Name:
Professor:
Course:
Date:
Face-to-Face Meetings vs. Virtual Meetings
As expertise with profound experience concerning meetings and event business, face-to-
face meetings and events are way more effective than those that are carried out virtually using
meeting technologies like zoom. Face-to-face meetings and events are much more convenient
when compared to virtually-conducted meetings in Zoho, Zoom, Skype, WebEx, and many
others.
First, in a face-to-face meeting, body language speakers embrace body language to the
latter, which sets a tone in the meeting. Someone is likely to think that body language is not
supposed to come into play for this context of comparison because someone would still see this
in the virtually held meetings. However, specific body language cues are easy for an audience to
pick in person, such as the direction of the feet, what the speaker’s hands and arms are doing,
and how close the speaker is to you. It is easy to express oneself physically in a room that
virtually. This will make the audience understand the speaker elaborately, and the speaker would,
in turn, understand how their audience is obtaining the message.
Secondly, it is easy to establish trust with your audience in a face-to-face meeting than in
a virtual meeting. In video conferences, you need to be prolonged to identify yourself with your
audience to build trust, unlike the case in face-to-face meetings. It is easy to avoid stumbling on
another person’s words in a face-to-face meeting than in video conferencing, i.e. (“You go
ahead,” “No, You) situation (Benchmark Meetings Editors). Such a scenario is hard to occur
when the meeting is done face-to-face than when it is done virtually. Most people are hardwired
to understand the potential nuances and plans of conversation; however, that does not translate
almost well when it is done on the screens.
Thirdly, there is no time wastage on connectivity issues in a face-to-face meeting, unlike
is always the case in video conferencing that are affecting substantially by connectivity and
signal issues. Time wasted in solving such issues erodes time that would be used to discuss vital
issues. Because of these technical issues in virtual meetings, some of the critical issues may be
left out unspoken, which implies some of the meeting objectives may be left out as well. If there
are few people in the video conferences, they may feel like they are second class citizens.
Consequently, they may end up refraining from opening up to speak up, suppose there are
technical issues. Mostly that is the case because they fear interrupting the meeting.
Fourthly, it is easy to persuade individuals on something in face-to-face meetings than in
video conferencing. It is much easier to say “yes” in face-to-face meetings since it is similarly
more comfortable to say “no” in vitally presented meetings. It may go unsaid, but it is worth
repeating; there are no connectivity issues when it comes to in-person meetings. The objectives
and purpose of the meetings, at some point, may not be to make sales, but one may be attempting
to pass information, and in doing that, persuade someone of something. Even if it is that take-
this-seriously phrase, it is easier and effectively said in person than in virtual conference
meetings.
Work Cited
Benchmark Meetings Editors. "5 REASONS VIRTUAL MEETINGS CAN’T REPLACE
FACE-TO-FACE MEETINGS." Benchmark Meetings (2020). Retrieved from:
https://www.benchmarkmeetings.com/face-to-face-meeting-advantages/
