What’s a fam trip really worth? Why the model needs reform

At the last CMW Lunch Club, attendees from DMCs, destinations and agencies met to discuss a pressing industry issue: no-shows on fam trips. Theo Reilly reports.

There’s a line that’s all-too familiar in the ‘fam trip’ world: “A proposal just came in – I’m going to have to drop out. Sorry!” At the most recent CMW Lunch Club, this issue dominated.

If companies send their representatives on a training programme – whether it’s a course on Adobe, Microsoft Excel or candle-making – they pay for the privilege. Education costs the educator. Why, then, does the destination community offer free trips?

We’ve now arrived at a point where so many free invitations are sent that some representatives don’t even show up – or if they do, they might be unqualified, or worse, uninterested.

No-shows and no standards

Mercedes Conde-Nieto, director of sales at Destination Management Connections, explains: “We see it as an investment and agencies should too. Being free has bred a sense of entitlement, and the UK market is highly spoilt with some agencies saying they receive up to 40 invitations a month to lunches, dinners and hotel visits in the UK and internationally.

“They pick and choose where they go. Some will accept and then cancel in favour of something more ‘appealing’. Some will cancel or no-show and not give it a moment’s thought.”

Chris Jordan of Destination Management Connections says: “Because invitations and places on these trips are free, people are lured into a false sense that ‘it’s okay if we don’t attend.’ The impact that has on suppliers who’ve invested time and budget is massive.”

Cathy Joyce, sales director at The DMC Advantage and past president of MPI UK & Ireland, said: “These trips are fundamentally professional development tools aimed at deepening relationships and enhancing knowledge about our destinations. It’s imperative that we foster a mutual commitment between suppliers and agencies, creating a framework where both parties invest. Without a fee or deposit, invitees will keep doing what they’ve been doing. The relationship between agency and supplier will never be a true partnership until both parties are financially invested.

The problem with the term ‘fam trip’

Sales director at destinations UNLIMITED and event speaker Roger Bradley said that one of the biggest problems is the language we use. Words like complimentary, free and hosted give the impression of a gift given – ‘on the house’ – by the supplier.

He says: “The perception of business development trips as ‘freebies’ or ‘complimentary holidays’ is an outdated mindset — especially when compared to how we approach other forms of professional development in the MICE industry.”

Chris Jordan echoes this idea: “Terms like free and complimentary create a culture of choice, where people feel they can pick and choose right up to the last minute. That leads to late dropouts, disengagement and missed opportunities for everyone involved.”

Pádraic Gilligan, marketing director at SITE, believes terms like complimentary “have distorted the perceived value of fam trips”. “These are not leisure junkets,” he says. “They are professional development tools and destination audits.”

One comment that was repeatedly thrown around was that “we don’t want to paint a picture of doom and gloom”. The industry wants to stress the positives of establishing a more balanced partnership.

So, what’s the solution?

Roger Bradley argues that agencies “need to build contribution fees into annual plans”. This, he claims, will “allow event professionals to attend high-quality BDTs with shared investment”.

He continues: “Not only does this help offset the cost for DMCs and destinations, but it also increases buy-in and accountability from attendees.”

Agencies were a little thin on the ground at the Lunch Club discussion – leading some to think that much more work is needed to bring them on board.

Lessons from Europe

Some of the attendees look across the Channel for solutions. While in the UK agencies appear flooded with fam trip invitations, European counterparts are far less trigger-happy.

Chris Jordan says: “European agencies seem to understand what a BDT can bring in terms of internal knowledge and client outcomes. That mindset feels more ingrained. They also understand how costly these trips are to put on – especially when outbound travel is harder and more expensive from their side.”

Mercedes Conde-Nieto adds: “We need to make it the norm.”

SITE, however, says that importing an external model isn’t necessarily the answer. CEO Annette Gregg explains: “Some models in mainland Europe, where fees are charged and invite lists are tighter, could offer valuable lessons. However, harmonisation isn’t simple. Cultural, commercial and regulatory differences make it complex.”

How do we set a standard?

At the Lunch Club, most were in agreement that these were good ideas, based on good principles. If there was one major trepidation, though, it was about how to set this standard industry-wide. What happens if a competitor undercuts the rest by not charging this fee? Could some DMCs and destinations actually lose business?

SITE has a suggestion. “We believe a cross-sector task force – comprising DMCs, DMOs, agencies and event planners – should be convened to define best practices and propose scalable frameworks for fees, vetting and accountability,” says Annette Gregg. “Without collective alignment, the model will remain fragmented and open to abuse.”

Gregg continues: “The idea of co-creating a shared code of practice, potentially under the guidance of global industry bodies like EIC, JMIC, SITE, MPI, ICCA, PCMA, IAPCO or Destinations International, is one that we would wholeheartedly support.”

Speakers at the Lunch Club agreed that the conversation needs to go beyond agencies and DMCs. “We need to bring the big hotel partners on board,” says Conde-Nieto. “Accor, Melia – that level. You can’t reset expectations unless the major players are involved in the conversation.”

A positive message

The message, it was agreed, can’t be that the sky is falling. “This isn’t about punishing anyone,” says Pádraic Gilligan. “It’s about ensuring that incentive travel continues to be a reciprocal and respectful business practice.”

Chris Jordan adds: “We don’t see these trips as supplier handouts. We see them as partnerships. If a trip helps someone win a pitch or opens the door to a new destination, that has real value. A small contribution fee is a way of recognising that – and a sign that we’re all in this together.”

Mercedes Conde-Nieto told CMW that her company once trialled a similar system. “We used to say what the trip would cost a client, and what it was costing us to put on. But we were the only company doing it, so we stopped. But maybe we shouldn’t have.”

Perhaps, as an industry, that’s where we should begin.