Speaking Engagements & Private Workshops - Get Dean Bubley to present or chair your event

Need an experienced, provocative & influential telecoms keynote speaker, moderator/chair or workshop facilitator?
To see recent presentations, and discuss Dean Bubley's appearance at a specific event, click here

Showing posts with label conferences. Show all posts
Showing posts with label conferences. Show all posts

Wednesday, September 11, 2019

Future Spectrum Policy: 10-year Disruptions

Yesterday, I presented & debated on disruptions & directions for spectrum-management, at UK regulator Ofcom's annual spectrum conference in London. The slide-deck (it was just a short 15-minute intro) & my Twitter thread are at the bottom of this post.

I was on a panel with representatives from Google (Simon Saunders, who looks after EMEA connectivity partnerships) & the FCC (Julius Knapp, Chief of Rules & Policy Division)

This was a really fun session, as my remit was to look into the medium-to-far future (10 years or so) and think about some totally new angles on spectrum for upcoming regulatory policy. Often, I throw rocks at things that don’t make sense… This time, it was more like tossing rocks into a pond, and watching the ripples propagate & stimulating ideas.

My previous presentations at Ofcom events have been on more immediate needs on spectrum: sharing models, local cellular, Private LTE, Neutral Host* networks [see comment on upcoming workshop, below] and the need for “network diversity” rather than just enabling a 3GPP 5G monoculture. This was about taking a much longer view.

Some of the topics I covered were:
  • Designing spectrum management policy (& future 6G mobile systems) with a direct link to implied energy consumption / CO2 emissions from its usage
  • Asking the question “will harmonisation be as important in future as it has been in the past?” given that we’re ever better at creating software abstraction layers, and creating multi-radio / multi-band chips and devices.
  • The next stages of dynamic spectrum allocatin: towards fluid spectrum marketplaces, API-led spectrum platforms, and radio resource within broader “Mobile Network-aaS or Satellite Service-aaS” concepts
  • Ensuring that spectrum allocations and processes ensure multiple delivery/business models are supported: services, private, amenity networks etc. This contrasts, for example, with existing national licenses for mobile spectrum, which are geared strongly to the MNO business model.
  • My new disruptions/distractions framework for realistic assessment of predictions of tech deployment & market evolution (see this post)
  • Spectrum releases aimed at more device-to-device & intra-device usage (for example between components on a circuit-board)
  • Potential post-Brexit divergence for UK #pectrum policy (we didn’t get a chance to drill into this much)
Overall, it was a really enjoyable session (my Twitter thread is at the end of this post). It might odd to describe a regulatory event on radio spectrum as “fun”, but this panel was certainly lively and wide-ranging. My co-panellists talked about everything from DevOps and just-in-time spectrum availability, to taking the lessons from US CBRS and expanding to other bands or regions.

I'm looking forward to similar events in the UK and other regions, both on spectrum (eg mobile / WiFi / satellite needs) and other regulatory angles on future networks and communications. Please get in touch if you need a speaker or panellist.

*Neutral Host Networks — if this area is of interest, I am running a 2nd London public workshop on Nov 21st, with Peter Curnow-Ford MIoD Details here: https://disruptivewireless.blogspot.com/p/2nd-neutral-host-networks-london-public.html And if you’re interested in a private internal session for your own team, please see here: https://disruptivewireless.blogspot.com/p/private-workshops.html


Dean Bubley presentation at Ofcom Mapping The Future 2019 Spectrum Conference from Dean Bubley

My Twitter thread for the rest of the event is here.

 

Thursday, August 31, 2017

Publications & Upcoming Events

This is an "administrative" post, covering my recent and upcoming publications & events. Please get in touch if you'd like any more details about booking me for speaking/workshops, or for considering published output - information AT disruptive-analysis DOT com.


