As an educator, I have dealt with Zoom for language teaching quite a bit. In that context, while I tried to enforce a “camera on for attendance” rule, the university pushed back on this. It was frustrating, but as the courses were student-focused, they mostly remained active.
I have also done a fair bit of Zoom management for language conferences, and in such cases having at least a few attendees visible and unmuted is crucial. You need a few people (in quiet locations) to allow for natural reactions; otherwise, you cannot use humor as a tool for engagement. Nothing is worse when presenting online than sharing a humorous anecdote to blank screens and muted participants.
After all, if everyone is going to be invisible and muted, you should post the presentation/meeting to YouTube and go asynchronous for follow-up questions. However, this is just modern-day alchemy, as you are transmuting a meeting into a presentation, and the two are not the same.
I think you’re right. It’s the natural reactions you miss.
You really notice it when you’re in a meeting room with other real people and then there are 4 or 5 people dialling in. Those people will all be on mute and will find it tricky to get into the conversation.
Platforms like Zoom and Teams having backgrounds to obscure backgrounds makes it easier to go on camera now. It expresses personality and helps as a conversation starter with new people🙂
I usually try to keep my camera on if I'm in a situation that allows for it although if it's more of just a passive webinar presentation I don't always do it. And thanks for the shout out to my Substack article!
I just got off a Zoom meeting where 3/4 of the participants were on camera, but one was not. The person not on camera engaged with the rest of the folks far, far less, and was engaged with far less as well (although causation =/= correlation).
There are a few times I turn off my camera because I'm a passive member and it allows me to multi-task. It's one of the best parts of the remote is that some meetings I only need to be present and half listening.
To be honest, I'd rather have less meetings and more engagement but...
Multitasking isn't real but there is certainly task switching. There are a lot of meetings that I only need to contribute 10% of the time and so the other 90% I do value added work.
As an educator, I have dealt with Zoom for language teaching quite a bit. In that context, while I tried to enforce a “camera on for attendance” rule, the university pushed back on this. It was frustrating, but as the courses were student-focused, they mostly remained active.
I have also done a fair bit of Zoom management for language conferences, and in such cases having at least a few attendees visible and unmuted is crucial. You need a few people (in quiet locations) to allow for natural reactions; otherwise, you cannot use humor as a tool for engagement. Nothing is worse when presenting online than sharing a humorous anecdote to blank screens and muted participants.
After all, if everyone is going to be invisible and muted, you should post the presentation/meeting to YouTube and go asynchronous for follow-up questions. However, this is just modern-day alchemy, as you are transmuting a meeting into a presentation, and the two are not the same.
I think you’re right. It’s the natural reactions you miss.
You really notice it when you’re in a meeting room with other real people and then there are 4 or 5 people dialling in. Those people will all be on mute and will find it tricky to get into the conversation.
Platforms like Zoom and Teams having backgrounds to obscure backgrounds makes it easier to go on camera now. It expresses personality and helps as a conversation starter with new people🙂
That’s a good point. It really can be a conversation starter. We have branded backgrounds which can be quite nice if we’re meeting external customers.
I usually try to keep my camera on if I'm in a situation that allows for it although if it's more of just a passive webinar presentation I don't always do it. And thanks for the shout out to my Substack article!
I just got off a Zoom meeting where 3/4 of the participants were on camera, but one was not. The person not on camera engaged with the rest of the folks far, far less, and was engaged with far less as well (although causation =/= correlation).
A few times a colleague (let’s call him Bob) has sat there with his camera off.
I’ve gone “I wonder if Bob’s still there? Bob, you there?”
“Yeah, I’m here”
“Ah, great. What do you think?”
Maybe that’s too passive aggressive? 😂
I did this a couple of times today, not gonna lie.
There are a few times I turn off my camera because I'm a passive member and it allows me to multi-task. It's one of the best parts of the remote is that some meetings I only need to be present and half listening.
To be honest, I'd rather have less meetings and more engagement but...
Totally agree. I’ve stopped going to the meetings where I’d be half listening. I actually don’t think I’m capable of that anyway.
Multitasking is a bit of a myth.
Multitasking isn't real but there is certainly task switching. There are a lot of meetings that I only need to contribute 10% of the time and so the other 90% I do value added work.
Some peoplekve meetings.
I appreciate the shoutout Martin! thank you!!
No worries Tobi. Hope all good with you.
This weeks post.
This has been getting quite a bit of discussion going in the comments.
Feel free to dive in! 😀
Perhaps the chair of the meeting should make it a rule that all participants do this?
Yes, I’ve started saying that. It’s tricky though. You don’t really want to start a meeting with any bad feeling.
I do think there are some real downsides for the individual who has their camera off.
Make sure it’s clear in the invitation.