their
ideas, the faster we will innovate as an industry.”
Participants explained that no one told them to communicate the innov-

ation strategies put forward by various organizations, but they felt that it
was a duty to their stakeholders to share the latest information.
Time
The third element of Roger’s (2003) DOI theory is time which encompasses
the innovation-decision process, adopter categories, and the rate of adop-
tion. All participants were well-informed on the innovation strategies that
were being planned and proposed by major hotel brands, audio-visual com-
panies, virtual event management companies, professional associations, and
within their own companies. According to the DOI theory, the information
gathered by stakeholders creates a platform for organizations to either
adopt or reject the innovation (Lundblad, 2003). Interestingly, unlike an
organization experiencing the DOI process in theory, the pandemic was
positioning many EMPs to accept the innovation strategies. Thus, the
adoption of innovation was not a process, but working with what is pro-
posed in the industry. As a result, some businesses are forced into
situations where they must reevaluate their service offerings. Melanie, who
works for an incentive travel company stated:
“We definitely were not doing virtual meetings before. It was kind of the opposite,
and I’m sure you’ve heard that from anyone else you’ve talked to. It was the opposite
of what our business was. We believe in, in-person meetings, experiences and
connections, and a virtual meeting just isn’t that, but right now that’s the space we
have to think about.”
The next discussion in the time element of DOI is the adopter categories.
Large organizations such as hotels and audio-visual companies fit into the
innovators category as these organizations are leading the changes in their
operations. Some third-party planning companies and in-house corporate
planners (Darlene, Callie and Andrea) were also considered innovators as
they were spearheading innovative strategies and have partnered with vir-
tual event and production companies to drive sales. Smaller business own-
ers, such as Emily and Dana, are identified as early adopters as they are
planning to extend their business services to include virtual events. Emily
explained that some events will be virtual and further stated:
“So, there are some events that I think can completely pivot to virtual and they’ll be
okay. A board meeting. Yeah, maybe people don’t all sit around the table and have a pad
of paper in front of them. You can have a small board meeting in this avenue, a keynote
lecture. If you’re just sitting in a seat and you’re just watching a keynote, sure why not.
Put it up on your big screen and have that same keynote deliver that same message. So,
there are some things that can be done virtually, and be done okay.”
The final component of the time element of DOI is rate of adoption,

specifically the speed of adopting the innovation (Rogers, 2003). Since the
interviews were conducted during business lockdowns, speculating the
speed of innovation adoption was premature. Nonetheless, the health and
safety measurements enforced and recommended by government agencies
and the CDC (Center for Disease Control and Prevention) have played a
substantial role in innovation strategies. While the pandemic was triggering
the EM industry to innovate, the pandemic was also slowing the speed of
adoption. As Bailey described, the lack of predictability during the pan-
demic pushed EMPs into unknown territory.
“We have had some obviously tragic times that have affected travel in our industry
in the past. I mean, 9/11 would probably be the first one that I worked during …
After that, we had the economic meltdown, but what we are seeing was something
completely different than those two shutdowns. At least with those, you saw a
beginning, a middle, and an end, and with this pandemic and all the news … Every
day, more and more news, is changing the direction of what we thought we could do
with our clients.”
The day-to-day changes and the “fear of the unknown” (Darlene) made
it difficult for EMPs to predict the effect of EM innovation.
Social systems
The final element of DOI theory is the element of social systems which
accounts for systems of individuals, groups, organizations or sub-systems
(Rogers, 2003). The findings revealed that social systems included profes-
sional associations, government agencies, and business organizations. This
may be due to the unique composition of sectors that need to come
together to produce event services and products. For instance, a corporate
event often requires an event planner, venue, accommodation, transporta-
tion, audio-visual, food and beverage, and more. There are numerous large
and small organizations that make up the events industry. Therefore, the
use of professional associations as a central space for EMPs to virtually
gather, learn, connect and discuss innovations was paramount. Established
professional associations served as a platform for crowdsourcing, a space
for content creation and an educational tool for helping EMPs pivot into
virtual and hybrid event design and production. Maya shared:
“It’s been really helpful to be a part of SITE SoCal where I have industry peers and
mentors that I can bounce ideas off of. And ultimately, I’m so thankful for our
industry all being in this together. I know we’re all remaining as flexible as
possible … we can try something and have a little bit more grace if it doesn’t work.
So, we’re kind of working through this all together and figuring it out as we go.”
With all the uncertainty brought on by the pandemic, many EMPs

