Staff evaluation of attendance at Balmoral Show

7. What was your Branch's/Directorate's/Group's aim for attending Balmoral Show? Please specify the organisation level, e.g. Branch/Directorate/Group, to which your aim refers. A response is not needed for each level if not known.

(Required)

8. How does your Branch/Directorate evaluate how effective your attendance at the Show has been in achieving that aim?

(Required) We use quantitative and qualitative methods to measure effectiveness such as reviewing feedback from visitors and setting targets to increase traffic to specific internet content, or increasing applications to schemes and measure this before and after the show to determine success. We only use quantitative methods to measure effectiveness such as reviewing feedback from visitors. We only use qualitative methods to measure effectiveness such as setting targets to increase traffic to specific internet content, or increasing applications to schemes and measure this before and after the show to determine success. We do not evaluate effectiveness.

Where applicable, detail the evaluation methods used and the results. Please include a link to the relevant CM document. (Required)

9. Do your Branch/Directorate utilise feedback from your interactions with visitors to improve your other communication activities?

Yes No

If yes, outline how you use the feedback. (Required)

10. Do you consider staffing the stand is useful in helping you engage with a wide variety of audiences and meet your communication goal?

(Required) Yes No

Provide a reason(s) for your answer. (Required)

11. For those staffing the stand outside of normal business hours (after 5pm) outline the level of interaction you had with visitors?

(Required) Very little footfall in the area and very little interaction; less than 10 visitors. Little footfall in the area and little interaction; less than 20 visitors. Reasonable footfall in the area but little interaction; less than 20 visitors. Reasonable footfall in the area with reasonable interaction; more than 30 visitors. Good footfall in the area and reasonable interaction; more than 30 visitors. Good footfall in the area and good interaction; more than 40 visitors. I did not staff the stand outside of normal business hours.

12. What was your overall impression of your exhibit?

(Required) The exhibit had a relevant message, which was engaging and drew in visitors who sought additional information. The exhibit's messaging was satisfactory, the graphics complemented the message and there was some interaction from visitors. The exhibit's messaging was satisfactory but the graphics and message did not engage visitors and there was limited interaction. The exhibit's messaging was not relevant to any current DAERA communication goals.

14. What, if anything, could have improved your exhibit?

(Required) No improvements needed. The exhibit could be improved by more interactivity. The exhibit could be improved by having more child friendly elements. The exhibit could be improved by having supporting marketing materials such as leaflets. The exhibit could be improved by having merchandise such as pens.

15. Do you think it is more beneficial to have a single, larger and more expensive Government Department display or would a smaller, less expensive presence for each department provide better interaction?

(Required) The current arrangement of a single, bigger and more expensive display is sufficiently effective. A smaller, less expensive and department specific display, particularly if it could be located in an area of high footfall, would be more effective.

Provide a reason(s) for your selection. (Required)

16. Do you have any other recommendations or comments which may aid future events or have any other comments regarding the Northern Ireland Departments exhibition?

Any other comments (Required)

Introduction