Defining the problem and assessing options before event planning Separate the request from the problem, compare the current approach with event and non-event options, and record the decision and its basis. Author: EVENTODIT Editorial Team Published: 2026-10-29T23:00:04+09:00 Updated: 2026-10-31T11:07:15+09:00 Original URL: https://eventodit.com/en/stories/event-purpose-alternatives-initial-decision.html Practical summary Key decision: Compare event and non-event options against the same access, cost, staffing and timing conditions. Responsible roles / intended readers: Event planning leads, requesting teams and decision-makers Record / next task: A record of the problem, evidence, options, outstanding conditions, decision-maker and review deadline Basis of information: Canadian inclusive event guidance, UK public appraisal guidance and a 2025 Seoul MICE support programme Editorial review: 2026-10-29 Part 1. Planning lead and requesting team **“Define the problem to be solved before choosing the event format.”** - Separate the request from the problem: When asked to hold a briefing, do not immediately settle the venue and schedule. Compare existing enquiries, participant feedback and operating records to establish whether applicants struggle to understand the process or lack access to advice. - Set a deadline for missing evidence: If the information is unavailable, record the problem as unconfirmed. Agree with the requesting team what evidence is needed, who will check it and by when. - Avoid repeating an event by habit: A previous event alone does not show that the same format is needed this year. Recheck who is affected and what needs to change using current evidence. Part 2. Planning and budget team **“Include options that do not involve holding an event and compare them against the same criteria.”** - Compare the current approach and alternatives side by side: Place feasible choices alongside one another, such as retaining current guidance, revising it with online questions and answers, holding small in-person consultations, or staging a large in-person event. Continuing the current approach may also involve costs and risks. - Check shared objectives and participation conditions: Assess how each option could contribute to the same objective and whether it can meet the preparation deadline. Check disability access and any travel or technology barriers for the intended audience. Do not treat participation counts alone as proof of understanding or problem resolution; decide what to check afterwards. - Mark the status of funding and staffing: Record estimated costs, operating staff and preparation schedules for each option, but do not present unallocated funds or uncertain staffing as confirmed. For supported estimates, record the source, assumptions and range, and distinguish them from confirmed values. Do not invent unsupported figures; record outstanding conditions and who will check them. - Distinguish the scope of reference guidance: The UK Treasury Green Book uses the current approach as a benchmark in public-sector appraisal. Do not treat it as an automatic requirement for Korean events. The assessment criteria in Seoul’s 2025 MICE support plan apply to that programme and year; check current notices for other programmes. Part 3. Decision-maker **“A provisional choice is not procurement approval. Name the owner and deadline for outstanding checks.”** - Record reasons for the decision and rejected options: Review the comparison and decide whether to proceed, adjust the scale, postpone or request further checks. Document why the option was chosen and why the others were not selected. - Assign follow-up for unresolved conditions: Identify who will check outstanding costs, timing, access support or required permits and by when. Review the decision again once the answers are received. - Control contracts and procurement before final approval: Do not confirm a venue booking or supplier contract merely because an option has been provisionally chosen. Check organisational approval authority, budget and actual commitment terms, and obtain final approval before making a legally binding commitment. **Final check before use:** Before detailed planning and procurement begin, confirm that the problem and supporting evidence, the comparison including the current approach and non-event options, and outstanding conditions and owners have been recorded. Use the form for the next handover Use the [Problem evidence and option decision log](/en/templates/problem-options-review.html) for the records described here. The XLSX contains Blank, Example and Instructions sheets. Write your event in Blank; the fictional example is a guide to what to enter. Describe a recent situation and blocked action, and link the evidence population and period. Compare business as usual, non-event responses and event options against the same objective and period. The planner sends the evidence and decision record to the budget and procurement leads. Unconfirmed conditions remain assumptions until checked. Application conditions Check participants’ access needs, available people and budget, and the organisation’s approval process. Unconfirmed information No specific event’s problem, costs, staffing, outcomes or support-programme conditions have been verified. Sources UK Treasury · The Green Book 2026 · Business as usual and options appraisal https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-green-book--2/the-green-book-2026 Women and Gender Equality Canada · Inclusive Event Planning · pp. 3–4 https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/wage-fegc/documents/gba-/gba--resources-inclusive-event-planning/inclusive-inclusif-en.pdf Seoul Metropolitan Government · 2025 MICE industry support plan · programme criteria, p. 32 https://korean.miceseoul.com/humanframe/theme/mice/assets/images/2025/2025%EB%85%84%20%EC%84%9C%EC%9A%B8%ED%8A%B9%EB%B3%84%EC%8B%9C%20%EB%A7%88%EC%9D%B4%EC%8A%A4(MICE)%20%EC%82%B0%EC%97%85%20%EC%A7%80%EC%9B%90%EA%B3%84%ED%9A%8D%20%EA%B3%B5%EA%B3%A0%EB%AC%B8_%EC%B5%9C%EC%A2%85.pdf