described leaning on professional associations for support, mentorship, and
guidance. The social system of these associations has been extremely
important to the dissemination of information and the development of
innovations in EM. Unlike the theory of DOI, the EM social systems were
shaping the innovation. As Thomas recounts,
“I think one thing that is a positive from all of this is that it appears to me that we
are all in the same boat - all of the DMC partners. It’s interesting to see that people
are coming together, leaders from all different DMCs are collaborating, talking about
the industry like we’ve never done before, figuring out how we’re going to stay
relevant within the marketplace. So, under ADM (Association of Destination
Management) we’re forming a coalition right now, so that we can start talking about
consistencies in terms of operations within the DMC world. Then also, with
contracting and billing clients. I think one thing that we were not prepared for is
once the cancellations started coming in, all the work that was done years prior, how
do you build for that? Usually, in a traditional market, it’s part of the cost of doing
business. But now that we’re hit with all these cancellations and all the vendor
cancellation fees, we also must be mindful of how we charge for our services
rendered, essentially, in terms of proposal design.”
In addition to professional associations, different government agencies

were also a landing point of support for EMPs. For example, many turned
to the CDC, WHO and their local CVBs for guidance. However, it is
important to note that, the guidelines of government agencies and health
authorities impacted business operations differently across geographical

locations. For example, Darlene described an incentive travel event she was
currently planning, and that “I’ve been constantly connecting with the local
CVBs there to find out what their rules and regulations are, how they plan
to enforce them and how this will impact my client”. This is where EMPs
may diverge in innovation strategies as they work with different counties,
cities, States, and countries. However, as Greg emphasized, it is still
unknown what the legal ramifications will be for businesses that move for-
ward with hosting face-to-face events:
“What are the legal ramifications going to be for people who are hosting events and
how they set up? And if somebody does get sick, are they legally responsible? I think
a lot of that will help to iron out what can and can’t be done because, I mean, two
people at a six-foot Table 1 mean, that just doesn’t even make sense.”
These frustrations were shared across participants, demonstrating a need

for clear guidelines on contracts and clauses. Finally, EMPs connected and
communicated within and across event organizations. Many described
weekly virtual meetings to brainstorm new ideas and empower employees
to think outside-the-box. Within organizations, this presented itself as a
bottom-up approach in an all-hands-on deck fashion. As Courtney shared:
“Our teams have absolutely risen to the occasion. At [company name], we meet in a
couple of different teams throughout the week … Every single meeting that we’re
having, we’re throwing out ideas of why don’t we try this? There’s been a lot for just
our company-wide, but for meetings and incentives, we’re doing a supplier referral
program. We’re working with our gifting companies, our DMCs, our production
companies, some of our hoteliers just so they have a third party that they work with
for all of the services.”
In addition to processing information within organizations, EMPs also

shared that innovations were being strategized across organizations. As an
example, Tara, who owns a staffing agency, shared how her company cre-
ated a space for EMPs to come together as a community by providing edu-
cational webinars.
“For freelancers – it was like, well, what can we do? Because right now we have no
value proposition for freelancers because there isn’t work to give them and
everything was canceling. So, we said, well, we can provide community and we can
provide education. They don’t have a corporate community, right, or co-workers, so
we created it. A lot of times, freelancers are busy and they also don’t have education
opportunities like people do when they work for an organization. So, we said, okay,
let’s start this webinar series. So, we started a webinar series called ‘reskill and revive.
And that really helped to bring our community together, customers were invited,
anybody could join, but it was really meant for the freelancers as a space to connect
with each other.”
Both examples highlight the unique ways in which EMPs utilized their
organizations as well as their connections with other EMPs and EM
organizations to connect, innovate, and strategize. In many instances, par-

ticipants shared how the pandemic has brought the once highly fragmented
industry closer together.
Discussion and conclusion