Events

I speak at, or attend, about 30 public events per year, plus a number of private workshops, executive off-sites and online webinars. Recent notable events have included:
  • Keynote on Futurism at Ofcom's spectrum workshop day (link)
  • Presenting at TMForum's Action Week (on blockchain - link)
  • Keynote on new wireless & spectrum models at WiFi Now in Washington DC (link)
  • Chairing Total Telecom's Connected Britain event
  • My own workshops, run jointly with Caroline Gabriel, on Enterprise/Private Cellular Networks, and AI + Blockchain for the Telecoms Industry (link)
The next few months are looking pretty hectic for events I'm speaking at, attending or moderating. My schedule always a bit of a work-in-progress, and some things may change a bit, so please get in touch with me if you want to arrange meetings/briefings, or need a speaker for other events. 
  • 3 Sep, London, London Futurists: Agenda for the Future (link)
    • Presentation: "Anti-Forecasting"
  • 4-7 Sep, Shanghai, Huawei Connect (link)
    • Attending as an analyst
  • 18-19 Sep, Bangkok: PTC Spectrum Futures (link)
    • Presentation: "A Futuristic View of Spectrum: Where Are We Going?"
    • CBRS Workshop
  • 25-27 Sep, Busan, S Korea: ITU Telecom World (link)
    • Panel Moderator: Reinventing Telcos
  • 3-5 Oct  Orlando, US: Astricon (link)
    • Keynote on "What the Future Holds for Asterisk - And What's Overhyped"
  • 5 Oct (TBA), Webinar: IBwave (link to follow)
    • Presenting on Convergence & Evolution in Indoor Wireless
  • 11-12 Oct, Brussels: IICom Annual Conference (link)
    • Presenting on "Innovation in connectivity technologies - embracing heterogeneity"
  • 23-24 Oct, Phoenix, US: Broadsoft Connections (link)
    •  Attending as an analyst
  • 25-26 Oct, San Francisco: GE Minds & Machines (link)
    • Attending as an analyst
  • 31 Oct - 1 Nov, London: Total Telecom Congress (link)
    • Speaking "Optimising Spectrum Regulation in the 5G era"
    • Chairing Day 2
  • 02 Nov, The Hague, Netherlands: WiFi Now Europe (link)
    • Keynote + Panel
  • 14-15 Nov, Lisbon: TADSummit (link)
    • Presenting on Enterprise & Industrial IoT mobile networks
  • 28-29 Nov, Bangkok: WiFi Now APAC (link)
    • Keynote + Panel
  • 30 Nov, London: Great Telco Debate (link)
    •  Speaker, topic TBA
  • 01 Dec, London DB + CG Private Cellular Workshop #2 (link to follow)
    • 1-day workshop on Enterprise / Private mobile networks
    • Contact: information AT disruptive-analysis DOT com for details

Publications

For my written output, I work through three main channels:
  • This blog and cross-posts on my LinkedIn & Medium. Recent topics have included:
    • Blockchain/ICOs (link and link)
    • Mobile connection bonding & SD-WAN (link)
    • Net Neutrality (link)
    • Sensors (link)
    • Amazon / Edge-Computing (link)
    • Data-over-Sound (link)
    • UCaaS (link)
    • Spectrum Sharing / Enterprise Cellular (link)
  • STL's Future of The Network research stream, which I run as associate director. My own recently-contributed reports include: 
    • Facebook's Telecom Infra Project (link)
    • Edge Computing (link)
    • VoLTE (link)
    • 5G Spectrum (link)
    • eSIM (link)
    • Other reports in the stream written by others have covered 4G in Asia, NFV and other topics. 
    • My next reports will look at LPWAN, cRAN/vRAN, and WiFi's strategic implications for Telcos.
  • Disruptive Analysis branded reports & papers, which include both open-market reports such as last year's eSIM study (link), and client-commissioned papers - some of which are internal and kept under NDA. Recent public documents include
    • Blockchain for Telcos, written for Juniper Networks (link)
    • Integrating IoT & Video Comms, written for Dialogic (link)
    • Data-over-Sound, written for Chirp (link)
    • IoT + Voice/Messaging Comms, written for Metaswitch (link
    • Upcoming paper on consumer communications privacy

Monday, January 16, 2017

My 2017 Plans: Research, Events & Client Focus

Excuse the narcissism: This blog post is about me. 

It's intended to clarify my current research focus, the ways I engage with clients, events I get involved in, and the other people and companies I work with.

