From the pin board in the workshop directly into a structured process planning? How is that supposed to work?

ABSURD? YES! THEN WHY DO SO MANY DO IT EXACTLY LIKE THAT?

Mit Miro und Mural jedenfalls nicht.

Absurd? Ja! Warum machen es denn dann viele genau so?

In the almost 30 years that I have been organising conferences and meetings for clients, I have experienced many meetings that would have found a place in a well-structured e-mail. Whereas in the past the focus was on costs when planning a meeting, the effect on the environment has now become an additional, important issue. Above all, however, within the framework of the development of virtual teams, tools have been developed with which essential workshop forms can be mapped. These, and more and more experienced moderators online, represent a real alternative today. Not for every meeting, because sometimes it is really important to feel each other and to experience each other beyond the picture. For in between however it may be gladly also times a virtual Workshop. But how high is the saving exactly? With the calculator from http://www.ecopassenger.org/ you can calculate it individually for yourself. On the basis of these figures, I once calculated two standard workshops as an orientation framework. Scenario 1 National Meeting 20 participants average arrival 400 km 50% train 50% flight result in 1.570 Kg CO2 Scenario 2 International Meeting 20 participants average arrival 1.000 Km 20% Train 80% Flight already 6.765 Kg CO2 These values only show the direct journey. In addition there are the additional consumption by hotels, the conference technology etc.. The burden of the virtual workshop, on the other hand, depends on the intensity of use of the platform, the type of power supply to the server, the devices of the participants and the type of power supply on site. Assuming the figures for the current CO2 consumption of streaming services and the German mix in electricity, the server and the devices on site each reach a value of several hundred grams. Even if an exact calculation is difficult here, a complete one-day workshop will be in the single-digit kilo range.

In den fast 30 Jahren, die ich Konferenzen und Tagungen für Kunden organisiere, habe ich manches Meeting erlebt, dass in einer gut strukturierten Mail Platz gefunden hätte. Wurde in der Beratung des Kunden früher auf die Kosten abgehoben, so ist der Effekt für die Umwelt inzwischen ein zusätzliches, wichtiges Thema. Vor allem aber: Im Rahmen der Entwicklung virtueller Teams haben sich Tools entwickelt, mit denen wesentliche Workshop-Formen abgebildet werden können. Diese, und immer mehr auch online erfahrene Moderatoren, stellen heute eine echte Alternative dar. Nicht für jedes Meeting denn manchmal ist es wirklich wichtig sich gegenseitig zu spüren und jenseits eines Bildausschnittes zu erfahren. Für zwischendurch aber darf es gerne auch mal ein virtueller Workshop sein. Aber wie hoch ist die Einsparung genau? Mit dem Rechner von http://www.ecopassenger.org/ können Sie es individuell für sich berechnen. Auf Basis dieser Zahlen habe ich einmal zwei Standard Workshops als Orientierungsrahmen durchgerechnet. Szenario 1 Nationales Meeting 20 Teilnehmer durchschnittliche Anreise 400 Km 50% Bahn 50% Flug ergeben danach 1.570 Kg CO2 Szenario 2 Internationales Meeting 20 Teilnehmer durchschnittliche Anreise 1.000 Km 20% Bahn 80% Flug ergeben bereits 6.765 Kg CO2 Diese Werte zeigen nur die direkte Anreise. Hinzu kommen die Mehrverbräuche durch Hotels, die Tagungstechnik etc. Die Belastung durch den virtuellen Workshop hängt im Gegensatz dazu von der Nutzungsintensität der Plattform, der Stromart des Servers, den Geräten der Teilnehmer und der Art des jeweiligen Stroms vor Ort ab. Die Zahlen über den aktuellen CO2 Verbrauch von Streaming-Diensten und den deutschen Drittelmix im Strom vorausgesetzt, erreichen Server und die Geräte vor Ort jeweils einen Wert von einigen hundert Gramm. Auch wenn eine genaue Berechnung hier schwierig ist, wird ein Tagesworkshop sich im einstelligen Kilo-Bereich bewegen.

Much has already been written about the necessity of special leadership in virtual teams and about the most common cooperation tools such as Trello, Meistertask, Asana etc.... But what if it should be a joint workshop? When brainstorming, inspiration, discussion and prioritization are required? Then workshop tools really pay off. Fortunately, all tools offer an important function for critical situations or difficult team constellations: anonymity. Here is a brief overview of three of the most common tools for virtual workshops. Stormboard - the perfect pinboard simulation + The advantages Stormboard is extremely intuitive as it essentially visualizes a pinboard interface and maps. With the "Fire Mode" the ideas just fly onto the screen. For the structuring different templates are available, which divide the screen. A colorful and modern design helps a lot with the structuring. The highlight, however, is the function that transforms a map into a new pinboard with a mouse click. This is possible infinitely often and so topics can be focused and deepened intuitively. The result is a dynamic that outstrips any collaborative mind map. That's really great. Another advantage is the good integration into other programs and services like Office or Trello etc.. - The disadvantages There are trifles, such as the fact that too many ideas have cards arranged unsorted on top of each other. It is a bit more difficult that a moderator or workshop leader cannot navigate the participants. Votes and rankings are also not the parade function of Stormboard. This could be overcome, but what I don't understand is the pricing model of the service. The price is $10,- per month and participant. For a small team of 10 participants this is $1000,-/year. Quickly bring in two externals? Costs extra! Above all, the participants must be registered and deregistered, otherwise they continue to cost. If the meeting is revised together again in 2 months, this means to register again etc. Five additional participants who have forgotten to unsubscribe will be charged $150 after one quarter. This may still be possible for a small, permanent team, but not for flexible structures with external employees, and for me as a moderator with constantly changing customers, the model is simply out of the question. The manufacturers of Stormboard could not be convinced to offer an alternative.