Assess your internal and external feedback
IR Magazine’s Investor Events report shows that, like IROs in the survey and the IROs in this report, investors favor in-person events over virtual.
Overall satisfaction rates for in-person events are lower among investors than among IR professionals, however – and in-person investor days come last for satisfaction after in-person site visits, investor conferences and roadshows.
So how do our IROs assess the effect of their investor day efforts? Each IR professional quoted here runs a post-event survey of some sort, either formally as a third-party perception study or through informal calls they might make themselves – or both.
‘Ultimately, the stock price and the analyst’s report are also a reflection of the event,’ explains Tractor Supply’s Mary Winn Pilkington. ‘But I do think a formal survey is beneficial.’
Some of the feedback that has come out of the surveying process Tractor Supply has responded to includes more time for Q&A and more time for casual management interactions, she adds.
What about where that feedback goes? At StarHub, Amelia Lee says the firm employs a third party to run an in-depth perception study that takes a couple of months to complete.
‘But from there we get really good feedback on the effectiveness of our communication strategy and – specifically – what people liked about the investor day format, what they didn’t like about it, how they felt the strategies were communicated by management members and whether the level of disclosure was sufficient,’ she points out.
‘That perception report goes right up to the board level, as well as to senior management. This is a highly official, formal way of providing the market’s feedback to both the board and the management team.’
Ultimately, the stock price and the analyst’s report are also a reflection of the event
