Office crew - how often do you use video conference (if at all)?
- Thread starter Mook
- Start date
None.
However, a lot here do have an IM program on their PC that includes video through skype that gets used. They took away our Lync IM system (which was extremely useful) and replaced it with this and lost 90% of the people on Lync because it required additional software rollout that you had to request (which is a PITA here), so that 90% of us just said "fuck it, it's not worth it..."
Oh, and I would've responded something along the lines, that "some of us believe in good, old fashioned face to face and hand shake conversations..."
However, a lot here do have an IM program on their PC that includes video through skype that gets used. They took away our Lync IM system (which was extremely useful) and replaced it with this and lost 90% of the people on Lync because it required additional software rollout that you had to request (which is a PITA here), so that 90% of us just said "fuck it, it's not worth it..."
Oh, and I would've responded something along the lines, that "some of us believe in good, old fashioned face to face and hand shake conversations..."
never use video conferencing and I've only seen it at one client and it looked awkward as fuck.
Phone conference calls and screen sharing for presentations but never video of myself or others.
Video is awkward because you stare at the screen where the person is, not the camera, so it always looks like you are looking somewhere else, when really you are looking at the person on screen.
It's grossly overrated and I have never seen any proof that it provides a "better client connection".
Phone conference calls and screen sharing for presentations but never video of myself or others.
Video is awkward because you stare at the screen where the person is, not the camera, so it always looks like you are looking somewhere else, when really you are looking at the person on screen.
It's grossly overrated and I have never seen any proof that it provides a "better client connection".
We implemented 3 Skype Room Systems at our 3 locations so HR/execs/senior management don't have to drive an hour just for a meeting. I think they're used once or twice a week at ~$3200 a pop. We've also been trying to get everyone to adopt Skype for Business with little results.
This company has the most tech un-savvy people I've ever met. Worse than my parents and my grandma.
This company has the most tech un-savvy people I've ever met. Worse than my parents and my grandma.
My company uses it all the time, we use Skype and Webex. We are an IT company and all of our clients have some type of video chat in place.
My clients use all forms of video conferencing, some it's built into their phone systems, others use add ons like Cisco and others.
There's cheap ways to get into it, your company probably should invest in it.
My clients use all forms of video conferencing, some it's built into their phone systems, others use add ons like Cisco and others.
There's cheap ways to get into it, your company probably should invest in it.
There are things like Zoom, skype, etc...sure....but I work with realtors and MLOs for the most part, and most of them have a hard enough time working their email or returning a phone call. Video conference has NEVER (literally) never been brought up until today. Screen sharing and such, of course.
That's probably what it was.
I, as the 90% who were on Lync and no longer are using it, gave up, because it was a "request" only I&TG software pushout. Which around here, trying to navigate our self-serve I&TG portal to make requests (be it hardware, software, etc), is like pulling nails out of your toes, which then needs a manager approval, then needs 7 other approvals, then gets pushed out... We all said "fuck it!"
I, as the 90% who were on Lync and no longer are using it, gave up, because it was a "request" only I&TG software pushout. Which around here, trying to navigate our self-serve I&TG portal to make requests (be it hardware, software, etc), is like pulling nails out of your toes, which then needs a manager approval, then needs 7 other approvals, then gets pushed out... We all said "fuck it!"
only time we used video was for training our Customer Service people in India... then the company moved those positions back to the USA. We always used Skype but it was done to share the screen more than anything else. All the managers offices and conference rooms are setup for Video conferencing but for our meetings even with other offices we still use the regular phone conferencing with Zoom.
At my last job we had at least one telepresence conference room in each of our facilities. They were cool, but I found no major benefit to them. Maybe it helped keep people from multitasking since everyone knows their on camera, but that's about it. The main reasoning for having it was that it was a big global company where we talked with people in Europe or Asia on a daily basis.
I'm working for a new company now and we only have one conference room that doesn't even have a polycom
I'm working for a new company now and we only have one conference room that doesn't even have a polycom
It's getting big, at least it is for our company. Huge initiative for us right now. We have a lot of WFH users that have supervisors that have never even seen their employees because they're in different states, so they want to have their 1on1s w/ video. Our weekly team meeting is required that we are on video.
This just became a thing we're looking into for a customer....
I was looking at this setup:
https://www.logitech.com/en-us/product/conferencecamkit-connect
I was looking at this setup:
https://www.logitech.com/en-us/product/conferencecamkit-connect
we are transitioning from lotus notes and sametime to outlook and skype for business.
i've had some meetings in the past with video simply because we'd use a certain room and a client i was consulting at had it available. it would do the whole cut/zoom to whoever was speaking.
seems a pointless piece of potentially going wrong overhead. i cannot think of a single business meeting i've ever had in my life where it being a video conference would have added value. it seems like a 100% waste of time and effort.
what makes a meeting a better experience for me?
- not having a meeting
- an agenda and someone leading with it
- any material i need to understand before the meeting
- having only people who know wtf they are doing talk or be invited
- getting shit over and done in 30 min or less
i've had some meetings in the past with video simply because we'd use a certain room and a client i was consulting at had it available. it would do the whole cut/zoom to whoever was speaking.
seems a pointless piece of potentially going wrong overhead. i cannot think of a single business meeting i've ever had in my life where it being a video conference would have added value. it seems like a 100% waste of time and effort.
what makes a meeting a better experience for me?
- not having a meeting
- an agenda and someone leading with it
- any material i need to understand before the meeting
- having only people who know wtf they are doing talk or be invited
- getting shit over and done in 30 min or less
Screen share is far more valuable and useful, it seems to be common for "all hands" stuff in the company but that's about it. EMC was pretty much the same way too. Very low on the list for me, epsecially considering I like wearing ragged heavy metal T-shirts and limited pants when I work from home. Not to mention having to clean up my fucking office and/or explain the reloading press in it.
Thread Info
-
Created -
25Replies
-
567Views
-
Participants list
