Not that long ago I read a post about conference speakers who secured their place on the podium by becoming a sponsor for an event.

While this "pay to say" practice was itself met with mixed reviews, what attracted the greatest level of consternation from readers was the fact that attendees were not made aware of this "arrangement." The general consensus was that by not informing the attendees that their speakers had actually paid to stand up before them was misleading, and as such drew into question the creditability of the entire venue.

It is an interesting subject for debate, because even though conference organizers have to provide added incentives to retain existing sponsors, while attracting new ones, there is a risk that events could ultimately be viewed as nothing more that Kevin Trudeau-type infomercials.

So here is the question; if the speaker option is pulled from the table as a sponsor incentive, how do sponsors actually justify paying what in some cases are significant fees to be featured at a conference or event?

In other words, what is the return - and I am talking about tangible return - on conference sponsorships beyond vague references to brand recognition?

Despite my best efforts to seek out actual studies providing this information, I was disappointed to discover that none was available.

Given the absence of any substantive data, I chose to pose the question on one of my other social networking sites. While obviously more subjective that factual, it nonetheless shed an interesting albeit limited light on whether or not sponsorships actually pay-off.

The one common response I seemed to receive is that you need to make a significant number of connections at an event to realize a minimal return in terms of actual sales. One commenter suggested that based on their experience " . . . lead generation at a conference (resulting in a potential sale) is about 2 per 1000."

If this is in fact an accurate number then a sponsor better have a high ticket product or service to sell in order to recoup their investment.

Big ticket sales notwithstanding, how do you measure or calculate the return on your conference sponsorship?

In an attempt to get the answer, I once again did a search using Google and struck information pay-dirt so to speak, when I came across a site that actually professes to have a sponsorship measurement formula.

The first step according to the site is to "understand your objectives," and "define what success looks like." Specifically what would you consider to be a successful outcome or result of your sponsorship participation.

Once you have done this, you would then have to "design a custom measurement program to determine how well your sponsorship is achieving any number of objectives" including;

Enhancing brand imageIncreasing sales/market shareBuilding awarenessIncreasing web trafficGenerating social media buzzIn short, what are each of the above objectives worth to you in relation to your existing business model.

Once again, the above criteria seems to make a great deal of sense but, appears to be long on concept and short on actual formulas.

The reason for this according to the site's owner is that "there can’t be a one-size-fits-all approach to measurement," and that "each partnership comprises different sets of objectives and benefits that must be taken into account." This means that the measurement framework has to be done on an individual case-by-case basis.

All of this leads me to wonder if anyone really knows how to quantify the return on their sponsorship dollars. It also leads me to believe that for many, the decision to become a sponsor is based more on the fear of somehow being left out or left behind by the competition, as opposed to an actual calculation. Kind of like cod liver oil in that you take it not because it tastes good but, because it is good for you.

So here is my question to you . . . why do you become a sponsor, and how do you measure (or perhaps justify would be a better word), your investment?