Pilot Teams’ Virtual Engagements

Pivoting to Virtual Engagement

Prior to the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, the pilot teams’ efforts emphasized gathering in face-to-face contexts where people could engage personally and informally, often over refreshments. This was consistent with the desire for courts to “get proximate” to the people they serve. However, as the pandemic took hold across the nation and the world, the pilot teams needed to pivot toward socially-distanced means of engagement.

As part of the current efforts, four of the pilot teams transformed their ongoing engagement activities from face-to-face to virtual formats. A number of commonalities characterized the pilot teams’ virtual efforts:

  • Teams altered their content to include discussion of the impacts of COVID.
  • All of the teams used Zoom as an engagement platform.
  • Due to the use of Zoom, new procedures and materials were created to fit with the technology.

The examples here offer ideas for how to conduct virtual engagements that are similar to existing face-to-face engagements, should the need arise.

Recruitment

Recruitment efforts were similar to those used for in-person engagements. Teams still utilized numerous recruitment methods, including press releases, social media posts, and direct and indirect contacts using email invitations.

The primary difference was that recruitment materials directed people to a virtual space instead of a physical space, and included instructions specific to the virtual space such as:

  • How to register to receive the link to the engagement
  • How to access and test technology to ensure it is working
  • When to log in so that the meeting can begin on time

Engagement

Transitioning the face-to-face engagements to an online, virtual format required a number of adjustments, including the following:

  • Agendas and scripts specifically referenced required technical tasks (e.g., creation of breakout rooms, monitoring of chat boxes, sharing of screens, featuring speakers).
  • Presentations included instructions relevant to the technology and norms for virtual engagement.
  • Activities were adapted to the online meeting technology (e.g., teams used virtual polls and virtual break out rooms).

  • Use “dress rehearsals” to practice conducting the engagement using the required technologies.
  • Use similar Zoom backgrounds for the institutional actors so they are easily identifiable.
  • Explicitly share expectations regarding virtual behaviors at the beginning of the meeting (e.g., please mute when not speaking, it is ok to leave your video off/on, use of chat box for asking questions, raise your hand to be called upon, how to pose questions).
  • If you will be asking participants to engage with the technology beyond muting and unmuting, create practice tasks to give them experience with the technology (e.g., a practice poll, practice raising virtual hands, practice chat comments).

Evaluation

The pivot from face-to-face to virtual engagements also changed the means and content of the evaluation. To avoid technical difficulties relating to changing platforms during the meeting, the teams delivered evaluation questions within the platform (Zoom) parameters. For example, Zoom allows hosts to show poll questions to participants, one question at a time. As a result, the evaluation questions needed to be relatively short and few in number to accommodate having the entire group answer the questions together.

Benefits, Challenges, and Lessons Learned

The pilot teams noted a number of benefits, challenges, and lessons learned relating to the need to move engagements from face-to-face to virtual contexts.

  • The small breakouts seemed to result in deeper discussion, perhaps because people could feel a sense of safety and anonymity “behind” their computers.
  • The meetings were more accessible to geographically dispersed persons.
  • The meetings were also more accessible to community leaders who could be invited to provide remarks (e.g., the mayor, judges, national speakers).
  • Use of an online format removed barriers relating to transportation and parking.
  • As people became more familiar with the use of technology due to COVID-19 (e.g., for telehealth and other types of interactions), more people were also more comfortable accessing the online engagements.
  • It seemed more difficult to get people to come to the virtual engagements, perhaps due to Zoom fatigue or because the engagements felt less attractive without the ability to provide refreshments and opportunities for social interaction.
  • Finding the best time to hold the engagement (e.g., lunchtime, evening, weekends) requires attention to your target audiences’ needs and preferences.
  • Technical difficulties could arise due either to technology limitations or participant unfamiliarity with the technology.
  • Heavy reliance upon technology means that the digital divide may prevent some demographics from attending.
  • A “dress rehearsal” of the actual event may reveal numerous technical issues that could occur from the perspective of the conveners and the participants, allowing you to address them before the actual event.
  • To reduce digital divide impacts, organizers should remind people they can use their smart phones to attend, and make activities smart-phone friendly.

Toolkit Tidbit: Puerto Rico Reflects on Virtual Tours During COVID

Toolkit Tidbit: Massachusetts Reflects on Virtual Engagements