Most of my work falls into 3 broad and overlapping areas:
  • Network Technology, Policy & Strategy: Evolution of telecom networks & operator business models. Fixed & mobile infrastructure, 5G, WiFi, LPWAN, NFV/SDN, spectrum policy, net neutrality, SD-WAN, MEC, MVNOs, eSIM, policy, mobile broadband, OSS/BSS and so on. (I don't do much on photonics & transport, or detailed product analysis or economic modelling though).
  • Communications Applications & Services: How humans & machines communicate & what that enables. Voice, telephony, video comms, messaging, WebRTC, cPaaS, VoLTE, UC/UCaaS, role of telcos, contextual communications, social communications, VoIP apps, bots & speech-tech, wholesale, numbering, collaboration etc.
  • TelcoFuturism: The intersection points of the telecoms / enterprise comms industry, with other orthogonal trends such as AI, blockchain, AR/VR, robotics, drones, IoT, self-driving vehicles, quantum technology, technological (un)employment, future government, human enhancement, geopolitics, advanced healthcare and demography.
In terms of client engagement and business model, I work as an analyst, consultant and futurist. This means several areas of activity:

  • Written reports, sometimes under my own Disruptive Analysis brand (eg recently on eSIM - link - and soon on Blockchain + Telecoms & maybe WebRTC/cPaaS once again). 
  • But in much greater volume, my report output goes through STL Partners / Telco 2.0, for which I act as Associate Director of the "Future of the Network" research stream (link). Recent FoN reports have covered 5G strategy, eSIM, LPWAN, Net Neutrality, SDN/NFV, SD-WAN. I'll be writing for STL on those topics plus also spectrum policy, VoLTE, satellite communications, vendor positioning & value-chain, network slicing & edge-computing in 2017. (If you're interested in subscribing to the Future of the Network programme, please contact me at information AT disruptive-analysis DOT com, or speak to an existing STL Partners sales contact).
  • Internal advisory projects and workshops for operators, vendors, regulators and investors. I participate in various private consulting assignments, under-NDA roundtables and presentations, or advisory workshops - sometimes for C-level executives and sometimes for departmental/product/strategy teams. Much of my work is on assisting companies to understand future market context & opportunities (especially across multiple silos), answer complex questions about value-chain & competitive dynamics, or "stress-testing" of existing plans and world-views. I'm happy to provide proposals & references on request.
  • Keynote speaker at public and private events. This spans both technology-specific issues ("what will 5G look like?", "what are the uses of blockchain in telecoms?") through to broader futurism ("what will the telecom industry look like in 2030, and what can we do about it?)". Get in touch if you want me to speak at something - fees/expenses apply for events that are company-specific, or require significant travel.
  • Providing input into M&A due-diligence, regulatory & policymaking processes or investment theses. I'm no longer a certified financial analyst, though.
  • Advisory boards and retainer relationships. I'm happy to work with clients on an ongoing basis, as long as it does not compromise my independence (eg ability to criticise). 
  • Writing white papers or custom reports for vendors and operators. I only write documents where my opinion is already aligned with my client's, or where they are looking for a contrarian or "provocative" piece. I retain editorial control. Given my trenchant and well-publicised views on many technology areas, there's no point asking me to write a glowing testimonial for stuff I criticise regularly. (Also, I don't do product comparisons or endorsements).
  • Some of my work is conducted in partnership with other independent consultants and analysts. I've worked with Martin Geddes (link), Alan Quayle (link) and Chris Lewis (link) before, and am open to other collaborations if they are mutually beneficial.
  • Interviews and other contributions for press and broadcast media. As well as industry specialists like TelecomTV, I've also been quoted by BBC, Economist, FT & many others.
I attend and speak at/moderate a lot of events - probably around 30-40 a year. These are mostly in the UK, rest of Europe and US, although I'd intend to spend more time at conferences in Asia and the rest of the world. My favourite events are those with 100-300 people, run by small-to-midsize event companies, and not over-controlled by sponsors paying for speaking slots or trying to censor the agenda. Any credible event has dissenting voices and debate. 

Conferences I visit or speak at are mostly a mix of public industry events (eg TADSummit, Great Telco Debate, Terrapinn, Layer123, WiFiNow, Cambridge Wireless & Upperside are among the best), company-specific forums run by vendors (eg Comptel Nexterday, Metaswitch Forum, GenBand Perspectives) and regulatory/policy workshops. Some Meetups are good as well - in particular London Futurists.

