A face-to-face one, a remote one, here by video from home, the café or the office, there on the phone while the others are sitting around a table or alone in a meeting room with people who have the camera open for some with the cats doing the java in the background, For others, everything is turned off and still others an avatar escaped from the metaverse that wriggles on the screen. It was science fiction 3 years ago, it's our daily life now.
But how do you manage your own work and lead exchanges with your teams in this maze of interaction channels? Here are some tips.
Make REAL choices of interaction modalities
The multiplication of modalities gives us more possible choices to meet our interaction needs. But these choices must remain choices. Don't let one modality or another be imposed on you for the wrong reasons. We don't do a video call because we need to be in two different places at the same time, because video has never given the gift of ubiquity to anyone.
On the other hand, video has exhausted more than one who will have found themselves dealing with 2, 3 or more different problems at the same time. A good reason to make a video, for example, is to exchange with people who are geographically distant and who cannot travel to meet up.
Also think about the phone, for all kinds of interaction that require us to talk to each other a little more than by email without requiring a proper meeting. Think of cooperative workspaces to deposit documents that you want to bring to everyone's attention without it having the urgency of an email. In short, for each interaction, choose the most suitable modality.
In practice
Take your agenda for next week and in front of each scheduled appointment, indicate what you expect from the exchange. You will not make the same choice of modality depending on whether you need to retrieve/give information, brainstorm with your team, do a reframing interview with an employee, share a vision, move forward with a file in production. Then choose the most relevant means of communication according to the expectations.
Be readable and firm on the framework given to each interaction
The hybrid is good because it multiplies the possibilities of defining the framework of exchanges. But that doesn't mean that everyone imposes their own framework ! If you feel that an exchange needs to take place in person, defend this position and stick to it. One of the people who is supposed to participate in the exchange announces that he will not be able to be there ? Prefer another date when everyone can be there. If you have good reason to consider that during such and such a video, it is necessary to also capture non-verbal signs, explain it and ask for the cameras to be open.
Remotely, don't skip the steps of setting up the framework which are even more necessary than face-to-face : remind them of the objectives of the meeting, set the agenda, specify the rules of the game of speaking, appoint a time-keeper and a rapporteur who will report back. Systematically end your meetings with a brief summary of the " for action " (and not with a " I'll leave you, I have my next video call starting ").
In practice
In all the invitations you issue, specify the terms and conditions (face-to-face/remote). If it is face-to-face, the place of the meeting. If it is remote, the solution that will be used (so that everyone can make sure they have the software installed on their equipment BEFORE the start of the meeting). Also indicate in the invitation the subject of the exchange and if possible an agenda and/or a list of expectations (what work needs to be done beforehand, what documents must have been consulted, etc.). For invitations issued by others, feel free to request that these items be added before agreeing to put the appointment in your calendar.
Make hybrid a field of awareness and innovation in practices
To get the most out of hybridization, bring into existence what this way of working changes and brings to the relationship. For example, when you have a semi-face-to-face, semi-remote meeting, what are the issues of maintaining everyone's attention or distributing the floor between one and the other that appear ? To what extent are these issues a reflection of the functioning of the collective which, even when it is gathered in the same room, does not engage everyone in the same way ? What responses will you be able to provide in hybrid mode to these challenges that you will be able to duplicate in simpler contexts?
In practice
In hybrid meetings, ask each participant to share their point of view in a very concrete way, i.e. to express themselves on where they are, what conditions they are in, what they have done before and will do afterwards. Knowing each other's situation (and therefore having a better capacity for empathy), everyone can then adapt their posture and their words to address the collective in the most audible, relevant and appropriate way to make themselves understood.
