> One of the worst things about Zoom, a friend in finance tells me, is not being able to pick up the status signals and thereby knowing who you can ignore in a meeting.
Man, I'd be tempted to make Zoom compulsory then... Imagine a world where people have to discuss ideas on their merits purely with logical arguments, rather than relying on behind-the-scenes class-solidarity pacts and other unfair arrangements to dismiss the hoi polloi...
I would assume that the organisation or business works as before where decisions and work happens according to some kind of existing hierarchy and that doesn't change because they have adopted video conferencing.
Thus, meetings in Zoom are not discussing ideas on their merits purely with logical arguments, but just a continuation of the existing ways of working. We can then say that, as far as getting work done, a meeting in Zoom is just like a meeting in real life, and as with meetings face to face there are times when things are said which will be ignored. (Ideally we would want our business to work where all information is being assessed logically, but in reality, people are not that logical!).
Video conferencing makes picking up on who is ignoring what harder, it doesn't make the what less easy to ignore. People will still be able to say things, it's just harder for others to notice the reaction of other people are to each other. People are free to react to other people and information, it's just harder to work out how others are reacting to that.
I wouldn't say it's the worse thing about Zoom at all and there are many positives but I can understand that there are some negatives to video conferencing. Humans often communicate many things non verbally. One obvious example would be seeing who is looking at who in real life, where all we now is everyone looking at each other equally.
edits:
It's worth pointing out that the article is about accents being subtle status signals but the anecdote is about social/power status in meetings where accents would be a bad signal.
We all notice and respond to status signals, whether consciously or unconsciously.
To think that it's even possible to have a system where, "people have to discuss ideas on their merits purely with logical arguments" is pretty naive in my opinion.
Social connections and influence will always play a role in things. I'm certain that person will come up with a new heuristic for detecting status over Zoom if it becomes a permanent aspect of their job.
The mention of finance is a giveaway that the author thinks the same as you. UK finance people are stereotyped as being terrible persons, often not without reason...
Man, I'd be tempted to make Zoom compulsory then... Imagine a world where people have to discuss ideas on their merits purely with logical arguments, rather than relying on behind-the-scenes class-solidarity pacts and other unfair arrangements to dismiss the hoi polloi...