I go to a few midsize trade shows (eg Enterprise Connect, TMForum) but not the ones with 10's of thousands of people (CES, MWC, CeBIT etc). The latter I find a complete waste of time, as I'm spread too thinly to be able to focus on particular themes. In the past I've had 400+ briefing invitations for MWC, and it takes weeks just to process emails and say "no thanks" without being excessively rude. 

My current roster of upcoming events (some speaking, some just attending) includes:
Please get in touch if you're looking for a speaker, moderator, or just an attendee prepared to ask difficult questions & post a bunch of commentary on Twitter during the event. Also, let me know if you're an AR professional running an analyst summit - I try to get to as many as I can.

In the past, I've also co-run small workshop-style events with Martin Geddes (eg on "Future of Voice") and that's something I may well return to in 2017.

In terms of publishing short-form pieces, this blog will continue to be my main vehicle. I also republish most longer pieces on my LinkedIn page (link), which often gets more comments and engagement - and also I put some on Medium (link), which doesn't. Occasionally people ask to syndicate my posts - it depends on the site and whether it gets a different audience to me. I don't often write guest posts for other people, except occasionally for consulting / retainer clients - I'm quite a bit more costly than freelance writers.

I put up quite a lot of my public conference presentations on SlideShare (link) although I intend to update it more frequently. There's also quite a few of my recent presentations on YouTube (link) & a few on Vimeo (link). I'm going to be doing - and collating - more video content in 2017.

Otherwise, for 2017 I'm hopefully going to carry on my usual broad & pithy coverage & commentary on the telecoms industry, plus spend a rather larger fraction of my time on more general futurism and tech-policy topics. If you don't know already, I'm @disruptivedean on Twitter, and can be reached by email at information at disruptive-analysis dot com.


Thursday, November 10, 2016

5G vs. AI

Last week, I was in Mainz in Germany, at a European telecom regulator's workshop about spectrum and technology evolution for future 5G networks. (link). It was a very formal event, with most people from government agencies, technology standards bodies and telcos, broadcasters and the like. Some industry verticals such as energy, rail and automotive were also represented. I was one of the few analysts there - and there were no journalists, I think.

This week, I've been in San Francisco, at a very different style of event, about Artificial Intelligence. (link). It was a multi-streamed conference, with a small expo area, a press office, lively panel sessions - and a selection of Silicon Valley's finest, from VCs to Google to Uber to innovation outposts of GE and Airbus, as well as countless software startups and enterprise IT folk.

I was there as part of my TelcoFuturism research effort (link) where I'm looking at the impact and opportunities of technologies such as AI, blockchain, drones, AR/VR, robotics and quantum computing on the telecoms industry. I was interested to see both internal applications of AI in running telcos' networks and IT systems, and also in terms of scope for new services and driving connectivity.

It's that last thing that struck me most. There is a huge gulf between the expectations of the 5G community (which talks endlessly of self-driving cars and robots using ultra-high performance mobile networks, or "massive Iot" networks of sensors and actuators) and the AI and robotics community (which doesn't).

I asked quite a lot of people developing both AI software (which is a huge diversity from deep-learning, to image-processing, to personal assistants and bots) and hardware and applications (autonomous vehicles, GPUs etc) how important networks were to their innovations.

The general answer: not that much. They want as much processing done on the device itself as possible, not controlled remotely or from the cloud, especially where anything safety-critical is involved. A speaker from Nvidia showed a board that is essentially a vehiclular supercomputer, using inputs from cameras, engine monitoring, LIDAR and all sorts of other sensors to work out what to do. A self-driving car is not going to ask the cloud for permission to brake in an emergency. There is a recognition that networks are not ubiquitous or completely reliable, so they need to act independently - autonomous means autonomous. This also means much lower latencies.

Other companies are working on facial/emotional recognition systems that can be embedded in smartphones, or even directly in camera hardware, without the need for an OS - or sending data to/from the network all the time. The speaker from GE said that aircraft engines may generate terabytes of data during a flight - but have enough onboard intelligence to do analytics, optimisation and even self-maintenance in flight. That doesn't mean they won't also transmit telemetry data via satellite (or maybe air-to-ground 5G in future), but that likely won't be for realtime control.

