Reviving Video Conferencing

Last week I had a look at the University of Bath’s video conferencing suite situated in the BUCS (Bath University Computing Services) building.

Video Conferencing Suite

The facilities comprise:

  • A Tandberg 6000 MXP Codec video conferencing system including P/T/Z/F controllable colour WAVE camera, dual 33″ monitors with Tandberg Natural Presenter Package (NPP) and MultiSite (MS) Packages. This runs over IP only.
  • Laptop, DVD player, VCR, overhead projector, interactive whiteboard, projector etc.
  • Screen
  • Seating for up 25 people

Despite considerable money and effort having been spent acquiring it, the kit is currently under-used. There were originally two dedicated rooms for video conferencing but university requirements for more space has meant that one of these has now been returned to staff use.

Martin Stone, who gave me a tour of the facilities, explained that the room was well used for a brief period while the University had been investigating having Oakfield campus as an extra university site in Swindon.  Short meetings between colleagues on the two sites had been the perfect material for the video conferencing suite. Now the room is primarily used by Human Resources as a way to interview overseas students for university places and by schools for e-learning activities.

Martin and I speculated on reason’s for the suite’s lack of use. We came up with:

  • Low level of promotion of the resources by BUCs and the university.
  • Expense – at £25 for half an hour the cost does seem high. A day’s use of the room would work out at quite an expense. However the cost is relative and fairly low if you compare it with the cost of flying a staff member out to a meeting.
  • Reluctance by staff to forgo travel opportunities.
  • Technical issues – To use the system, both ends need have appropriate facilities in place.
  • The increased use of free and low-cost software applications that allow peer-to-peer video contact e.g Skype.
  • Better options – despite being bespoke, costly and purchased only a few years ago the system is already out of date. Many newer teleconference systems offer visual options like life-size images of attendees. The experience could be a much better one than that offered by Bath.

It seems a real shame that room isn’t being used more and I have to admit to feeling a little sad about the situation. The University is currently taking part in Our Big Energy Challenge and could quite easily do more to promote the suite’s use  from an environmental perspective.

Are other Universities finding that their video conferencing suites are sitting empty? How can we get people to embrace the technology?

Further information on video conferencing in Higher Education is available in the form of a briefing paper by JISC’s Tech Learn.


6 thoughts on “Reviving Video Conferencing

  1. I think you answered your own question – who wants to schlep off to a suite when these days with as little as a headset, browser & webcam you can partcipate in a video conference from your own desktop? Perhaps the best way of promoting video conferencing is to invest in services that can be used fom any office, [web] services without the limitations of freebies such as Skype and that can be used without the need to install yet another client. i.e. are browser based (have something in mind I’ve trialled but won’t risk inadvertant promotion). I’d say also that decades or organisational culture are challenged in promoting video conferencing, so any shift will take time and will require influential champions in the relatively federal struture of many academic institutions. It also strikes me that there is a social side to physical meetings that video conferencing doesn’t really foster.

  2. Pingback: software for video conferencing + whiteboard,replacing netmeeting, without public IP Address? | Conference Call Providers

  3. Pingback: Cultural Heritage » Blog Archive » Elsewhere on UKOLN Blogs: June 2009

  4. To promote utilisation of Video conference facilities, some organisations have implemented systems that require an individual to justify travelling, and not using Video conferencing.
    Some University’s also use their Video conference facilities to deliver lectures to other learning centres, allowing for feedback from a very large audience, which can help lecturers improve their content or delivery.

  5. Hi Gareth,

    I’d like to hear more about the systems you mentioned. We’ve considered doing something like this at UKOLN but haven’t been able to come up with the right approach yet. There are lots of questions like “how do you define an essential trip?” and “on what occasions is video conferencing (or skype) a better option?” that we have no answer to at the moment. At the moment we just suggest alternative approaches when people fill in a trip request form.

    Any more you could offer would be useful.


Comments are closed.