Follow 

Share

Archived reviews are more than 24 months old, and aren't counted towards the average five star ratings or percent recommended.

Affordable option with worthwhile add-ons

Attendee Experience
4
Average: 4 (1 vote)
How satisfied are your attendees with the platform?
Admin Experience
5
Average: 5 (1 vote)
How satisfied are your administrators with the platform?
Customer Service
5
Average: 5 (1 vote)
To what extent are your customer service experiences timely, helpful, and resolved to your satisfaction? To what extent do you consider your vendor to be a true partner in your organization’s success?
Stability & Reliability
5
Average: 5 (1 vote)
How satisfied are you with the platform's uptime and technical performance?
Integrations
3
Average: 3 (1 vote)
How satisfied are you with the platform's ability to integrate with other technologies?
Exhibit Hall
3
Average: 3 (1 vote)
How satisfied are you with the functionality for a virtual exhibit hall?
Sponsor Recognition
5
Average: 5 (1 vote)
How satisfied are you with the functionality for recognizing sponsors?
Attendee Interaction
4
Average: 4 (1 vote)
How satisfied are you with the functionality for supporting attendee-to-attendee interaction and communication?
Reporting and Analytics
5
Average: 5 (1 vote)
How satisfied are you with your ability to access platform data in useful ways?
Overall Rating
4
Average: 4 (1 vote)
What is your overall rating of this platform?
Job Role: 
Vice president
Organization Type: 
Charitable or philanthropic organization
Number of Attendees at Largest Conference: 
200 to 499
Geographic Focus: 
National
Highest Number of Sponsors: 
10 to 29
Highest Number of Exhibitors: 
1 to 49
Highest Number of Sessions: 
30 to 59
Highest Number of Concurrent Sessions: 
5 to 9

We used Whova for a three day conference held consecutively across the three days. Users found it intuitive to use and the ability to build your own agenda simplified the experience for those who used it. Presenters liked the ability to update their profile and session materials on their own time frame. The data report at the end gave sponsors solid metrics on how many impressions they received which was good for engagement. Users had access to the material for a month following the conference which was a customizable timeline. It worked flawlessly throughout the conference. Some of the features native to the system like photo contests were used by our team to increase engagement and we had fun with it.

The downsides: Zoom integrates with Whova but some of the features don't work as well in the integration. Presenters found it easier to access the session straight through Zoom and not rely on the integration through the Whova platform, though participants accessed the session through Whova. Since both Whova and Zoom have chat features for each session, our team had to decide where to direct people to use the chat (we opted for zoom). Having the ability to chat on Whova and on Zoom during a session was more monitoring than the producers for the session wanted to engage. We did a lot of testing with the platform before we launched the conference.

The vendor space was okay. It's mostly a logo with a description and the ability to send the vendor a message. Not as much interaction or live-person engagement as we might have liked. But, the metrics in the final report showed the vendors how many visits to the booth they had, and we were pleased at the count.

Â