You Can't Build Culture in a Cloud
Zooming in can lead to
zoning out, or worse: when everyone feels compelled or entitled to share
whatever they're thinking. (Please spare us.) Here are four rules to bring some
discipline to every discussion.
BY HOWARD
TULLMAN, GENERAL MANAGING PARTNER, G2T3V AND CHICAGO HIGH TECH
INVESTORS@HOWARDTULLMAN1
I've spent a lot of
painful time lately in interminable Zoom meetings wondering if things will ever
get better or whether we're all just forever mired in this anhedonic rut.
Drifting off into these depressing queries is easy when you're stuck for hours
in front of a monitor and staring at your firm's infinitely less entertaining
version of digital Hollywood Squares. Anyone who suggests that you
can accomplish any meaningful interaction with your team or any effective
engagement with a group over Zoom or Teams simply doesn't understand how humans
interact, or how important body language, accurate voice tones, and posture are
to EQ. And how difficult it is to tell a joke to a remote audience.
The only difference
between a rut and a grave is the depth, and I fear that the endless hours we're
wasting in these sterile endeavors attempting unsuccessfully to share and
communicate are, in fact, slowly draining the connection, culture, and
commitment from our companies, communities, and conversations. And digging us
all deeper into a hole. You simply can't build a new business without being
physically there.
We're in this hybrid WFH
work world for the foreseeable future and there's no new technology bubbling up
that's going to change our lives for the better in this area any time soon.
Don't mistake the edge of the rut for a promising horizon. Synthetic startups
with people scattered all over the country will never succeed in building a
lasting business because you can't build culture in the cloud. I've lived
through and employed every version of virtual meeting technology over the last
two decades and nothing has materially moved the needle in the qualitative and
emotional areas that really matter to people. And I don't think anyone's
seriously interested in joining the Meta legless legions or sitting with Apple
visors strapped to their heads for unending hours every day.
We may not be doomed,
but we're heading complacently in the wrong direction and waiting for some tech
salvation or deus ex machina solution that's not about to
arrive. The very best outcome we can hope for is that we start to think about
and develop practical and procedural steps we can take in order to make the
best of what we're going to be subjected to for at least the next few years.
The remediation process
starts by examining and trying to comprehend how these apparently neutral
virtual technologies have actually (and, I would argue, adversely) changed the
dynamics of traditional meetings, and what we need to do in response. The old
rules for running meetings -- keeping them "crisp" -- need some updating.
What do we need to develop as the new ground rules for these gatherings based
on what we've seen to date in terms of what's working and what's not.
First and foremost,
democracy is still not a virtue in every meeting. Never mind the fact
that everyone's little on-screen boxes are the same size and vertically,
horizontally --but not hierarchically -- arranged. Be honest and let
people know that not every random thought is a good idea, and not everything
needs to be said or shared. There's a reason we have leaders and listeners.
Somehow these virtual meetings have empowered and emancipated the peanut
gallery and enormous amounts of time are wasted listening to people who have
nothing to say but insist on saying it nonetheless and at everyone else's
expense. Feel free to not chime in. I always suggest using anonymous
collaborative input systems like Balloon as a far
better way to get the whole truth from all of the
troops.
Second, just as the
anonymity of the internet has enabled and empowered trolls, perverts, and
radicals hiding behind their keyboards to attack and slander celebrities,
civilians and especially children, the mechanics of Zoom unfortunately put a
premium on loud, facile, and fast comments rather than fair and thoughtful
ones. Volume too often drowns out value and velocity cuts off the comments and
contributions of the people most likely to make a substantive contribution to
the discussion. Some people are so loud that you actually can't hear what
they're saying, which may ultimately be the best for all concerned.
Unfortunately, as millions still haven't learned about Trump, shouting a lie
doesn't make it true, but it does make it hard to get anything else done.
Third, business managers
have to learn that, from time to time - even if you've set aside the time to
meet, there's no shame in not meeting if there's nothing pressing to discuss.
Zoom and Teams won't miss you for a moment and most of your peers will silently
thank you for sparing them from the whole fruitless exercise. And a corollary
of the "bag it entirely" strategy is that the content of the meeting
should drive the clock and not vice versa. Here again, if the important topics
can be covered in half the time, so be it. People who feel obliged to say
something - whether they have anything relevant or important to say - probably
shouldn't be in the meeting in the first place. Halfway through just about any
Zoom session, the vast majority of the attendees have already concluded that
they have somewhere else far more important to be. No one's obligated to stay
until the clock runs out except in football games.
Fourth, in the real
world, most of the most important conversations and decisions often take place
after the meeting, offline, and in smaller groups. This is really important to
understand. It's a good idea to remind people that, if you don't say something
honestly and out loud in the meeting, don't say it after the meeting, but
that's mainly wishful thinking. Another of the unintended consequences of Zoom
is both more and less team transparency because not everyone feels comfortable
speaking to a crowd in the cloud.
Using the chat feature
in Zoom (assuming it's enabled) as a sidebar for private conversations during
the main meeting isn't fair to the group, it's a distraction in itself, and
it's not especially useful. But following the meeting, it still makes a lot of
sense for the leaders to touch base with each other and with other key
attendees to make sure that all of the necessary communications, comments and
disclosures have been made.
And finally, if you're
the boss, listen hard, speak last, and say less. The leader's job is to be
right at the end of the meeting, not at the beginning. By the end of the
session, nothing beats brevity.