The line from Nvidia's website (link) that should be read carefully by 5G advocates is this: 

"With a unified architecture, deep neural networks can be trained on a system in the data centre and deployed in the car"
However, that is not to say there is no requirement for connectivity. There will be a lot of data flowing around, generated by sensors or user/device behaviour, fed back to a machine-learning system and analytics function to help develop, train and improve future algorithms and models. But that doesn't need to be realtime - it can wait until the car gets home, or the handset dips back into 4G/5G/WiFi coverage. Vehicle-to-vehicle data flows will be useful in helping build a better picture of the context, but that is a secondary consideration at the moment, and also may well not involve cellular connections.

There will also be a need for non-critical information to use the network, such as mapping and navigation data for vehicles, entertainment for passengers, or advertising overlays for an AR headset. In an IoT context, the irrigation data from one farm's sensors will implicitly be helping train the AI system used to manage other locations' (and maybe even other industries') systems.

I think there is a gulf in understanding between telecoms and AI communities. I don't think many of the 5G standards and verticals discussions factor in the rise in GPUs at the edge/in devices, for a lot of "heavy lifting". It often won't need to be done in the cloud, or even mobile edge computing nodes. Some of the VCs seemed to get "connectivity" a bit better, but even some of those seemed unrealistic about 5G timelines, deployment and capabilities.

Clearly there will still be many needs for huge volumes of 4G/5G Internet connectivity from smartphones, streaming video for various applications and a lot of genuine IoT requirements. There is definitely an ongoing business model for enhanced mobile broadband. (Sidenote for another post: Home WiFi is also going to be mesh and AI-enabled by companies like Google and Amazon).

So... I think that some of the expected critical IoT and massive IoT uses for 5G are being overstated. There may well be a need for more mobile uplink data to help train deep-learning systems and other analytics tools. But that often doesn't need to be realtime. While they might need software updates from the cloud, a lot of endpoints will be smart enough to make their own decisions and analysis without relying on he network.

I also think that in the 3-5yr timeframe for mobile and IoT 5G deployments to have broad coverage, AI technology (both software and hardware) will have progressed far beyond even where it is today. There are so many branches of AI, from deep-learning to image recognition to bots - and these have much tighter couplings with the enterprise IT systems and end-devices, than the network. 

Meanwhile, the telecoms industry is looking forward to exciting 3-year processes to define "agenda items" in interminable regulatory committee stages, and regional sub-committees, before the next ITU World Radio Congress in 2019, to debate 28GHz vs. 32GHz bands, or work out how to "harmonise" 700MHz for 5G against incumbent desires of broadcasters and others.

At the moment, in the new strategic battleground of Networks vs. AI, I suspect that Moore's Law and deep-learning mostly favours the robots.

This post is from Disruptive Analysis' new TelcoFuturism research programme. This looks at strategical implications of intersections between the telecom/network industry and other adjacent trends. If you are interested in more detail about this, or to arrange an advisory briefing or keynote speaking engagement, please contact information AT disruptive-analysis DOT com.

Wednesday, October 14, 2015

A few thoughts on the IIT RTC conference



Last week I attended the Illinois Institute of Technologyconference on Realtime Communications. I enjoyed it immensely – not a huge event (maybe 150-200 or so people, spread across various tracks), but a really good mix of attendees and topics. As well as WebRTC and cloud communications, it covered more general aspects of IP voice, IoT networks and applications, a touch of 5G, and quite a lot on public safety / NG911. Quite a bit of technology, but also a decent focus on use-cases and business. And well-curated to avoid obvious corporate pitches, even by sponsors.

There were many of the “usual suspects” for WebRTC, VoIP & APIs there – among them Chad Hart, Tim Panton, Emil Ivov, Alan Quayle, Dan Burnett, Ivelin Ivanov, Andy Abramson, Vladimir Beloborodov, Robin Raymond and James Body. But there was also a good representation of service providers (eg Comcast), and major IT/enterprise comms vendors with WebRTC leanings, including IBM, Microsoft, Oracle, Intel, Avaya & Unify, plus assorted smaller developers (for a mini TadHack hackathon), academics and students from IIT, and a few industry veterans like Henning Schulzrinne (former FCC CTO) and Richard Shockey (SIP Forum). Google participated remotely (especially on the topic of ORTC), and GenBand was also there in force, with its Kandy bus outside for a day.

