# Trade Show Lead Kit — Post-Show Review Sheet

> The show is loud; the review is where the money is found. Use with `trade-show-lead-kit-guide.md`. The evening triage is the compressed version; this sheet is the full one, run within a week of the last handshake.

## How to run this review

- Within five working days, before the show becomes "last time we went". Bring the triage list and the three numbers: scans, A-count, meetings booked.
- Review the loop, not the luck: which phase leaked — capture, grading, or speed?
- One page, three columns: what leaked, what fixed it, who owns the fix before the next show.

## Read the four leaks

1. **Scans far below conversations** — the loop was not one scan deep. People hesitated at the form, or the Wi-Fi died, or the stand was invisible from the aisle. Each cause has a different fix; guessing wastes the show.
2. **A-count suspiciously high** — grading inflation. Either the written definition of A is mushy, or the collector triaged alone. Both are huddle problems, not people problems.
3. **A's that never got called** — the 48-hour rule broke somewhere between intention and calendar. Find the exact hour it broke; that is the review's real output.
4. **Meetings that went cold after booking** — capture was fine, follow-through was generic. The tiered messages said the same thing to everyone; the A-list deserved a sentence with their own words in it.

## The six review questions

1. **The number under the number.** What was the scan-to-conversation ratio, and what made people walk past the stand? → Targets: capture design; "the aisle didn't stop" is a layout fact, not a mood.
2. **The grading audit.** Re-read ten B's: which one was secretly an A, and what does that say about the written definition? → Targets: triage calibration; the definition improves one sentence at a time.
3. **The speed line.** For the three A's that converted, how many hours until first contact? For the ones that didn't? → Targets: the 48-hour rule's real shape; the gap between the two groups is the entire business case.
4. **The script test.** Which of the three qualifying questions got skipped most — and did the skipped leads grade worse? → Targets: question design; the third question exists for a reason.
5. **The money check.** What did this show cost, and what would the same money buy if half went into the follow-up week instead of the booth? → Targets: budget honesty; exhibitors over-invest in furniture and under-invest in phone calls.
6. **The next-show change.** Name one change to the loop for the next event, with an owner and a date. → Targets: durability; a review that changes nothing is a tour of regrets.

## Failure modes of the review

| Failure mode | Why it happens | The rescue |
|---|---|---|
| The blame tour | Leads died, someone must be wrong | Review the loop, not the humans; the bowl was the problem, not the booth staff |
| Deck theater | A beautiful report nobody acts on | The review ends with one owned change, not a slide count |
| The lost spreadsheet | Triage data lives in one person's inbox | The lead list lives in one place or the loop starts over next show |
| Six-month amnesia | The fix is decided and forgotten by the next event | The owned change has a date before the review meeting ends |

## What this is not

This is not a marketing attribution study, and one show is not a trend — it is a five-day habit that keeps the lead furnace from leaking into next quarter. The three numbers tell you where the loop broke; this sheet makes sure somebody owns the welder.