Supporting Seraphin’s (2020) call to reassess how EM is studied, this paper
provides deep insights into the way innovation is actively and collectively
created and diffused in times of disasters. Adopting and implementing an
innovation is a complex and multifaceted process. Innovating during a
worldwide pandemic brings this process to a new level unique to the cir-
cumstances only a disaster can trigger. Findings from this study highlight
what Devine and Devine (2012) posited, that disaster is a catalyst for cre-
ativity and innovation. More specifically, the diffusion of innovations
revealed in this study were unique because they were triggered by COVID-
19 while also slowed by the ongoing and uncertain nature of the pandemic.
Additionally, in line with Vargo et al. (2020) results revealed a framework
that highlights multiple actors as innovators across the EM industry, rather
than specifying one power structure of innovation from the top-down.
Results not only demonstrate the innovation strategies among EMPs, but
more importantly illustrate the ongoing communication of information
over time through specific social systems. Divergent from the traditional
diffusion of an innovation which is oriented in a linear fashion (Rogers,
2003), this process is unique to the EM industry because the communica-
tions and social systems were shaping the innovations as a result of the
COVID-19 pandemic. In many ways, the innovation process described by
EMPs revealed ‘innovation by fire’ – fueled by a strengthened professional
community based on collaboration, empowerment, trust and resilience as
communicated through virtual platforms. Therefore, the findings serve as
considerations for EMPs to innovate the EM industry and thrive in a pan-
demic world.
Professional growth was revealed to be at the forefront of all innovations
described in the data. Commitment to growth opportunities allowed EMPs
to feel empowered to be at the forefront of innovative change. In the case
of content design, EMPs described numerous ways (high technology, multi-
sensory experiences, and engaging content) in which they were preparing
to make the transition to virtual and hybrid platforms smoothly. As the
way the 9/11 terrorist attacks have forever changed airport safety proce-
dures, COVID-19 will change the significance of virtual and hybrid event
productions for the long-term. Furthermore, health and safety innovation
strategies must navigate a fine balance between government mandated poli-
cies and client risk perceptions. However, the strengthened professional
community facilitated by communication and social systems will play an

important role in continuing to build resiliency and trust amongst EMPs
and with their clients.
Results highlighted that this level of communication was only made pos-
sible with virtual platforms as a method for interpersonal communication,
thereby making technology a conduit for fostering trust and resilience. In
line with Miles and Shipway (2020) recommendations, resilience will be
key to continued process of innovation development and diffusion over
time. Trust will also be a major element to continue the strength of resili-
ency amongst EMPs throughout the pandemic, and, post-pandemic.
Finally, time will be the greatest determinant of how the innovations will
evolve during the continuously changing climate. The element of time dis-
cussed in this study reveals that innovation is still at the beginning stages,
leaving much room for further inquiry. Moving forward, researchers may
ask – Which of these innovative ideas will remain in the short term versus
the long term? Will the newly formed environment of collaboration and
empowerment amongst EMPs outlive the pandemic? Only time, and future
research will be able to answer these questions. Although sparked by a glo-
bal pandemic, innovations birthed from this time will likely change the
event industry forever, and, hopefully, for the better.
Implications, limitations, and future research

