One Size Doesn’t Fit all: Choosing the Right Path for Your Meetings and Events Strategy.

When organizations decide to professionalize their Meetings and Events (M&E) strategy, the first big question is often: “How should we resource it?” The truth is, there is no universal model. What works brilliantly for one company can fail for another, not because the solution is flawed, but because it isn’t the right fit.

Today’s most common operating-model options:

• Insourced: Building an internal team that owns strategy and execution.

• Outsourced to a local M&E provider: Beneficial for organizations with strong activity in a single market, where local knowledge is a real advantage.

• Partnership with a global TMC (Travel Management Company): Offering scale, consistency, and integrated travel/event management across multiple regions.

• Partnership with a global Meetings and Events provider: Providing end-to-end event strategy and delivery across markets with centralized standards and scalable resourcing.

• Partnership with a global communications agency (experiential arm): Delivering brand-led experiential programs integrated with creative, content, and media.

• Self-serve technology: Empowering internal teams to manage programs directly, often with strong reporting and visibility but requiring governance and discipline to succeed.

• Technology managed by a local or global TMC/M&E provider: Blending the power of digital tools with external expertise and operational support.

Each of these models has merit. The “best” choice depends on your program goals, geographic footprint, and company culture. A company prioritizing speed to market might favor outsourcing. One focused on control and brand experience may prefer an insourced model. Organizations with a complex global presence may find that a hybrid approach balances consistency with local relevance.

What really drives the decision:

• Control vs. agility: How much direct ownership do you need over standards, brand, and approvals, versus speed and flexibility?

• Complexity and risk profile: How varied are your event types, spend patterns, regions, and stakeholder expectations?

• Capability and capacity: Do you have (or want to build) the talent, leadership, and governance to run this in-house?

• Culture and change readiness: Will teams adopt new ways of working, or will a lighter-touch model land better?

• Data and visibility needs: How critical are consolidated reporting, compliance, and auditability to your leadership?

The point isn’t to chase a trend; it’s to design an operating model that mirrors how your company actually works.

Common pitfalls to avoid:

• Assuming there’s a single “right” answer: Context matters more than the category.

• Starting with tools, not outcomes: Technology supports the model; it shouldn’t define it.

• Underestimating adoption: Even the smartest design fails without clear roles, simple processes, and sponsorship.

What success looks like:

The most successful Meetings and Events strategies are not defined by whether they are insourced or outsourced, but by how deliberately the operating model has been chosen and aligned with the company’s DNA, and refreshed as the business evolves.

If your organization is exploring its options, we’d be glad to share perspectives on how to assess the fit and chart a course that balances ambition with practicality - without overcomplicating what should feel straightforward for your teams.