"We are optimally evolved to talk at a range of about 5 feet in groups of no more than 90 people" says Ceri Roderick, a partner at an occupation psychologist practice in an article in the "Culture of Collaboration" supplement in the Financial Times last month.
He goes on to say that "unified communications", operating in real time and combining as many forms of communication as possible, such as images, voice and text is the best way when building relationships and trust, solving problems or reviewing progress.
I agree, as the only time I have heard remote conferencing really working across cultures was when it was something that combined voice with everyone being able see slides, data etc and someone doing streaming minutes across the bottom of the screen.
He also says that virtual teams should make time to meet occasionally, and again I concur - it helps people understand the personal and cultural context of others.
The article goes on to point out that video conferencing still isn't growing very fast, despite predictions, and according to Prof Peter Cochrane of ConceptLabs, this is due to poor quality, with no eye contact, gaze awareness, no body language, small people images and no depth of field. Apparently this can now be fixed. But I still think such conferences should include images and text.
Jeffrey Mann of Gartner rightly stresses that asynchronous communication still has a valuable role when communicating with someone in another language, as it gives them more time to think and react.
It finishes off with the inevitable references to Web 2.0 and how a new generation are hitting the workplace who communicate through wikis, blogs and social networks.
A letter to the Times last month said that it is "perfectly normal" to see people using wireless in meetings to answer e-mails (and uses the word "polychronic" which I thought was a word usually confined to interculturalist circles!) and sets down some new rules:
- a text is merely an urgent request for information so should be replied to without delay
- if a caller rings once sends it to an answerphone, twice and it's probably urgent so answer it, if it's not urgent call them back after the meeting
- it's normal not to have a desk phone and your work mobile has two lines, one personal one business
"this is the culture I live with day to day and it is accepted as normal, not rude", the letter concludes.
Which makes me wonder, as I have not been part of a large corporate workplace for 6 years now, what is normal, what is rude? Whose culture? I ask participants in each company I do training in what their attitude is to mobiles on in meetings etc, and I get a different answer each time.