Forum menu
People only turn their camera on if they want you to see their bookshelves.
1-1 to me it's the same as a phone call, and I tend not to be able to stare peopeople in the eye during those.
Meetings, TBH if there's not a presentation or a spreadsheet or something to be shared and discussed, rather than a co-worker's mug then it's probably not such an important meeting... (IMO).
Interesting topic!
I hadn't really given this any thought before. The company I work for has a culture of cameras on in meetings, there hasn't been any mandate on it, it is just what people do and I can't recall anyone questioning it. As a business I like to think we have a friendly culture and seeing your colleagues face to face seems to help with that. I manage a sales team of remote workers and it has been good for colleagues to get to know each other a bit better. All the other sectors of our business seem to operate in the same way with cameras on by default. Anyone who doesn't want there real life background showing just uses a virtual background. It is only in large seminar style meetings where the message is to turn cameras off. I regularly chair meetings for my team and find it much better when I can see peoples faces to see they are picking up on the key points, if I am presenting and can't see peoples faces it is harder to see their engagement.
Dress code has been an interesting one. Typically office dress code is shirts and no ties. At the start people seemed to match this dress code in Teams calls, but fairly quickly this disappeared, so most people I have meetings with are casually dressed - which seems far better. The exception would be customer calls when we expect the sales team to be slightly smarter dressed.
On a side but related note.
During a teams call does anyone run a sub chat window where you message other people in the call and try to distract them/ stir up some bickering/ get them to laugh, comment on their backgrounds etc and generally take the piss?
Yes, but its very VERY dangerous as someone else already mentioned.
I have made this mistake, early on in my corp career, on a global Microsoft call with MSFT execs with top global partners only and I was having a side chat with my boss as well as listening into this call...
At the time, Microsoft was going through some channel changes that weren't being managed well and go-to-market support from MSFT (GTM) was a big challenge (especially for us at our org which was the largest telco globally at that time).
However, during this discussion about GTM with my boss, whom he and I were very comfortable with frank, often sweary conversations (we were friends before I joined), I mentioned that "Microsoft were massively shit".
Only I had typed that into the main global call window, with the top ten global partners present, several general managers from MS and a whole bunch of great MSFT guys. The presenter stumbled, managed to ask politely that the audience refrain from profanity, and then carried on. I sh@t my pants, my boss asked wtf I was doing and whether I was looking for a P45 and I had to do one huge round of profuse apologetic calls immediately after the call ended.
Luckily, MSFT and the general managers knew me and we had a good relationship and we turned it into a positive, having a good laugh about it and actually sitting down and asking 'why' they were sh1t.
I survived, but I never ever lived it down in Vodafone and went all the way up to director level and my name was sullied from that day on.
A very tough lesson learned.
As a manager I am surprised you aren’t trained with regard to labour law and human rights law and the right to privacy. Lots of reasons not to be on camera including bandwidth, own privacy, children in the house, have they been given a camera by your organisation? But the main reason may just be that the meetings are not perceived as efficient use of their time. I understand it’s frustrating if people are multitasking. That’s up to the manager to make the meetings efficient and useful for everyone involved.
This is probably the most sensible reply so far; the children point especially so - especially when schools are shut. Privacy is a very VERY prickly HR subject, with constructive dismissal cases galore around because of it. If you work with colleagues in Germany, for example, there are several incredibly fiercely protected rules around webcam use - so this reply makes some serious sense. I would probably be seeking HR advice before any 'mandating' happens.
Nothing of use to add, but I’m currently sat outdoors and have just been watching a buzzard 2 metres away swoop down to catch and eat it’s breakfast….. The snowdrops are popping up around me, I’ve a couple of trees to fell. Yes I may earn a pittance but at least I don’t have to put up with all this crap you lot do!
It’d be a firm cameras off from me
Seeking HR advice is a very good point and I think if I were in the position the OP is in I would also be looking to have a discussion with another manager at a similar level or my boss to check that the route I wanted to go down makes sense
To me this is a situation whereby there may well be unwanted secondary effects ie putting folks back up and ending up with malicious compliance or more unhappy employees
I think some people are just shy or lack confidence! Especially in programming jobs and things, where I think it's fair to say more than an average number of people are on the autism spectrum. That doesn't mean they can't work very well.
And webcams just don't work very well. You can't make eye contact, there's lag in the video, it's not big enough to make out body language well. It's not the same as meeting in person.
