Why i like presence
Despite the alternatives provided by technology there are still some reasons why face to face is valuable.
Donald Clark explained in his Plan B blog, ‘Why I’m bored with F2F apologists.’ Now, Donald is more easily bored than me but, in principle, I’m in agreement with him. Does so much really need to be done face to face?
If you were to stop every car on the motorway (and I don’t suggest that you do this, because it would make you very unpopular) or interview every passenger on a typical train or plane, then you’d quickly appreciate how much of the earth’s valuable energy resources are wasted on people travelling to training sessions, conferences and meetings that could easily have been accomplished online.
You’d think that with budget cuts and time at a premium (especially now), not to mention the odd terrorist attack, snow storm and volcanic eruption, that we’d have learned by now that we need an alternative to the traditional get-together, but we’re only slowly taking advantage of the alternatives of Skype, WebEx and myriad other tools.
On the other hand, I differ from Donald in that I believe there is still a strong case for people to meet face to face on occasion. These occasions can be quite hard to pin down, so I drew up a list of situations in which I’d stay strictly up close and personal.
The first and most obvious reason is that you live or work in close proximity to the people with whom you wish to interact and so there is very little reason not to meet face to face. If you work or live in the same building, campus or street and there is a meeting space available, then, fair enough, take advantage of the situation. However, few meetings fall into this category. Even within the same town it can take a long time to get to a central location.
Beware sensory deprivation
And then some basics. The internet may have multimedia capability, but needless to say it doesn’t meet all our sensory needs. Some activities require physical touch, smell or taste. Apart from the obvious examples, which shall remain unsaid, even the geekiest among us are inclined to the occasional meal out, sporting activity, night out at a club or visit to the pub.
And then some activities – including quite a few in the context of workplace learning – require us to interact with a physical object, such as a piece of equipment, a musical instrument or a vehicle, or to become familiar with a particular place. Even with the amazing advances in 3D technologies, some of these interactions cannot be adequately simulated, at least not economically.
At other times, people need to interact with full body language cues. Webcams come close but don’t quite cut it. An obvious example of this situation in learning and development would be role playing, typically of interpersonal situations.
In my experience, it also pays to be face to face when there is a lot of complex problem-solving to be carried out. I’m talking half a day or more here, when headsets become tiring and screen space is too limited to see all the necessary information easily – the maps, plans and lists of issues.
Value of eye contact
I’ve certainly found over the past few years that there is no substitute for being face to face when you need to win over a reluctant audience. Online it is all too easy for a disengaged participant to focus their attention elsewhere and simply ignore what is going on. Face to face you at least have a chance, given that you can establish eye contact and read every available body language cue.
Lastly, there is the obvious problem for those who work in busy offices: when you’re online, you can still be easily distracted by emails, telephone calls and visitors. Locked away in a meeting room, it is usually possible to get some peace.
I know I run the risk of being just another face-to-face apologist and irritating Donald Clark even more. But after 30 years of fighting the cause of technology I think I’m allowed the occasional day off.
Clive Shepherd is an independent e-learning consultant and chair of eLearning Network