A real Life Video Conference.

Fig. A real life video Conference (Mr Jose, and other fellow members)

Here is an analysis of the real experience about the Video Conference that happened in this session, vs the theories read and put on blog after last session.

Conducting a real life video conference is totally a different experience from that reading in theories, or planning sitting behind table. When doing the real stuff, we don't remember any theory. There are no designs, or approaches in mind, but just one clear aim, to make them understand what we mean.

When we were there, trying to put system in proper place, all things were like.....uncertainity about what is going to happen. "Oh god, my slides are not visible to them, what to do now? Can we put it on the front screen, can we focus camera on the Laptop"...and all sorts of combination keeps going.

Then some intelligent guy helps us putting the slides on screen. Thank God ( & thanks to Anil). Now we can sit and think about proceeding for the conference. What was our theory....oh yes, Soft System Methodology.
OK, i have the notes ready, about the CATWOE...

So..Clients...The Trainers and Trainees(as per previous blog). That's us, and the people on the other side. But here, even the operator helping us this transmission, and the audience guiding and watching us, become the part of this conference. And hence, were the clients of this Conference.

Then it occurred like, let's check if they can hear our voice, or not. "Hello Simon....can u hear me."
"Yes..i am getting you. Are you getting me?"
Yes, voice can be transferred now. And video too. Lets get started with talks; we'll see the Theory later.
And when we started talking, one point lead to another, one topic bought another. Introduction, then contact details, then schedule...everything kept flowing. There was no Soft System Methodology anywhere in the talks.

Actors were all the members, taking part in the conference, not only the trainer. Because every one was teaching something, and everyone was learning from others.

Owner, in the notebook, we mentioned as Parent Company. But here, everyone owns the video conference because activity of each member affects the conference. When the designer allows everyone to make changes in systems, everyone becomes the owner. If parent company proposes some schedule, but child company do not agrees, how can parent company alone be the owner of this training system? All users, having permission to make changes, becomes the owner.

Environment, was it only the seminar hall, or the meeting room in both companies?....NO. One team member was not available that day, might be due to bad weather. So bad weather in this country affected the conference going in some other country. The length of Mic wire also had an impact on the ease of people in conference. So Environment should include the climate, the physical things, and even the aroma of the company.

Transformation: changes that are affected by this system. The training do has a huge transformation on the skills, but the thing that we all were trying to achieve was, to make ourselves clearly understood to the other person. Be it about any technology that training is about, or the culture, or even the time-difference between two locations. The main aim was, to bring them on a common ground, to make them understand, what we have in mind.

World View, or, how the system is perceived in a particular root definition. It's this whole blog, with our views about the Video Conference. And also the comments put on this post, which gives views of other people about the conference.