The diffusion of innovations within and across EM organizations pose
implications for academics and practitioners in EM. The exploration of
innovations in EM is an important step in the continued understanding of
the impacts of COVID-19 on the hospitality industry. Findings from this
study provide a framework from which to build future theoretical and
practical possibilities. Theoretically, results from this study illustrated the
complex, non-linear nature of innovating through a disaster.
Traditionally, innovations are diffused over time and considered a linear
process involving knowledge, persuasion, decision making, implementation
and confirmation. Within this process, categories of adoption may include
a variety of types ranging from innovators to laggards. Divergent from
Rogers (2003) original DOI model, innovators were widespread across the
profession, without any reference to a specific process or category of deci-
sion making over time. Due to the unique nature of this study, the cyclical
nature of how innovations were diffused makes a theoretical contribution
extending the use of DOI into disaster management. However, it does
bring up the question, is DOI suitable for innovation development through
a disaster? If not – is there room for a new theoretical model that more
adequately addresses innovation catalyzed by disaster?
Participants of this study represented a wide array of EM sectors includ-

ing venues, third-party planners, incentive travel, corporate meeting plan-
ning, event design and production, destination management organizations,
suppliers, and staffing agencies. Therefore, communication of innovations
occurred within organizations and across EM sectors through partnerships
and collaborations. However, study findings may have been influenced by
all study participants being from the United States. For instance, as the
United States became more accustomed to using virtual platforms and
hybrid models to gather, participants leaned toward innovations on virtual
experiences and socially distanced meetings. However, various institutional
regulations governing other countries and organizations outside the United
States will inevitably affect the way innovation occurs and diffuses. For
instance, Taiwan eased its domestic MICE (meetings, incentives, conferenc-
ing, exhibitions) regulations on the back of an improving COVID-19 situ-
ation in July 2020 (Hui, 2020). This implies that as the world moves into a
post-pandemic world, global competition will intensify according to how
destinations and its infrastructures raise the importance of events and sup-
port EM platforms. In the United States, due to the nature of the pan-
demic, virtual platforms were utilized as an important tool for
communication across otherwise challenging barriers (geographic locations,
time, organization affiliation, etc.).
The significant use of webinars, social media and digital communication
software made the innovation process described by EMPs unique. This
finding has practical implications for EMPs as they continue to move for-
ward through this pandemic. Virtual platforms provide a globally accessible
method for EMPs to continue to communicate and stay connected even in
a post-pandemic world. In fact, they may serve as a platform to continue
the work toward a more streamlined event industry through collaboration
and partnerships internationally.
Planning for the future, limitations of this study should be considered.
Due to the qualitative nature of this study, results may not be generalized,
but researched further using a quantitative lens. Additionally, the organiza-
tions included in this study were all based in the United States, making
global references difficult. The rapidly changing environment of COVID-19
also limits the amount that any single research project may be considered
holistic. Therefore, consideration should be given to the development of a
more suitable framework for innovating in response to a disaster. More
specifically, in the realm of EM, future research should explore what was
learned from this disaster once it is behind us. Finally, once the EM indus-
try is fully back in operation, future research should explore which innova-
tions actually worked in the face of the pandemic vs. which fell short.
Research on other areas of the hospitality industry such as restaurants and
hotels are also warranted. Although the topic of this research is novel, it is
not without limitations. Due to the ongoing nature of this pandemic, and
the status of the EM industry at the time of data collection, results from
this study should be explored further once EMPs are fully engaged in EM
again. Specifically, following up with EMPs to understand exactly how they
operationalized the innovations discussed in this study would be beneficial.
