Many organisations are being forced to make drastic decisions about
meetings, conferences and workshops that had been planned to take place
during these months. Should we cancel them? Postpone until the
restrictions are lifted? Or should we move them online and "meet"
virtually?
As an experience-designer and facilitator, my job is
to bring the right people together in a shared space and help them to
collectively think, create, debate, envision, and trust each other as
they strive for a specific larger purpose. My speciality has been the
design of highly-interactive experiences where everyone is physically
present, so Covid 19 is presenting me with difficult but exciting
challenges.
Unfortunately, many people see Ted talks or online
classes as reference points for running meetings online. The problem is
that these types of "meeting" consist of unidirectional communication,
whereas meetings are about bringing people together for omnidirectional
communication. We need to design for discussion, feedback, active
listening, ideation and collective decision making.
Too often,
event organisers (be it meetings, workshops or conferences) put most of
their effort into the logistics of getting people into the same space at
the same time, and too little thought into what will the people do when
they are together. As Priya Parker says in her book, The Art of
Gathering:
"As much as our gatherings disappoint us, though, we
tend to keep gathering in the same tired ways. Most of us remain on
autopilot when we bring people together, following stale formulas,
hoping that the chemistry of a good meeting, conference, or party will
somehow take care of itself, that thrilling results will magically
emerge from the usual staid inputs. It is almost always a vain hope."
The
further challenge that online gathering brings is that the chemistry
that Parker refers to above is even less likely to happen because those
gathered are not physically present in the same space. As the
philosopher Byung-Chul Han says in this book In the Swarm: Digital Prospects:
"The
verbal component of communication is very slight. Nonverbal forms of
expression such as gestures, facial expressions, and body language
constitute human communication. They lend it tactility. In this context,
tactility means not physical contact but the multidimensionality and
multilayeredness of human perception, which involves both the visual
field and other senses. The digital medium strips communication of
tactility and physicality."
But, one might argue, in video
conferences we can see the faces of those present. And the face (and
eyes in particular) are the most expressive parts of the human body, so
shouldn't we able to replicate to some extent this chemistry? However,
think about the experiences you've had these last few weeks video
conferencing with colleagues and families. What is the difference
between seeing a face on a screen talking to you, compared to having
them in front of you? Andreas Bernard, in his essay In weiter Ferne, so
nah, written on the tenth anniversary of Skype, observed:
"Undoubtedly,
the video-telephone creates the illusion of presence...However, the
remaining distance still is palpable—and it is felt most clearly,
perhaps, in a slight displacement. When Skyping, one cannot exchange
glances. If you look into the eyes on the screen, the other party will
think you are looking down a little because the camera is installed at
the upper edge of the computer. The charming peculiarity of an
unmediated encounter—where looking at someone always means being seen,
as well—has yielded to asymmetrical gazes. Thanks to Skype, we can be
close to each other twenty-four hours a day, but we are constantly
staring past one another."
So, what can we do? Is it possible, at
least to some extent, to replicate the closeness and chemistry of
in-person encounters in a video-conferencing context? I believe that it
is, and the solution lies in going back to the basics of designing a
meaningful and effective "gathering".
Forget about the wallpaper
Focusing
on the software, the lighting in your office, which microphone to use,
is equivalent to spending most of your time worrying about the wallpaper
in the meeting room where you plan to sit with your attendees. Of
course, these things are important - if your microphone sucks then no
one will be able to hear you. But once the tech basics are covered, it
is far far more important to pay attention to the design of this
encounter - the activities, the flow, generating the interpersonal
connections and trust among the attendees to reach the objective.
As
Parker says, "Gatherings crackle and flourish when real thought goes
into them, when (often invisible) structure is baked into them, and when
a host has the curiosity, willingness, and generosity of spirit to
try." Deciding on structure means first being clear about the reason for
this meeting, and a good way to discover that is by starting at the end
- what is it that we want the attendees to do, feel and know when the
meeting is finished. Note that I've put "know" at the end of that list -
too often, meetings only have one objective - to inform the attendees,
to speak information AT them. If this is the only objective, then don't
waste their time by holding a meeting, email them the information, which
is the most efficient way of passing information on. But if you want
them to take some action, then you will need to persuade them, and
persuasion means going on a journey with them. And you might want to
include them in the decision-making process itself leading to that
action. Will you ask them to formulate the problem themselves before
looking for answers? Or will you formulate the problem for them? Will
you look for consensus? If so, how is that achieved? By voting?
You
will need to think very carefully about what you want out of this
meeting and structure if accordingly. Then you will need to turn your
attention to facilitating it. But it is nearly impossible to facilitate a
meeting that has no structure.
Remember, before your event starts, it has begun.
Don't invite the world and its mother
Running
a meeting is like being a chef. The dish that comes out of the kitchen
mainly depends on the ingredients at the chef's disposal. Even the best
chef in the world can't make pasta if there is no flour or eggs in the
kitchen. The opposite is also true - if the chef is obliged to use too
many ingredients the dish is going to come out bland or disgusting -
chicken, fish, mango, cream, wine, foie, lemon, chocolate and popcorn
all in the same pot?
Having a meeting online can often lead us
to assume that it is ok to invite even more people. Physical space and
distance are no longer constraints, so let's invite everyone! However,
we need to think- who is this for? Who is it not for? The meeting
organiser should be very clear (and it is even a good idea to include
this info in the invitation) about why each attendee is being asked to
the meeting.
Also, the number of attendees will impact on what
you aim to get done. You want to run an ideation session? Then inviting
20 people to the meeting is going to make creativity very difficult to
manage, and not everyone is going to get the chance to share their
ideas.
This is an exciting time to experiment with new ways of
running our meetings. If you need help or advice on designing and/or
facilitating an important meeting, please get in touch, and the team at Performing Ideas will be delighted to help.
Checklist of important questions when preparing an online meeting (or any meeting):
- What is the objective of this meeting? What changes are you hoping to bring about?
- How
do you plan to reach that objective in the time allotted for this
meeting? What are the steps? What do you need to do before the meeting
even takes place?
- What are the different roles in this meeting?
Who will facilitate? Who will take notes? For online meetings, where
there is the possibility for attendees to write in a chatroom (as in
Zoom), it can be a good idea for the facilitator to have an assistant
who draws their attention to any important questions being posted
there.
- How will ideas be shared, worked on, critiqued in this meeting? One too many? One to one? In small breakout groups/rooms?
- Who will speak, when will they speak, and who will they speak to?
- When
will attendees be given an opportunity to think and prepare alone
before, during and after the meeting? How will you follow-up on these
ideas?
- How will you, the facilitator, gauge the energy in the
"room", taking into account that you cannot read their body language,
smell hear or sense the energy as you would normally do when they are
sitting in front of you?
- How will you check that they are paying
attention? That they haven't been distracted by all the other potential
stuff happening on their screen (email, Whatsapp, social media) and by
the people in their home interrupting them?
- How will you ensure that the attendees know how to use the video conferencing software? How will you solve their problems if they cannot connect, hear you or see the shared screen etc.?