Advertisement

Value Proposition of the Radiology Professional Society Meeting

Published:January 02, 2023DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2022.11.031
      What is the value proposition of a radiology professional society meeting? The answer to this question may be different depending on which radiologist you ask and which meeting you are asking about. The Oxford English Languages online dictionary defines “value proposition” as “an innovation, service, or feature intended to make a company or product attractive to customers”( ). From a marketing standpoint, the ideal value proposition for an organization would be one that supplies features that the target customers wanted, that the index organization excels at delivering, and that the index organization's competition could not provide. From a consumer perspective, the business sector has defined 30 different elements of value that impact purchasing (Table 1) (
      • Almquist E.
      • Senior J.
      • Bloch N.
      The Elements of Value Measuring-and delivering-what consumers really want.
      ). Review of these established elements of consumer value suggests that many play a role in radiologists’ decisions to attend professional society meetings.
      Table 1– Consumer Value Categories and Elements – HBR/Bain, 20162
      Functional Saves Time
      Simplifies
      Makes money
      Reduces risk
      Organizes
      Integrates
      Connects
      Reduces effort
      Avoids hassles
      Reduces costs
      Quality
      Variety
      Sensory appeal
      Informs
      Emotional Reduces anxiety
      Rewards me
      Nostalgia
      Design/aesthetics
      Badge value
      Wellness
      Therapeutic value
      Fun/entertainment
      Attractiveness
      Provides access
      Life changing Provides hope
      Self actualization
      Motivation
      Heirloom
      Affiliation/belonging
      Social impact Self-transcendance

      Key Words

      Abbreviations:

      ACR (American College of Radiology), ARRS (American Roentgen Ray Society), AUR (Association of University Radiologists), CME (continuing medical education), ISMRM (International society of magnetic resonance in medicine), LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transsexual, queer), MRI (magnetic resonance imaging), PACS (picture archiving communication system), RSNA (radiologic society of North America), SCARD (society of chairs of academic radiology departments), SSR (society of skeletal radiology)
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Academic Radiology
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

      1. O. E. Dictionary, ed.Oxford English Language Dictionary available at:https://www.google.com/search?q=value+proposition+definition&oq=value+pro&aqs=chrome.1.69i57j69i59l2j0i131i433i512l2j69i60l3.2173j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8. Accessed November 4, 2022.

        • Almquist E.
        • Senior J.
        • Bloch N.
        The Elements of Value Measuring-and delivering-what consumers really want.
        (vol. September, ed)Harvard Business Review. Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation, 2016: 46-53
      2. M. Sandborn, “Why radiologists should attend the annual meeting,” vol. 3; Issue 4, ed. Radiology, 1924, pp. 348-349.

      3. M. Edwards and L. Sirtonski, The House of Radiology, ACR Bulletin, November 2020. Available at:https://www.acr.org/Practice-Management-Quality-Informatics/ACR-Bulletin/Articles/November-2020/The-House-of-Radiology. Accessed November 4, 2022.

        • Dodd G.D.
        The radiology conglomerate: optimizing the structure and function of the 50-plus radiology organizations–a summary of the 2010 Intersociety Conference.
        J Am Coll Radiol. Aug 2011; 8 (in eng): 539-542https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2011.03.006
        • Dodd G.D.
        Optimizing the structure and function of the 50-plus radiology organizations, part 2: a unified strategic plan-a summary of the 2011 intersociety conference.
        J Am Coll Radiol. 2012; 9 (in eng): 325-328https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2012.01.007
        • Cornell J.
        • Taj A.
        • Sivinski J.
        • et al.
        Integration of virtual platforms for enhanced conference experience: data-based evidence from the society of interdisciplinary placebo studies 2021 conference, (in eng).
        Front Commun (Lausanne). 2022; 7https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2022.857661
      4. B.A. Nelson, K. Lapen, O. Schultz, et al., The radiation oncology education collaborative study group 2020 spring symposium: is virtual the new reality?, (in eng), Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 110 (2), 2021, 315–321, doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2020.12.026, 06 01.

      5. C.U. Lehmann, K. Fultz Hollis, C. Petersen, et al., Selecting venues for AMIA events and conferences: guiding ethical principles, (in eng), J Am Med Inform Assoc, 29 (8), 2022, 1319–1322, doi:10.1093/jamia/ocac073, 07 12.

      6. B.J. Slater, M.V. Kashyap, C.M. Calkins, et al., Global dissemination of knowledge through virtual platforms: reflections and recommendations from APSA/IPEG, (in eng), J Pediatr Surg, 57 (9), Sep 2022, 124–129, doi:10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2022.01.006.

        • Bassett M.
        Since 2011, the rapidly growing Virtual Meeting has emerged as model of success. RSNA News, 2019
      7. https://abdominalradiology.site-ym.com/general/custom.asp?page=MeetingsArchive (accessed November 2, 2022).