The process of innovation in response to COVID-19 will be ongoing and
complex. Approaching the new normal with a dynamic mindset that
embraces change will be key to the survival and success of EM. This holis-
tic approach steeped in collaboration and empowerment will assist in the
development of the continued innovation of EM in a post-pandemic world.
References
Anderson, R. M., Heesterbeek, H., Klinkenberg, D., & Hollingsworth, T. D. (2020). How
will country-based mitigation measures influence the course of the COVID-19 epidemic?
The Lancet, 395(10228), 931–934. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30567-5
Baum, T., & Hai, N. T. T. (2020). Hospitality, tourism, human rights and the impact of
COVID-19. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 32(7),
2397–2407. doi:10.1108/IJCHM-03-2020-0242
Benjamin, S., Dillette, A., & Alderman, D. H. (2020). “We can’t return to normal”: Committing
to tourism equity in the post-pandemic age. Tourism Geographies, 22(3), 476–483.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2012). Thematic analysis. In Cooper, H. (Ed.), The handbook of
research methods in psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Castillo-Montoya, M. (2016). Preparing for interview research: The interview protocol
refinement framework. Qualitative Report, 21(5), 811–831.
Chien, G. C., & Law, R. (2003). The impact of the severe acute respiratory syndrome on
hotels: A case study of Hong Kong. International Journal of Hospitality Management,
22(3), 327–332. doi:10.1016/S0278-4319(03)00041-0
Chinazzi, M., Davis, J. T., Ajelli, M., Gioannini, C., Litvinova, M., Merler, S., … Sun, K.
(2020). The effect of travel restrictions on the spread of the 2019 novel coronavirus
(COVID-19) outbreak. Science (New York, N.Y.).), 368(6489), 395–400. doi:10.1126/sci-
ence.aba9757
Clarke, V., Braun, V., & Hayfield, N. (2015). Thematic analysis. In Smith, J.A. (Ed.),
Qualitative psychology: A practical guide to research methods (pp. 222–248). London:
SAGE Publications.
Coudriet, C. (2020). Coronavirus cancellation tracker: More than 83 million affected after
events cancelled or rescheduled. https://www.forbes.com/sites/cartercoudriet/2020/03/10/
covid-19-coronavirus-cancellation-tracker/?sh=9b8820d67ba9.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and
mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage publications.
Currie, G., & Spyridonidis, D. (2019). Sharing leadership for diffusion of innovation in pro-
fessionalized settings. Human Relations, 72(7), 1209–1233. doi:10.1177/
0018726718796175
Devine, A., & Devine, F. (2012). The challenge and opportunities for an event organiser
during an economic recession. International Journal of Event and Festival Management,
3(2), 122–136. doi:10.1108/17582951211229681
Draper, J., Young Thomas, L., & Fenich, G. G. (2018). Event management research over
the past 12 years: What are the current trends in research methods, data collection, data
analysis procedures, and event types? Journal of Convention & Event Tourism, 19(1),
3–24. doi:10.1080/15470148.2017.1404533
Faulkner, B. (2001). Towards a framework for tourism disaster management. Tourism
Management, 22(2), 135–147. doi:10.1016/S0261-5177(00)00048-0
Fedorowicz, J., & Gogan, J. L. (2010). Reinvention of interorganizational systems: A case
analysis of the diffusion of a bio-terror surveillance system. Information Systems
Frontiers : A Journal of Research and Innovation, 12(1), 81–95. doi:10.1007/s10796-009-
9167-y
Getz, D., & Page, S. J. (2016). Progress and prospects for event tourism research. Tourism
Management, 52, 593–631. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2015.03.007
Getz, D., & Page, S. J. (2020). Events studies. Theory, research and policy for planned events.
New York, NY: Routledge.
Goh, E., & Sigala, M. (2020). Integrating Information & Communication Technologies
(ICT) into classroom instruction: Teaching tips for hospitality educators from a diffusion
of innovation approach. Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism, 20(2), 156–165.
G€ossling, S., Scott, D., & Hall, C. M. (2021). Pandemics, tourism and global change: A
rapid assessment of COVID-19. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 29 (1), 1–20.
Groh, M. (2014). Strategic management in times of crisis. American Journal of Economics
and Business Administration, 6(2), 49–57.
Hui, L. X. (2020). Taiwan offers support to domestic MICE players as COVID-19 restric-
tions ease. In Meetings and Conventions Asia.
Jamal, T., & Budke, C. (2020). Tourism in a world with pandemics: Local-global responsi-
bility and action. Journal of Tourism Futures, 6(2), 181–188. doi:10.1108/JTF-02-2020-
0014
Lee, S., & Goldblatt, J. (2012). The current and future impacts of the 2007-2009 economic
recession on the festival and event industry. International Journal of Event and Festival
