Best online teleconferencing options?
September 6, 2007 5:44 PM Subscribe
Help save my friend and the atmosphere from unwanted air travel! He works at home, for a company in another state; they fly him in several times a month for meetings. How can he persuade them that he doesn't need to go, that there's a teleconferencing app that'll work just as well?
He's a hardware design engineer, and his airline "commute" is costing the company many thousands a year.
He's a hardware design engineer, and his airline "commute" is costing the company many thousands a year.
Teleconferencing doesn't work just as well, ask anyone who has tried to get work done both ways. The fact of the matter is that real live communication has much higher bandwidth then any teleconference or skype session, no matter how high tech the app is. I worked remotely from home for my last job for over a year, and have also worked in small groups in an office. Communication is much easier in the face to face group, bar none.
That said, I use campfire for very simple, easy to organize chat. Its text only but works well for simple stuff and just status updates.
Skype works great for video calls, and I believe it can support up to 4 simultaneous callers. Make sure you get a nice USB headset. Beyond that you are in the realm of setting up the full fledged video camera and monitor at each end, which is expensive and more of a commitment.
posted by rsanheim at 6:12 PM on September 6, 2007
That said, I use campfire for very simple, easy to organize chat. Its text only but works well for simple stuff and just status updates.
Skype works great for video calls, and I believe it can support up to 4 simultaneous callers. Make sure you get a nice USB headset. Beyond that you are in the realm of setting up the full fledged video camera and monitor at each end, which is expensive and more of a commitment.
posted by rsanheim at 6:12 PM on September 6, 2007
also, re-reading your question, you seem to think that there's some technical videoconf solution that will simply make the problem go away. again, that's worrying, because it's just not true. for 1-1 communication a phone call is usually as good as it gets without meeting face to face, at least imho (i think it's way more intimate than a videoconf).
for group meetings videoconf is a little better, but a conference call with a shared desktop is as good. and, again, it's nowhere near as effective as face to face.
if this kind of thing isn't obvious then you need to get some experience before trying to make a case against meetings.
[on preview - what rsanheim said...]
posted by andrew cooke at 6:16 PM on September 6, 2007
for group meetings videoconf is a little better, but a conference call with a shared desktop is as good. and, again, it's nowhere near as effective as face to face.
if this kind of thing isn't obvious then you need to get some experience before trying to make a case against meetings.
[on preview - what rsanheim said...]
posted by andrew cooke at 6:16 PM on September 6, 2007
How can he persuade them that he doesn't need to go, that there's a teleconferencing app that'll work just as well?
First, don't try to convince them that it's just as good, just that it's good enough.
Does he already have a teleconferencing app in mind? If not, first, he should do the research, find the one that's best for his situation, and make sure it's good enough to be worth sticking his neck out for it. Then ask the company to give it a try for just a few meetings and see how it works. Then let them decide -- if teleconferencing really is good enough, they're not going to keep spending the money on airfare (or, if they are then the problem is much bigger than just this issue and isn't something that's going to be solved by discussing teleconferencing apps)
posted by winston at 6:22 PM on September 6, 2007
First, don't try to convince them that it's just as good, just that it's good enough.
Does he already have a teleconferencing app in mind? If not, first, he should do the research, find the one that's best for his situation, and make sure it's good enough to be worth sticking his neck out for it. Then ask the company to give it a try for just a few meetings and see how it works. Then let them decide -- if teleconferencing really is good enough, they're not going to keep spending the money on airfare (or, if they are then the problem is much bigger than just this issue and isn't something that's going to be solved by discussing teleconferencing apps)
posted by winston at 6:22 PM on September 6, 2007
sorry, one more thing. be good at taking criticism. i find this really hard, but it's key. one reason people want to meet face to face is to give criticism (for what should be obvious reasons). so he should really work on how he handled criticism "long distance". that means avoiding appearing defensive (no-one wants to hear your excuses), avoiding being aggressive, identifying what the issue is, fixing the issue, and demonstrating that the issue is fixed.
posted by andrew cooke at 6:26 PM on September 6, 2007
posted by andrew cooke at 6:26 PM on September 6, 2007
I understand and agree with the desire to eliminate unnecessary air (or any kind) travel, but don't let that obscure the fact that your friend's got a really sweet gig going, even with the travel bit. (At least I assume it's a good gig, or he'd just look for a job closer to home).
The suggestions above are good, but I'd just be careful not to come off too hardcore about cutting down on travelling. There are often folks who let themselves get overly concerned about others' work arrangements, and you don't want anyone getting bent out of shape about his telecommuting setup - and thinking really hard about those thousands they're spending flying him to and fro.
This is assuming he'd be happier continuing the current arrangement than getting an "offer" to relocate.
posted by altcountryman at 7:33 PM on September 6, 2007
The suggestions above are good, but I'd just be careful not to come off too hardcore about cutting down on travelling. There are often folks who let themselves get overly concerned about others' work arrangements, and you don't want anyone getting bent out of shape about his telecommuting setup - and thinking really hard about those thousands they're spending flying him to and fro.
