When it comes to meetings, we know how to be inclusive of people who are in the room (through the 12 Inclusive Behaviors and the Inclusive Meeting Norms). We know how to be inclusive of people who are not in the room (by assigning them a buddy to fill them in on what was discussed, who said what, the feeling of the room, and the to-dos that came out of the conversation).
What about people in a new, third category: people in the meeting but not in the room—because they’re attending via the Internet, from a remote location? What does it mean to include them?
This came up for us during a training class in Charlotte, North Carolina. Because some participants were physically in Charlotte, and others (like us) were taking the class remotely, the experience led us to think about inclusion in virtual learning environments. The instructor did practice some Inclusive Behaviors: for instance, he had the participants introduce themselves and state their name, the name of their employer, and a hope for the day’s learning. This reminded us very much of hellos and connecting questions—things we do at the beginning of every KJCG meeting, and within our client systems, as a part of our Inclusive Meeting Norms.
However, while giving us a moment to connect and share about ourselves was great, it was only the first step on the journey of inclusion. What else could have been done to encourage a more inclusive learning environment?
First, the instructor needed to create a sense of safety in the larger “room”—both the classroom in Charlotte and the virtual “room” full of people in remote locations. To do so, he could have reminded us that we were all going to be learning: we would make mistakes, and generate ideas, and be excited and frustrated all at once, and it was OK to ask questions since this was a learning environment.
Also, the virtual meeting software could have been better designed for inclusion. It allowed us to see the instructor, but he couldn’t see us. We also weren’t able to communicate face to face with the other students. As a result, we lost a lot of opportunity for learning and growth.
How much opportunity did we lose? We were the only two individuals who took the class out of the training center in Albany, New York; there were about 15 people taking the class in total. That means we couldn’t interact with more than 85 percent of the participants. We didn’t get the 360 degrees of vision that happens when you include all the Right People at the Right Time. We were lucky if we got 45.
The point we want to leave you with is this: It’s not only about who is in the room or who is not in the room. It’s about how you interact with those people. Whether they are in the chair next to you or across the world, it is important to practice Inclusive Behaviors, be fully present in your interactions, and carefully consider how the tools in the meeting might help or hinder inclusion.
By Victoria Gammerman and Tia Wager
Pages:
I do agree with both of you. It is not about who is in the room and who is not. It is about how you interact with the people who are there in a conversation.
In my work, I frequently have to talk to groups who are not based out of the same location. We have conference calls where some 6-8 people dial in to a number. Almost all of us dial in from different geographical locations and most of us sit in open office spaces. This compounds the challenge for us to zone in to a conversation.
In a face to face meeting of a group, the challenge lies in ‘how do we establish connections with the people who are in the room.’
The challenge our group faces is ‘how do we zone out from the not so private physical space we are in, and zone in to the virtual space we are dialed into’.
After attending the BE BIG workshop i have consciously tried to work towards a few behaviors – saying the hellos and establishing connect at the beginning of the discussion; listing out what we expected from the discussion (moment of focus); and using clarification questions. Making clarification questions a part of our routine has tremendously helped us in virtual conversations – where one doesn’t have the advantage of also experiencing non-verbal behavior being expressed by the other person. These coupled with a common language (4 corners breakthrough; and concept of notion, stake, boulders, and tombstones) has enabled us to be much more effective in our virtual conversations than we were before.
Hello, Sourav,
Thank you so much for your feedback. I especially want to link to your mention of a “common language.” At KJCG, we have talked a lot about the importance of common language for achieving clarity and opening doors to people. When people share and use common terms like Four Corners Breakthrough, leaning into discomfort, and listening as an ally, it serves as an invitation for others to join in the conversation.