One of the discussions is about what's different about virtual teams; the answers are the one's you'd expect, leading with time zones and 'no co-located stand-up meetings'. But the one I like, though it comes up less often, is 'no body language'.
Having sat on endless conference calls, and participated in a mind numbing number of online chats, I can sympathize that there's a lot left out. But we know that from a lot of experience; we didn't need agile to tell us that body language counts for a lot, by some estimates more than 50%. Agile only reinforces the idea that it's hard to substitute for what Alistair Cockburn calls communication by osmosis--that absorption of information from the unspoken, the casually spoken, and the mere presence in the room, if you will.
On the other hand, reality intrudes: often there's no practical way to get body language in the picture. Yes, that is a shameful segue to video teleconferencing, including Skype and other pc-based video. But I can tell you (as if you need telling) that even with a good camera, video is not an osmosis channel. Nevertheless, better than a straight teleconference most of the time.
Of course, there's the wiki board, and the threaded discussions. They are a possibility also, and I've tried those too. They add value, to be sure, but in the end, there's just nothing like being in the same room!
Are you on LinkedIn? Share this article with your network by clicking on the link.