I did a general presentation on the WebRTC market status (there’s now more than 100m active users, various new use-cases, and 20+ service provider deployments – more details soon). I also moderated a panel on contextual communications (with Tim, Ivelin & Santhana from GenBand), and participated in one with Henning about the evolution of “identifiers” and especially the future role of the phone number. I picked up a lot of new insights into areas such as WebRTC+IoT (more soon), the state-of-the-art for mobile WebRTC implementation, and the technical/regulatory/financial challenges of future forms of public safety networks and emergency communications.

A couple of quick thoughts I’ll expand on in other posts or reports in coming weeks:
  • IBM made a great point about using IoT events to trigger a separate WebRTC communications session, eg a temperature sensor in a machine kick-starting a video/audio session, when it hits a threshold
  • The fragmented nature of US emergency communications tells me that while 911/NG911 will remain as “lowest common denominator”, we will see various other higher-level emergency apps on smartphones for particular uses. Ideally, there would be an emergency API that developers could use inside any mobile app, as well as having support for the native dialler
  • Interesting presentation & ideas by Thomas Howe about the use of automated interaction with businesses via SMS (see just justkisst.me
  • Great presentation from Chris Rezendes about IoT - using the fascinating example of water metering/monitoring, also also asserting the resurgence of SMEs
  • As we go towards 5G (& also SDN), we’re seeing another attempt at defining “quality classes” in networks – but what is the right “level of abstraction” to encourage app-developers to be interested in network performance? And do developers actually want to ask for certain QoS levels (or even pay for it)? There seems to be a good argument that developers want to have something like a “network status API” that allows them to manage variable network conditions, rather than necessarily ask for specific quality or assurances.
I also did an interview with NoJitter during the event, about contextual comms - there's a great write-up by Beth Schultz here.

I go to a lot of good events, but I have to say that overall this was one of my favourites when it comes to understanding “what’s next?” in communications, without an overdose of corporate spin. In some ways it reminded me of the old and much-missed eComm conferences. 

Many thanks to the organisers - I’ll definitely be back next year, especially as Chicago is such a great city to hang out in for an extra couple of days. (The picture below is one of mine taken from the lake with #nofilter, as Instagram would say)

Friday, July 03, 2015

Videoconferencing does not replace business travel



I did a short radio interview the other day, about London airport expansion, and the possible new runway at Heathrow or Gatwick. I wasn’t speaking about the choice of one location vs. the other. Instead, I was speaking as a frequent traveller, and why additional capacity is likely to be needed in the first place.

Some of the reasons are aviation-related: congested airports have no wiggle-room if something goes wrong. I’ve suffered big delays when weather or other incidents has meant that airports can only operate at reduced capacity, with greater spacing between landings and take-offs. Then there’s a desire for more direct flights from London to cities across Asia, the Americas, and MEA. Changing planes in NY or Singapore or Istanbul is always possible, but that just adds more time (and additional fuel-heavy take-offs). Various other reasons apply too.

But I’m not an aviation specialist. I’m a communications industry analyst & consultant.
What really stumped the radio-host was when he suggested videoconferencing might replace most business travel, so fewer flights would be needed and therefore perhaps less airport capacity.

I responded that ironically, about half my own travel is to events/clients actually involved in the videoconferencing industry, or in other aspects of advanced communications. I regularly attend and speak at video, UC & WebRTC events in person, have private workshops with operators or vendors, meetings with investors and so on.

Could I do some or all of these via a phone-call or video session? In theory yes, some could be done remotely, but in my view they would be much less productive – and many wouldn’t happen at all. This isn’t just my personal dislike for video either (I prefer voice-only, in general), but a more general observation.