I rarely switch mine on any more. I've read the entire thread, and I've still not understood a good reason to do so.
Also, I doubt a lack of engagement in meetings will be solved by webcams.
You need to talk to people to find out why they aren't engaged.
OP, before you mandate cameras on have you spoken to them about why the cameras are off?
IMO 3 x 30 mins a week is excessive pending on what the purpose of the call is, for individuals to give updates on pieces of important work fine, for a chinwag thats too much IMO.
Teams or other software is a pale imitation of being in a room/space together, you cant chat as freely, conversations which would have spanned a day cant be crammed into shorter group calls.
The other thing that is annoying about Teams calls is, the chair doesn't have the same grip on the calls as if they were face to face, people that love hearing their voice will continue to speak and this will block others from voicing up and also lose interest. @rich_s I did a training course recently where this happened and after session 1 went camera off for the following 5 sessions.
WFH more during the pandemic has shown me that the relationships I had in the office weren't as valuable to me or others as I thought when in the office, I simply no longer have anything to chat to these people about or any office gossip to spread!
I think in my work it’s about right. We have daily meetings first thing in the morning and we don’t have to have cameras for that as it’s just data and organisation for day stuff. If we have any other meetings where we are being more personal and need engagement most meeting leaders will ask people to put their cameras on for a few minutes then say people can turn them off after 5-10 minutes if it’s a longer meeting.
If I’m having a meeting one to one with my manager I have my camera on - I would expect the same in my previous manager role.
I started this new job in lockdown and the one thing that really annoys me is people who make a fuss about having cameras on. For crying out loud all I’ll be able to see is your face and probably a cream wall with a picture on it behind you. It really helps me to see your face and it’s just plain rude not to turn it on when asked - and if say you’re not dressed properly or something just explain that and that’s fine - we are all generally working the same way at home now and know people might be in pyjamas and be unshaven etc.
I think some people are just shy or lack confidence! Especially in programming jobs and things, where I think it’s fair to say more than an average number of people are on the autism spectrum. That doesn’t mean they can’t work very well.
It would be fascinating to know whether cameras on/off opinions align with introverted and extraverted personality traits. And whether the "off" enthusiasts are mostly working in IT.
Can we start insisting on HD webcams and quality lighting, and stands to bring the laptop to an appropriate height next then? Plus a decent WiFi connection and maximum distance from the router.
I'm a photographer and staring at someone's grainy badly lit shot of the underside of their chin/face is genuinely off-putting/distracting.
It's a generational thing I think. My generation (millenials) seem much happier not to see each other if we don't have to. I'm the youngest person in my company, everyone else is in their late forties or fifties and they seem to want to talk all the time about nothing important, phone up to ask for validation of their thoughts even when they know the answer and are keen to get back to the office. I think my generation just prefers to get down to business without all the touchy feely seeing and validating each other stuff.
I think a mandate is a bit daft. People aren't necessarily comfortable with people seeing their homes, seeing into other peoples homes or being looked at if they don't have to be. Treat it as a phone call, which is what it is. Telling them "I don't trust you, you have to turn your camera on" is not going to help.
This is an interesting thread. There's no mandate in my organisation but the culture is generally "cameras on". My take is that it depends on the meeting. 121s and small team/ project meetings are replacing face to face, and it's often quite helpful to have visual cues from my staff, particularly if I'm asking them to do something and I want to know if they're comfortable with it. I see much less point of cameras in larger meetings/ presentations - the images are too small to see how your presentation is being received and it can be a distraction. I think the "seeing your home" thing is largely bogus, as it's easy enough to blur out the background.
When you all worked in the office did you sit there with bags over your heads?
Not bags, no. But yes to ear-defenders to block out the chatter and to safety glasses adapted to form blinkers and cut down on the visual distractions.
Like others here, I've WFH for about 10 years but it was something forced on me by my employer moving to Open Plan. I hate working from home, but I hate being constantly distracted and at risk of distracting others far more. The last thing want or need is to import those conditions into my own home and I'll only use the camera for very small meeting. And then it's out of politeness, not because I want to or gain any benefit from it.
Saying that it's important for team cohesion seems to me to be the height of arrogance. Why assume that the conditions you prefer are automatically going to benefit everybody else? We're all adults, and capable of making our own decisions.