This is assuming he'd be happier continuing the current arrangement than getting an "offer" to relocate.
posted by altcountryman at 7:33 PM on September 6, 2007
Unless he has some way of making himself absolutely indispensible, and the rest of his company is very used to dealing with telepresence and telecommuting, eliminating the face-to-face meetings may be a seriously bad career move. Instead of being "Bill the hardware engineer," he'll turn into "that random virtual guy." He won't be a real person. And guess who won't get raises or promotional consideration? Hint: bosses take care of 'real people' first, 'virtual people' second.
If the company is willing to fly him back and forth frequently to keep in touch, I'd say he's pretty lucky. In my experience, when people get put on teleconferences and told not to show up in person, it's a death sentence. The elimination of travel is a typical low-confrontation way for management to turn off your air hose, and let you suffocate on your own (in other words: until you get depressed and quit).
If he's really dead-set on not traveling, he has to have a conversation (preferably in person, because it's going to be a delicate one) with his manager setting out how he thinks that the travel is unnecessary, or at least in excess of what it needs to be, and how he can keep in touch some other way.
The only situations where I think a no-contact telework arrangement would be good is if everyone on a project or in a company is doing that, or if someone is just biding their time before leaving and doesn't care about advancement.
posted by Kadin2048 at 11:39 PM on September 6, 2007
If the company is willing to fly him back and forth frequently to keep in touch, I'd say he's pretty lucky. In my experience, when people get put on teleconferences and told not to show up in person, it's a death sentence. The elimination of travel is a typical low-confrontation way for management to turn off your air hose, and let you suffocate on your own (in other words: until you get depressed and quit).
If he's really dead-set on not traveling, he has to have a conversation (preferably in person, because it's going to be a delicate one) with his manager setting out how he thinks that the travel is unnecessary, or at least in excess of what it needs to be, and how he can keep in touch some other way.
The only situations where I think a no-contact telework arrangement would be good is if everyone on a project or in a company is doing that, or if someone is just biding their time before leaving and doesn't care about advancement.
posted by Kadin2048 at 11:39 PM on September 6, 2007
Yes. This can only benefit your friend to get face time at work, especially when he's got as sweet a gig as this. If he's not happy about all the hassles of air travel in this day and age, he should just think about all the time and money he's saving without a daily commute. The atmosphere can take care of itself.
posted by chickaboo at 6:30 AM on September 7, 2007
posted by chickaboo at 6:30 AM on September 7, 2007
eliminating the face-to-face meetings may be a seriously bad career move. Instead of being "Bill the hardware engineer," he'll turn into "that random virtual guy."
Having been "that random copywriter girl," I very much agree with this. I think it's probably a very good thing that he's getting so much face-to-face time.
That said, can he work on cutting the number of meetings down a bit, rather than cutting them out entirely? Can he pick his battles a bit? Maybe there's a few meetings for which he just needs to hear what's going on rather than making a presentation, or which are just early brainstorming meetings, or weekly departmental "here's what I'm working on" meetings, or whatever -- see if he can pick and choose by content which meetings it makes sense for him to attend, and which can be covered by phone.
posted by occhiblu at 7:47 AM on September 7, 2007
Having been "that random copywriter girl," I very much agree with this. I think it's probably a very good thing that he's getting so much face-to-face time.
That said, can he work on cutting the number of meetings down a bit, rather than cutting them out entirely? Can he pick his battles a bit? Maybe there's a few meetings for which he just needs to hear what's going on rather than making a presentation, or which are just early brainstorming meetings, or weekly departmental "here's what I'm working on" meetings, or whatever -- see if he can pick and choose by content which meetings it makes sense for him to attend, and which can be covered by phone.
posted by occhiblu at 7:47 AM on September 7, 2007
Mod note: A few comments removed. Argue about the environmental impact of business air travel elsewhere, please.
posted by cortex (staff) at 3:34 PM on September 7, 2007
posted by cortex (staff) at 3:34 PM on September 7, 2007
This thread is closed to new comments.
in my experience working at home well requires (i) a lot of effort on your part and (ii) a very good team. so even if he gets (i) right, (ii) may still mean he has to meet face-to-face quite often.
things he can do himself include:
a - always keeping his boss in the loop (i send a very brief daily report even though it's not required)
b - focussed goals/actions. having a million different projects open is not just confusing for your boss, it means more interaction with others.
c - being on good relations with the rest of the team. this doesn't just mean being friendly (in itself that's not that important), but gaining their trust professionally. you need to convince them you can do your job. and (b) helps by making it clear what your job is.
d - understanding what his boss wants and making that a priority.
if he's doing all that, the next thing to look at is what the meetings are being held for. the meetings are for a reason. someone, somewhere, thinks they are necessary - why? once he works that out, address the issue. if the issues are already solved then work out where the disconnect is - what information is not getting to the person who is making the meetings happen?
the attitude of your question worries me because it sounds like "stupid company" which means he (or you) is not getting the above. you have to understand what your boss wants. think of him - and everyone else you work with - as your customer. if you work from home you are a little company yourself, providing services, and these include not just "doing your work", but making everything run as smoothly as possible.
[maybe i should have mentioned this earlier, but i guess step zero is understanding why face to face meetings are so often necessary. that should be obvious, but perhaps it's not?]
posted by andrew cooke at 6:08 PM on September 6, 2007