The Problem with Hybrid Meetings and Events
In-person meetings and events are completely different animals from virtual meetings and events and that difference needs to be recognized and respected. In-person and virtual formats work best when they are exclusive and not combined into a “hybrid” format. While hybrid meeting and event formats may be used occasionally in response to unexpected disruptions, they should not be viewed as the new normal or a long-term option for the future.
Hybrid is a fancy term for blending. In this case the blending occurs when meeting and event formats are expanded to include both virtual and in-person attendance at the same time. Blended formats can be effective in certain situations when they are used for transitional bridging purposes to help organizations move through periods of disruption and uncertainty. As we witnessed during the pandemic a few years ago, hybrid meetings and events can be a temporary solution to help organizations build back momentum and gain the confidence and trust of participants for stable future attendance.
However, after planning and participating in multiple hybrid events and meetings and observing the outcomes, I believe these formats are not sustainable for regular long-term future use. The best approach is to treat hybrid events and meetings as a steppingstone to the most effective non-blended format: either virtual or in-person, but not both at the same time.
Unexpected disruptions can sometimes force an organization to consider pivoting quickly to add a virtual option to an in-person format to avoid having a meeting or event that is delayed, canceled, or will be missed by a substantial number of participants. While a temporary blended meeting format might be successful in the short run, eventually unintended problems will surface.
The problem lies in the assumption that you can just easily layer on virtual formats seamlessly on top of in-person formats and get the best of both experiences. The reality of hybrid meetings and events is that both formats will usually suffer from attempts to equalize the experience for both in-person and virtual attendees. This often causes compromises to be made in presentation formats, time allotments, and scheduling. These compromises will influence topic choices, the amount of content, and presentation styles, while also impacting opportunities for attendees to network and make connections. Efforts quickly become counter-productive with pressure to make concessions and leading to watered-down results.
Another consideration is the impact on staff capacity to support two simultaneous meeting formats. Virtual and in-person formats together might at first appear synergistic, but in reality, the workload for staff will increase exponentially, making it harder for staff to support both formats with the same vigorous commitment to excellence.
Planning Tip – In the event a temporary disruption (such as changing economic conditions, a health safety event, or a weather crisis) forces your organization to provide virtual attendance options at an in-person meeting or event, make sure that your messaging is clear that this is an adaption for special circumstances and not a regular continuing option. This will help to ensure that a hybrid format does not become a continuing expectation for attendees.
Consider which format is long-term most effective and appropriate for each type of meeting and event and designate that as the preferred format, with exceptions for special circumstances clearly defined (accommodations for people with a disability). For example, a virtual format will likely be the most effective for Board and committee meetings (options to meet more often with fewer burdens associated with travel time and related costs). On the other hands, events for donors, members, and constituents are usually best suited to an in-person format (encourages networking interactions, increased opportunities for engagement, and branding enhancements).
If there is a strong desire to facilitate virtual as well as in-person attendance, consider utilizing both formats separately. For example, this can be a good solution for meetings and events that occur repeatedly throughout the year, such as Board and committee meetings. Alternating formats between virtual and in-person Board and committee meetings will allow you to design the agendas and content that work best for each format.
Having separate in-person and virtual schedules with limited or no overlap of content can also work well for larger educational events, membership annual meetings, and networking conferences. For example, the in-person portion could run for the first two days of a conference, with keynote presentations only streamed near the end of day-two. The conference can then pivot to virtual for the remaining days. Splitting up an event in this way will give attendees options. This will also allow staff and presenters to focus on one type of audience, building out content and adjusting presentation methods to meet the needs of a single set of attendees.