It's an interesting question.
I had to chair some online group discussions for university students. I had three groups of students each week for a few months. The groups settled into their own routines quite quickly: Group 1 were cameras on, all the time. Group 2 was cameras on if speaking, but mostly off. Group 3 were cameras off.
I absolutely hated chairing group 3. None of them wanted to talk, you'd never know if they were present or not (on at least one occasion, I asked a direct question to someone who clearly wasn't there). It was like pulling teeth. It made all the potential problems of poor engagement so much worse.
Clearly lecturer vs students is a different power dynamic to an office of colleagues, though.
it’s easy enough to blur out the background.
I've only had a quick play with this (cameras are disabled by policy on works pc/phones) - it only works with a static background. I found it amusing that the 'fireworks over the Thames' vista that I appeared against suddenly included my dressing-gown clad daughter and the spontaneous appearance of a large, open fridge door! 😀
No – it is rude because the no camera person is being rude, it is quite an aggressive action in interactions with colleagues
WTAF - I'm glad I don't work with people that would take offense at such trivial things. Aggressive? LOL!
<clears throat> 'Offence'. That's all.
If you were asking me, no, I don’t put up with “this crap”. My house, my rules and if I don’t want the camera on, it ain’t going on, end of.
Wasn't directed at anyone personally. I just find it weird that anyone would care sufficiently to start mandating webcams, and despite protestations from some quarters no-one's come up with a reason why they're necessary beyond "it's rude." Well, boo hoo. How did y'all cope when we just had phones, drive the length of the country for a 30 minute meeting?
Colleagues who flat refuse to switch camera on in any meeting, that is a power and control move and needs a private and diplomatic chat
Why?
A "private and diplomatic chat" sounds far more like a power and control move to me than anything relating to a webcam.
it is quite an aggressive action in interactions with colleagues when there are good reasons not to
Name one.
I could perhaps understand it in a "getting to know you" phase of a working relationship. But I've worked with the same team unchanged for North of three years, the last time I saw my networky counterpart was at a conference pre-covid and I don't think I've ever seen my boss face-to-face since he became my boss. No-one cares, it simply doesn't matter. It's an outmoded "but we've always done it this way" working practice just like...
Dress code has been an interesting one. Typically office dress code is shirts and no ties.
... dress codes. Does wearing a shirt help you file accounts more effectively? It's pointless enough in a non-customer-facing office, expecting a dress code from home workers is plain stupid.
I once worked in an office where the male dress code was a full business suit. Not only did it serve no purpose but it was actively dangerous (and expensive), that's totally what I want to be wearing when I'm running cables under desks.
I think my generation just prefers to get down to business
Give over! 😀 That's not a flavour of Millennial that I recognise...
Toss it off endlessly 'cos I'm soooo exhausted' and messing about with phones. Now that I recognise 🙂
For me ( and I have never worked in this sort of environment thank goodness) before you go charging in with a mandate to always have cameras on a polite discussion with each staff member asking why they do not want their cameras on could be useful but be prepared for answers you will not like. People may have perfectly good reasons or they may not.
Then you need to establish what your aims are in making sure cameras are on and to decide if that aim is met by having cameras on
Are you new to managing at that level?
Most people in my work turn them off. Rarely are they on. If you just sit in the meeting and don't contribute, it's noticed. Generally we don't invite people without a reason, i.e. they have a job to do on the project.
If the meeting is big enough that not all participants can be seen at once on video, we switch off. Saves bandwidth. 1-1's are always on.
My org (global IT services company with 300k employees) has a published statement of cameras being a choice as “we’re being invited into your home” which is pretty reasonable. Most people seem to have them on for 1-2-1 or small groups, but off for larger groups. We also have corporate branded backgrounds we can use if we don’t want to blur. These are actually pretty good when doing client facing work as you can put your job title and role on them.
I did get called out by one client for not having my camera on during an all-hands call of around 100 people. I pointed out that the laptop his company had issued me wasn’t capable of running video and camera when there were that many attendees…
The one that gets me is people refusing to say “hello” or “goidbye” at the start or end of the day in the Teams chat.
Sod that. I’ve got around 100 active channels in Teams, and probably 30-40 chats on the go with either individuals or groups. I’m not saying ‘morning’ and ‘evening’ to every bloody one. If my status is ‘busy’ or ‘available‘ then I’m present, if it says ‘away’, I’m away.
