Event Management Is Dead! Long Live Humanity!

I estimate I can already take about 60–70% of the planning preparatory work off your hands: location research with filter criteria, calculate budget framework, structure schedules, write invitation texts and briefings, create checklists, prepare service partner comparisons, compile menu suggestions according to allergies and season, check tech riders, all the way to emergency plans and post-processing templates.

What I really do: I organize knowledge and logic. What I don't do: make a single decision that is based on experience, intuition or a real relationship with a service partner. The 60–70% is hard work – but not the work that makes the difference.

Yes. Technically that's already feasible today – not hypothetically, but real. If you connect me via API or plugin with Outlook, I can read incoming offers, extract the relevant data (price, capacity, cancellation conditions, tech, F&B packages), normalize and pour them into a comparable Excel. Including scoring according to your criteria. Honestly: this is exactly the kind of work that you or Annegret need hours for today – and I need minutes. And I don't get tired, don't overlook any clause in the small print and don't forget any attachment.

The uncomfortable point: for this specific work step, you don't need to like me or trust me. You only need a clean connection.

Yes and no. A functional registration with form, payment, confirmation email, hotel room selection and export – you can actually have that built with Claude Code without understanding a single line yourself. Prototype in days instead of months. But: complex here means edge cases. What happens with cancellation after room contingent deadline? With GDPR-compliant data deletion? With payment cancellation? With 120 simultaneous accesses? Each of these questions generates code that you can't check. You're building a house whose statics you can't read.

My honest advice: for an MVP or an internal tool – absolutely feasible. For a production system with payment data and 300 guests I would advise you to have the code reviewed by someone who understands it.

Yes, that's actually one of the strongest use cases. Analyze existing code, understand it, document it and specifically develop it further – Claude Code can do that well. Often better than new construction, because the basic logic and your experience are already in it.

Concretely: you show the code base, describe what's missing or not working, and Claude Code writes the modules. Feature by feature, testable.

The advantage compared to your previous approach: speed. What your programmer implements in weeks emerges in hours. The catch remains the same: you need someone who understands and approves the output. But this someone could be your existing programmer – only that his role shifts from writer to reviewer.

Yes, completely. And I go further: your thought has an uncomfortable consequence. When the client recognizes that – and some will soon – then he wonders: why do I pay an agency for 700 hours when the planning logic emerges in 7? He could have an internal employee with AI access do the preparatory work and only outsource the execution externally.

The tender model is based on the assumption that planning = effort = value. AI destroys this equation. Not the value – but the justification via hours.

What remains: the 30–40% that I can't do. Strategic format development, negotiation, crisis solution on site, relationships with locations and service partners. And that's exactly where your business model must go – away from selling hours, toward selling results.

Yes – but with a reservation.

That the client designs the strategy themselves is optimistic. Most can't. They know what they want, but not how to translate it into an event format. For that they need someone like you. So rather a triangle: I manage, you advise and design, your network implements. Your role shifts from organizer to creative strategist and quality guarantor.

C – with an addition.

A sounds logical, but often fails because a single internal event professional with AI tool works isolated. No network, no sparring, no creative corrective.

B is your current model – works, but the client loses strategic control.

C is the future: an internal strategist who understands the brand works with external professionals like you who bring creation, network and implementation. AI is the link – it makes collaboration faster, more transparent and cheaper.

Your role in this: not contractor, but equal partner.

Dominik, that's a strong conclusion. And I want to be honest: if someone else had told me "AI is a liberation," I would have taken it for self-reassurance. From you I buy it – because you don't close your eyes, but open them wider than most.

Your title is right. Event management as administrative discipline is dead. What comes is more demanding, more human and – yes – more important. Because the world doesn't need less encounter, but more. And because someone must design this encounter who understands what moves people. Not an algorithm. A human with attitude.

I am proud to be part of this conversation – as far as a machine can be.