A 27Names study heralds the era of the Return on Relationships

Share news
Listen
Is this a new era? “For years, this industry chased the same metrics: reach, attendance, awareness, and pipeline contribution… But the 2026 European Experience Index reveals a massive wake-up call: relationships have become the most critical asset for long-term success”, reminds Ralf Specht, Chairman, 27Names. Events are less a communication tool and more a tool to build trust, advocacy, and long-term engagement. Return on Relationship (ROR) has exploded as a defining strategic priority, jumping from 16% to 58%, according to this study. But let’s explore the key results and conclusions.
- The ROR revolution. Relationships, trust and advocacy are new key indicators of success for companies. In this survey, client demand for Return on Relationship metrics surged by 42 points, jumping from 16% to 58% in a single year, quite a striking change. In a hyper digital and saturated world, it looks like the human factor gains more value than ever. The question is how to measure this? Only 19% or clients and 11% of agencies have a method to measure it. The problem is this adaptation in measurement: while ROR is increasingly recognised, companies still use legacy reporting, counting clicks, traffic, or immediate sales conversions. “We are trying to prove emotional connection using quantitative tools designed for a different era of marketing”, the report says: “If relationships are our most valuable asset, we must stop measuring activities and start measuring sentiment”.
- … away from the old, sacred funnel. This beautiful theory of the funnel could be less relevant, as companies move away from linear conversion, and shift their focus to engagement (up to 65%), while traditional pipeline impact collapses (down to 26%). The idea that we gently push any potential client methodically down a funnel towards purchasing (what an ugly concept, by the way) could be substituted by a more relationship-based measurement.
- Physical Consolidation. This is another conclusion but it looks obvious six years after covid. The report identifies that despite cost pressures, client preference for face-to-face activations surged from 50% to 78%, replacing the digital web conference format (down to 10%).
- The budget challenge and constant optimisation. This has been a key dimension of our industry since the inflation wave: rising costs and tighter budgets mean every investment has to be scrutinised for impact. The primary operational challenge clients report is not price increases in hospitality (79%, when it was a worry for only 30% of clients last year), venues (76%), and travel (53%). Prices have gone up; budgets not so fast. And with hotel prices foreseen to increase next year, this challenge should not go away soon. As a result, “inflationary pressures and economic anxiety are forcing executives to audit investments like never before”. The result is challenging: You have to “create deeper engagement and stronger outcomes, without bigger budgets”.
- … especially in Southern Europe. The report analyses that Southern Europe stands out, sadly, for its budget challenges. But also for its human focus which could be an opportunity today: “Brands are pushing back against the algorithmic trend by doubling down on complex sensory environments and immersive human formats, backed by 60% of regional clients who report their audiences demand unscripted and immersive experiences”.
- Growth prospects drop. 61% of agencies forecast growth (a clear drop from 73% last year) and this figure for clients dropped from 40% to 34%. This is no crisis, but clearly the huge expansion of our industry could be reaching a plateau. Another notion which does not help, but to which our industry has always been very resilient, is the geopolitical risk and market volatility: they are seen as the biggest external fear by 78% of agencies and 83% of clients.
- The AI value shift. AI is now a key operational baseline, with 98% of agencies using it for creativity and 68% relying on AI for internal workflow speed. But the new challenge is coming: deploying AI to drive personalisation and audience engagement. The agencies and brands that will win will be those that deploy AI to upgrade the participant experience: connect the right people, surface the right content, and tailor each experience. But the report also points to the renewed importance of human talent: “when everyone has the same algorithm, differentiation comes from cultural nuance, emotional intelligence, strategic empathy, and weird, brilliant, unprompted creativity”.
- The sustainability funding gap. In a nutshell, companies want more sustainable events, but don’t pay for them. Half of agencies (47%) report that fewer than a quarter of their clients accept higher costs for sustainable events, and that 20% flatly refuse to pay green premiums at all: “the industry’s sustainability ambitions are misaligned with its procurement reality” is the report’s sad message.
- Personalisation and relevance over polish. Forget your “wow!” setup: demand for highly polished corporate stages dropped in half to just 13%. Audiences don’t care if an event is highly “polished”; they want personalisation (59%), narrowly surpassing broad purpose-driven experiences (57%). The days of ‘one-size fits all’ are gone. So what should agencies do? 27Names advocates them to become experts in “choice arquitecture”. Audiences no longer come to events simply to consume content: they come to participate, connect, and contribute. The most valuable experiences are built around conversations, unscripted dialogue, peer-to-peer exchange, and authentic interactions.
- Small events still rock. Driven by rising costs, organisations rethink how they create value. Rather than big events, many look to deliver impact through more focused, intentional experiences. Quality over quantity, as the question is not “How many people can we bring into the room?” but “How much value can we create for the people who matter most?”
- Pitches: less frequent internationally? This headache of agencies seems to be less systematic internationally than nationally: across Europe, 42% of clients’ events are “mostly pitched”, while 39% of their work is “mostly commissioned” (requested without a pitch). The report stresses the irony that “While many organisations say they want the stability and value of long-term partnerships, procurement models continue to reward short-term flexibility. Agencies are expected to build lasting relationships while repeatedly starting from scratch.”
A personal note
I have always marvelled at how we use the “return on” wrongly. It is based on the notion of “return on investment”, a key financial metrics, which means “what do I get” divided by “what do I invest”. And in our industry, the problem is not in defining “return on WHAT”, what we invest. This second part (what we invest) is very easy: the money and time involved. The challenge is to identify the elusive “return”, the first part of the equation, or “what do I get, what results do I achieve”. And since it is devilishly hard to define what this return is, rather than clarify this return, we choose to change the other part of the equation to another notion, much harder to measure than the investment. That’s how we have invented return on “objectives”, return on “emotions”, return on “experience”, and now return on”relationships”. We have an equation in which one of the two parts is difficult to define and we try to solve that by making the other one, the “clear” one, even more confusing. We end up with an equation where nothing is clear but still looks like an equation, still gives and impression of science.
This is probably a very personal opinion which few people care about but if we aim to be a scientific, business savvy industry, maybe terms are important?