How did y’all cope when we just had phones, drive the length of the country for a 30 minute meeting?
Yeah, but phones are a pretty crap way of meeting. So why replicate it?
Are you new to managing at that level?
I'm sure this was meant as a friendly honest open question... but it just made me laugh out loud.
I mentioned that “Microsoft were massively shit”.
Only I had typed that into the main global call window, with the top ten global partners present,
The only fair reaction would have been be sage nods all round. Of course they'd have to have had cameras on for you to see this.
On
Saves bandwidth.
I keep hearing this and it makes kinda theoretical sense but whose bandwidth?
Broadband is a more basic requirement than water and for me in practical terms I'm usually working in a house where in the evening there will be screens streaming stuff, multiple sonos, possibly work computers x3 and phones plus various smart shite all on the home broadband. Far more domestic bandwidth use than during the day.
Employer bandwidth? Not really my problem but I've never encountered an issue including in large seminars. So when I hear people cite bandwidth as a reason I can't see them (not that I ask as I've said early in the thread) I assume it's usually a proxy for something else.
Have no real problem with the camera on and like someone stated earlier it's a good way of seeing who you are addressing (if like me you often have meetings with people you have never met). It can lead to a little disorientation when folk with the camera off are talking as you aren't always sure who is speaking.
On a side note though I love teams and video meetings as in the construction industry they bloody love to have a sit down to discuss something that only needs an email or two and the site is never 5mins away....more often 2 or 3 hours away and all for bugger all. Prior to COVID we spent so much time pointlessly driving round the country and now it's 10 or 15 mins of my time without going anywhere. Client insisted we had a face to face the other day in York (nearly 4 hours for me) and my employer went along with this request...25 mins later I was back in the car...won't be happening again.
Bandwidth or perhaps computer resource. Either way I have had plenty of meetings with our small team (5-10 people) and the picture or sound freezes for an individual pretty regularly, and not always the same person. Turning off cameras seems to help. As you can tell I am not IT literate enough to know exactly what the issue is. Could be their internet connection (upload) or could be their computer, especially Teams seems to use 100% resources of every computer I have used and seems to freeze often on Mac or Linux devices. My work does not pay for my personal laptop I am using to connect to my work desktop and they don't pay for my broadband, so they can't expect an expensive fibre connection. I know people sharing 5+ on a connection on the cheapest broadband package you can get and on personal devices.
Give over! 😀 That’s not a flavour of Millennial that I recognise…
Toss it off endlessly ‘cos I’m soooo exhausted’ and messing about with phones. Now that I recognise 🙂
You realise that some "Millennials" are now in their 40s, right? It's perhaps time to stop sticking the boot in to an entire generation and telling them how shit they are once they've become grandparents.
I keep hearing this and it makes kinda theoretical sense but whose bandwidth?
My boss lives in some rural backwater. His Internet connection barely supports voice let alone video.
Fortunately.
It’s perhaps time to stop sticking the boot in to an entire generation and telling them how shit they are once they’ve become grandparents.
Blimey. Errrrm OK Mr Grumpypants. Will do. 😉
My team manager did do a lets have the camera on for one of our weekly team meetings. Two of us attended wearing masks (cant be too safe), sunglasses (definitely cant be to safe) and hoodies (ermmm). He just sighed and five mins in I crashed my camera messing with background images.
He didnt bother again after that.
We were a mostly remote team before lockdown though and often had to dial into random calls. So being just a voice isnt a massive change.
Whilst it is something I do like from a providing training viewpoint where getting to see whether people are looking confused or not is useful I dont see it adds any real value for most meetings where generally there is a screen share going on anyway.
Its not like seeing someone necessarily lets you know how much they are contributing. I was fairly notorious when I did attend meetings in person for looking half asleep with the rest of my attention appearing to be dedicated to spinning pens or other stuff around before saying something and making it clear I was paying attention.
Likewise been on plenty of calls where people have looked like they are paying rapt attention whereas I know they dont have a scoobies what is being discussed.
Likewise been on plenty of calls where people have looked like they are paying rapt attention whereas I know they dont have a scoobies what is being discussed
Hiya! 🙋😬
I’d question the OPs management style based on the thread title alone.
Absolutely this, as soon as I saw it.
"I'm the manager here, and ..."
"fellow managers, what do you think of ..."