Thinking about it, I’m pretty sure that the people who pitch online alternatives as a replacement for in-person meetings probably don’t do much of either. There are at least 10 reasons why audio & video-conferencing is not a replacement for business travel.
Firstly, it is worth noting that the applicability of video/collaboration tools will necessarily depend on the type of meeting involved. There are multiple “use-cases” for physical business travel, each with different characteristics:

  • Short one-to-one meetings (maybe 1hr in length) for sales calls, introductions, catch-ups with colleagues etc. These can be sub-divided into company internal meetings (eg boss/employee) or external (eg salesman/client) which have different dynamics
  • Internal small-group meetings, eg a project team distributed across multiple locations. Again, these can be internal or external (eg consultant presenting to the board)
  • Site visits, where someone is shown around multiple physical parts of a location, has a variety of meetings & so on.
  • Trade shows where the emphasis is on booths and the “show floor”
  • Conferences of 1-3 days duration, with multiple presentations, panels, break-out sessions etc
  • Seminars (maybe 1-3hrs) with a few speakers and predominantly “broadcast” mode with some Q&A
  • Interactive workshops where people interact in small groups
  • Team-building sessions combining a mix of presentation and social/bonding activities
  • Many other types of “meeting”.
While any of these can use the same transportation mode (ie a flight) they would all need to be re-invented with different forms of conferencing or collaboration application. Some are easier than others – informal meetings with a small dispersed project team, for example, can be done with a simple audio or video bridge, ideally with file/screen-sharing as well. Webinars can replace some seminars.

But a full-on trade show, with demos and new products, as well as private meeting spaces for confidential discussions, cannot really be replicated online to any reasonable extent. Neither can good interactive workshops, or even summit-type conferences. As a regular panel moderator and conference chair, I don’t think anywhere near the same experience could be done via video as in person. Maybe in 10 years time, with Oculus Rift version 8 and some advanced haptic interfaces and full body-suits, but I’m not convinced.

Some of the limitations of videoconferencing-style replacement for physical meetings:

  • Lack of detail – while you can replicate lifelike scenes with 4K video, it’s still not fully immersive without stereoscopic vision, ultra-fast frame rate etc.
  • No way to support culturally-important actions like handshakes or physical exchanges of business cards
  • Security and privacy – how can you be sure that the quiet chat over a virtual coffee remains confidential?
  • Subconscious awareness of body language and micro-expressions
  • Cognitive absorption – what part of your concentration is diverted to seeing how you appear on-screen to other people?
  • Technical complexities of managing virtual events with multiple parties, using different networks & devices. WebRTC and its peers only go so far
  • Dependency on camera/sound crews, cameras, microphones – which then mean you get an “edited” version of an event rather than your own choice of where to sit/stand/walk around
  • Lack of sync between timezones. Do you want to get “virtual jetlag” by attending the breakfast session at 9pm at night in your timezone & listening to conference presentations until 4am?
  • How do you facilitate networking over meals, provide “back-channels” to whisper to your neighbour during sessions, manage realistic arguments or back-and-forth discussions and so on?

Overall, while online collaboration is OK for some use-cases, it is generally a second-class citizen, with numerous almost-intractable limitations. It would reduce the effectiveness of companies, compromise security and productivity, and advantage people with geographic proximity.

In many ways, videoconferencing is becoming more important. In future we may have access to contextual communications tools which may improve some interactions so they're better than real-life speech and vision. But it’s usually more accurate to consider it as a “better phone call” or “richer than an email exchange”. It’s a big step down from interaction in person. Conferencing can enable extra conversations, or allow extra people to attend existing physical meetings remotely. But that is not the same as replacing the core in-person conversations.

Ironically, better remote conversations may lead to more international business and travel. A more-effective initial introduction via video/voice may well lead to new relationships being built. And later, those relationships will often involve in-person meetings, for site visits, events, interactive workshops and so on. Certainly, without my extra “reach” via both conferencing and social-media, I wouldn’t have nearly as many international clients to work with.

It’s also worth noting that while videoconferencing might be able to replicate some aspects of traditional meetings, the latter have evolved as well. Many conferences now employ techniques that are experiential or immersive. Group exercises, interaction with voting terminals, not to mention the improved venues and carefully-crafted social interaction episodes.

A similar story is true for consumers. Wearing a virtual-reality headset in a tanning salon is not a substitute for feeling the beach sand between your toes. Videoconferencing into your distant family’s Xmas dinner doesn’t work, if you can’t taste the turkey and pull the crackers. Listening to a rock concert on the radio doesn’t compare to jostling and jumping with other 
fans of the band in the arena.

Nobody can conclude a deal with a video-handshake in a virtual restaurant, or experience Burning Man by conference-call. 

Those are "contexts" that cannot be replicated online.

You have to be there.