Management, 3(2), 137–148.
Ludvigsen, J. A. L., & Hayton, J. W. (2020). Toward COVID-19 secure events:
Considerations for organizing the safe resumption of major sporting events. Managing
Sport and Leisure, 1–11. doi:10.1080/23750472.2020.1782252.
Lundblad, J. P. (2003). A review and critique of Rogers’ diffusion of innovation theory as it
applies to organizations. Organization Development Journal, 21(4), 50.
Lyck, L., Long, P., & Grige, A. X. (2012). Tourism, festivals and cultural events in times of
crisis. Frederiksberg bogtrykkeri, Denmark: Copenhagen Business School.
Mason, P., Grabowski, P., & Du, W. (2005). Severe acute respiratory syndrome, tourism and the
media. International Journal of Tourism Research, 7(1), 11–21. doi:10.1002/jtr.519
Miles, L., & Shipway, R. (2020). Exploring the COVID-19 Pandemic as a Catalyst for
Stimulating Future Research Agendas for Managing Crises and Disasters at International
Sport Events. Event Management, 24(4), 537–552. doi:10.3727/152599519X15506259856688
MPI. (2020). Navigating the new normal: Tips of organizing meetings and events in a post-
COVID world. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rpN62dN5RGh1Rdurwsc-
7eDPRu7jTewOCRS5m-K3QXM/edit.
Oxford Economics (2018). Economic Significance of Meetings to the U.S. Economy Report
in Meetings Mean Business. https://www.ahla.com/sites/default/files/Economic%
20Signifcance%20of%20Meetings.pdf
Parsons, W. (1996). Crisis management. Career Development International, 1(5), 26–28.
doi:10.1108/13620439610130614
Pine, R., & McKercher, B. (2004). The impact of SARS on Hong Kong’s tourism industry.
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 16(2), 139–143. doi:10.
1108/09596110410520034
Raj, R., Walters, P., & Rashid, T. (2017). Events management: Principles and practice.
London, UK: Sage Publications.
Robertson, M., Swan, J., & Newell, S. (1996). The role of networks in the diffusion of
technological innovation. Journal of Management Studies, 33(3), 333–359. doi:10.1111/j.
1467-6486.1996.tb00805.x
Rogers, e. (1962). Diffusion of innovation (Vol. 1). New York, NYL: The Free Press A
Division of Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc.
Rogers, E. (2003). Diffussiion of innovation (Vol. 5). New-York, NY: Free Press. A division
Simons & Schuster Inc.
Rowen, I. (2020). The transformational festival as a subversive toolbox for a transformed
tourism: lessons from Burning Man for a COVID-19 world. Tourism Geographies, 1–8.
Seraphin, H. (2020). COVID-19: An opportunity to review existing grounded theories in
event studies. Journal of Convention & Event Tourism. doi:10.1080/15470148.2020.
1776657.
Smeral, E. (2010). Impacts of the world recession and economic crisis on tourism:
Forecasts and potential risks. Journal of Travel Research, 49(1), 31–38. doi:10.1177/
0047287509353192
Smith, S. L., & Kline, S. F. (2010). Crisis preparedness and meeting planners’ perceptions.
Journal of Convention & Event Tourism, 11(1), 62–78. doi:10.1080/15470141003613032
Sox, C. B., Kline, S. F., Crews, T. B., Strick, S. K., & Campbell, J. M. (2017). Virtual and
hybrid meetings: A mixed research synthesis of 2002–2012 research. Journal of
Hospitality & Tourism Research, 41(8), 945–984. doi:10.1177/1096348015584437
Stafford, G., Yu, L., & Armoo, A. K. (2002). Crisis management and recovery how
Washington, DC, hotels responded to terrorism. The Cornell Hotel and Restaurant
Administration Quarterly, 43(5), 27–40.
Tew, P. J., Lu, Z., Tolomiczenko, G., & Gellatly, J. (2008). SARS: Lessons in strategic plan-
ning for hoteliers and destination marketers. International Journal of Contemporary
Hospitality Management, 20(3), 332–346.
UNWTO. (2020). Impact assessment of the COVID-19 outbreak on International Tourism.
https://www.unwto.org/impact-assessment-of-the-covid-19-outbreak-on-international-
tourism.
Van de Ven, A. H., Polley, D. E., Garud, R., & Venkataraman, S. (1999). The innovation
journey. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Vargo, S. L., Akaka, M. A., & Wieland, H. (2020). Rethinking the process of diffusion in
innovation: A service-ecosystems and institutional perspective. Journal of Business
Research, 116, 526–534. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.01.038
WHO. (2020). Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. https://www.who.int/emergen-
cies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019?gclid=Cj0KCQiAzsz-BRCCARIsANotFgO-
qt0zwtewvA4J3SHXqtcjuZIUcFN8qJyajIfBK1fA1SR10xpKdVgaAsoYEALw_wcB.
Wolfe, R. A. (1994). Organizational innovation: Review, critique and suggested research
directions. Journal of Management Studies, 31(3), 405–431. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.1994.
tb00624.x
Yardley, L. (2015). Demonstrating validity in qualitative psychology (3rd ed.). London, UK:
Sage Publications.

