Why Implementing Videoconferencing Is
Getting Easier
Published 9/19/2012
David Danto
Principal
Consultant - AV / Multimedia / Video / UC,
Dimension
Data
Director
of Emerging Technology, IMCCA
By now,
everyone has heard how the successful implementation of collaborative
communication tools increases productivity. Many people look to
videoconferencing to minimize business travel (and the related costs), increase
productivity among a dispersed workforce, and improve the quality of
interpersonal communications for employees, potential employees, and customers.
Ten or
fifteen years ago, just the word "videoconference" was enough to
create panic in the minds of enterprise users. Questions around being able to
get a room, calls staying up, questionable connections, etc., were on the minds
of discouraged, pessimistic users. This was because videoconferencing was
oversold by the industry manufacturers. It was advertised as "just like
being there" and "easy to install and use," when the truth was
usually far to the other extreme.
Adoption
improved over the years but didn't really take off until the latest wave of
telepresence hit the market a little over five years ago. Telepresence got
everyone interested in video again, added reliability to the mix, and got the
c-suite involved in becoming video champions and driving funding. For all the
good that it did, however, telepresence regrettably also came with its own
unique set of hype and overselling.
With
the dust now settling from the telepresence explosion, what we're left with is
much better than what we had before. As I've written many times, organizations
are now starting to understand that it's all about selecting a unique blend of
collaboration tools that is right for them. What's interesting is that the
selection within our industry is far richer than at any time before. There are
easy-to-deploy choices in telepresence and room and desktop systems. There are
truly interoperable services, and there are truly flexible managed services.
The
installation of telepresence four or five years ago usually involved major
construction to prepare rooms. In many cases (which I personally experienced),
the cost to prepare the room was equal to or greater than the cost of the
technology. Today, there are less rigid systems that can be installed in rooms
as they are, and modular/four-wall options are able to drop into a space,
making it instantly ready.
The
installation of a room-based videoconferencing system used to involve a choice
between poor-performing carts or overly expensive, overly complicated
integrator installed systems. Today, firms are manufacturing stand-alone units
that provide very high-quality for relatively little cost. The era of the AV
integrator and AV consultant firm inflating the cost (and complexity) of room
systems is now over. More and more organizations are buying these simple room
systems, which I refer to as "the video equivalent of the conference room
speakerphone."
The
installation of desktop video used to involve balky cameras clipped to the top
of PC monitors, very low-quality postage stamp-sized images, and very difficult
to manage enterprise software. Today, high-quality HD cameras are frequently
embedded within the displays, and the software is much more simple and
reliable. Calling between firms used to require either unsecure connections
over the Internet, or very expensive connections to private B2B exchanges (or
legacy ISDN connections that were problematic in and of themselves). Even with
all of those complexities, calling between different brands and types of
systems was rarely guaranteed to work.
Today,
there are a number of relatively inexpensive services that can connect video
systems of different types and standards with no trouble at all. I frequently
have video calls combining Skype, room systems, Lync, and anything else you can
think of. You can also now hire partners and/or managed service providers that
help you only where you need the help. It no longer has to be an overly
expensive, complex hosted solution.
If any
of this is news to you, then you're not speaking with the right people. If you
need some suggestions regarding where to begin, post a question on the message
boards. But remember, just as a surgeon usually recommends that you do surgery,
advice from video system manufacturers will usually involve buying their
systems. I suggest you speak with the manufacturers last -- specifically so you
can see demonstrations of products, once you're ready for that step.
I also
recommend that, as a first step, you seek general advice from people and firms
that have no vested interest in selling you one product versus another. That
way you can get a fair representation of the pros and cons of your many
options.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This blog was written by David Danto and contains solely his own, personal
opinions. It originally was published at UBM’s “The Video Enterprise” website
that was closed down November 1st 2012. Here is a link to the Google cache of the
page with comments. I do not know how
long Google keeps these pages.
David has over 30 years of experience providing problem solving leadership
and innovation in media and unified communications technologies for various
firms in the corporate, broadcasting and academic worlds including AT&T,
Bloomberg LP, FNN, Morgan Stanley, NYU, Lehman Brothers and JP Morgan Chase. He
recently joined Dimension Data as their Principal
Consultant for the collaboration, multimedia, video and AV disciplines. He is
also the IMCCA’s Director of Emerging Technology. David can be reached
at David.Danto@Dimensiondata.com or DDanto@imcca.org, he can be followed on
Twitter @NJDavidD , and his full bio and other blogs and articles can be seen at Danto.info.