        • Ball J.
        • Elzebroek N.
        • Pozniak E.
        Lupus academy: keeping education live, virtually.
        J Eur CME. 2021; 10 (in eng)2014041https://doi.org/10.1080/21614083.2021.2014041
        • Bhargava S.
        • Negbenebor N.
        • Sadoughifar R.
        • Ahmad S.
        • Kroumpouzos G.
        Virtual conferences and e-learning in dermatology during COVID-19 pandemic: results of a web-based, global survey.
        Clin Dermatol. 2021; 39 (in eng) (May-Jun 2021): 461-466https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clindermatol.2021.06.002
      8. D.K. Devaraj, S. Barua, N.K. Nair, et al., Hybrid conferences in the post-COVID-19 era: time yet for a paradigm shift for medical associations, (in eng), J Cutan Aesthet Surg, 15 (1), 2022, 82–85, doi:10.4103/JCAS.JCAS_207_21, Jan-Mar 2022.

        • Forrest A.R.R.
        • Repetto G.M.
        • Reichardt J.K.V.
        Human genetics and genomics meetings going virtual: practical lessons learned from two international meetings in early 2020.
        Hum Genomics. 2020; 14 (in eng): 27https://doi.org/10.1186/s40246-020-00275-3
        • Klijanienko J.
        • Cochand-Priollet B.
        • Król-Cieciorowska W.
        • Jeleń M.
        • Vrdoljak-Mozetič D.
        Organization of the 43rd European congress of cytology in the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic period: a report.
        Cancer Cytopathol. 2022; 130 (in eng): 488-490https://doi.org/10.1002/cncy.22578
      9. D. Ostler, J. Steger, L. Bernhard, et al., "Hybrid" scientific conference: lessons learned from the digital annual meeting of the CARS international conference during the Covid-19 pandemic, (in eng), Innov Surg Sci, 6 (3), 2022, 115–123, doi:10.1515/iss-2021-0012, Jan 17.

        • Hameed B.Z.
        • Tanidir Y.
        • Naik N.
        • et al.
        Will “Hybrid” meetings replace face-to-face meetings post COVID-19 era? Perceptions and views from the urological community, (in eng).
        Urology. 2021; 156: 52-57https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2021.02.001, 10
        • Patel M.H.
        • Akhtar J.
        • Taqvi S.M.R.H.
        • Batool T.
        Analysis of challenges faced and the scientific content of a hybrid pediatric surgical conference arranged during the COVID-19 pandemic.
        Ann Pediatr Surg. 2021; 17 (in eng): 67https://doi.org/10.1186/s43159-021-00135-2
        • Sanberg P.
        • Morrison D.C.
        • Bjugstad K.
        ASNTR's Venture into a Hybrid Conference: Lessons Learned During the COVID-19 Pandemic.
        Cell Transplant. 2021; 30 (in eng) (Jan-Dec 2021)https://doi.org/10.1177/09636897211053872
      10. J.G. Richter, G. Chehab, J. Knitza, et al., [Annual meeting of the German society for rheumatology going virtual-successfully defying the pandemic], (in ger), Z Rheumatol, 80 (5), Jun 2021, 399–407, doi:10.1007/s00393-021-00997-2.

        • Weiniger C.F.
        • Matot I.
        Craving togetherness: planning and replanning a national society hybrid conference during the COVID-19 pandemic.
        Br J Anaesth. 2021; 126 (in eng) (03): e116-e118https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bja.2020.11.029
        • West C.E.
        • Hunter D.G.
        Carbon footprint of the 2021 and 2022 AAPOS annual meetings.
        J AAPOS. Sep 09 2022; (in eng)https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaapos.2022.06.002
        • Ellis R.
        • Goodacre T.
        • Mortensen N.
        • Oeppen R.S.
        • Brennan P.A.
        Application of human factors at hybrid meetings: facilitating productivity and inclusivity.
        Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2022; 60 (in eng): 740-745https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjoms.2021.12.055
        • Kim K.-J.
        • Kim S.R.
        • Lee J.
        • Moon J.-Y.
        • Lee S.-H.
        • Shin S.J.
        Virtual conference participant's perceptions of its effectiveness and future projections.
        BMC Medical Education. 2021; 22: 1-7
        • Woolston C.
        Scientific conferences mull relocating over abortion access.
        Nature. Jul 08 2022; (in eng)https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-022-01884-9
        • Mainiero M.B.
        • Omary R.A.
        • Norbash A.M.
        Moving a national medical meeting in response to California's anti-lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender discrimination travel ban.
        J Am Coll Radiol. Jul 2019; 16 (in eng): 1006-1008https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2019.01.024
      11. "RSNA News," ed, June 2014, p. 21.

      12. M.W. Johnson, C.M. Christensen, and H. Kagermann. Harvard Business Review. (December 2008). Reinventing Your Business Model.

      13. J.C. Anderson, J.A. Narus, and W. van Rossum. Harvard Business Review. (2006.). Customer Value Propositions in Business Markets.

        • Standaert W.
        • Muylle S.
        • Basu A.
        Business meetings in a postpandemic world: when and how to meet virtually.
        Bus Horiz. 2022; 65 (in eng) (May-Jun 2022): 267-275https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2021.02.047