Diffusing Innovation in Times of Disaste

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Diffusing Innovation in Times of Disaste

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Diffusing Innovation in Times of Disaste

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal of Convention & Event Tourism

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wcet20

Diffusing innovation in times of disasters:

Alana Dillette & Sandra Sun-Ah Ponting

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/15470148.2020.1860847

Published online: 27 Dec 2020.

Submit your article to this journal

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

Diffusing innovation in times of disasters:

these occurrences leaves long lasting impacts on individuals, families, busi-

hospitality, merchandizing, programing, sponsorship, and marketing. Also,

to this disaster is of great importance for understanding how EM will evolve

innovativeness. Organizational complexity considers the knowledge levels and

Table 1. Profile of interview participants.

adapt to hosting virtual and/or hybrid events. Those furloughed or laid-off

Analysis and coding

process. Secondly, the researchers coded the interview transcripts separately

Figure 1. Interconnected innovation web.

to virtual events to conduct business and signaled that content design,

The importance of training the speakers was echoed by Callie, an in-

Numerous participants emphasized the importance of looking at content

businesses to coach speakers, providing high-technology platforms, and

To counterbalance the lack of face-to-face interaction, EM companies are

Similar thoughts were shared by other participants, however, some

Blake further predicted that companies will pre-condition their events

be located throughout the event space. In line with protecting attendees’

Although the majority of participants understood that these creative

Furthermore, many participants worried that innovative health and safety

Smaller companies had to consult legal partners as they “never even

(Greg). The unforeseen pandemic was forcing EMPs to train themselves

As Maya further stated “I mean, everybody in our industry, it’s so inter-

Participants explained that no one told them to communicate the innov-

The final component of the time element of DOI is rate of adoption,

With all the uncertainty brought on by the pandemic, many EMPs

In addition to professional associations, different government agencies

authorities impacted business operations differently across geographical

These frustrations were shared across participants, demonstrating a need

In addition to processing information within organizations, EMPs also

organizations to connect, innovate, and strategize. In many instances, par-

Discussion and conclusion

community facilitated by communication and social systems will play an

Implications, limitations, and future research

Participants of this study represented a wide array of EM sectors includ-

You might also like