Expand and evolve your Meet usage

As your organization evolves over time and your use of videoconferencing (VC) increases, you can use the information in this article to help you manage and control growth.

Model for growth

This article uses a model for VC growth in an organization that moves through four stages of maturity. The stages of maturity are: initial, reactive, proactive, and preemptive. The stages are based on common maintenance models in various industries.

Determining whether your organization’s VC usage is mature

You can examine your organization's practices in several categories to determine if it has reached the mature stage of videoconferencing use. In general, a mature organization has the following practices:

  • Overall: has a commitment from IT Management, has a defined strategy with business-aligned objectives, has a plan in place for 10x and 100x growth, and knows which business problems it’s trying to solve with VC

  • Process: processes are under continuous improvement, most activities that can be automated are automated, processes enable the organization to deliver the service as agreed with customers

  • Performance: shows consistent, reliable performance, has speedy adaptation to a changing environment, organization meets and exceeds customer expectations

  • Governance: service improvements are prioritized by business value, operations are integrated with business planning activities, organization is solving the business problems it’s trying to solve

Measuring stages of maturity

The following tables contain descriptions of organizations in various stages of VC maturity, using the stages introduced in this article. Use these tables to examine your group’s status and to help plan its evolution and expansion.

Vision and management
Category Initial stage Reactive stage Proactive stage Preemptive stage

Management commitment

"Bring your own" VC

Reliance on individual technical knowledge

Funding via business units

Uncoordinated approach to VC

Investment in innovation is largely driven by construction projects

Objectives and targets in place

Core infrastructure centrally funded

VC is a clearly defined part of conferencing strategy

Standards for technology and room designs are regularly published

Strategic objectives and goals are aligned to strategic business goals

Central funding of strategy is aligned to strategic business goals

Development investment is driven by performance data and stakeholder management

Defined strategy "Bring your own" VC

No strategic thinking

Ad-hoc development

No product development principles in place

Larger changes driven by windfall funding from large construction projects
 

Standalone VC strategy

VC conceptualized, designed and delivered as a product

Regular, scheduled product updates

Larger changes funded through annual IT budgeting cycle

Strategic objectives and goals aligned to strategic business goals

VC conceptualized, designed and delivered as a service

Continuous service improvement 

Strategic development is driven by performance data and stakeholder management

Planning for 10x and 100x growth No plan in place

No plan in place

Main blockers identified

Cross-team collaboration impacted by silos

Manual, repeatable processes predominate

Efficiency of growth impacted by large data gaps and misalignments

10x plan in place 

Many blockers removed, but systemic blockers remain

Cross-team collaboration driven by goal alignment

Increasing process automation

Efficiency of growth impacted by coordination between multiple platforms

Learnings from 10x execution inform 100x plan
 
Removal of blockers for 100x plan has been independently verified

Cross-team collaboration driven by shared, business-driven goals
 
Critical processes are automated

Single management platform
 

Managing processes
Category Initial stage Reactive stage Proactive stage Preemptive stage

Processes under continuous improvement

No plan in place

Few, if any, documented procedures to check compliance against

Warnings, non-compliance, and variations addressed tactically

Improvements often appear ad-hoc, and lack a strategic focus

Compliance regularly checked against documented procedures via audit 
 
Warnings, non-compliance, and variations are collected
 
Improvements are identified based on audits and reviews

Lack of service change analysis can lead to unexpected outcomes

Improvements are actively sought, registered, prioritized and implemented, based on business value and business case

Pre-release testing plus veto over service changes that haven’t been through change analysis minimize unexpected outcomes

Process automation Little or no automation

Automation efforts are ad-hoc and often a by-product of larger IT initiatives 

Multiple, uncoordinated management platforms

Little impact on SLAs, unit cost of service delivery, and speed of adaptation

VC-specific automation is underway, such as automatic room configuration checks

Multiple management platforms, broadly integrated

Predominantly anecdotal improvements to SLAs, unit cost of service delivery, and speed of adaptation

Most activities that can be automated are automated

Single management platform

Automation shows quantified benefits in improved SLAs, lower unit cost of service delivery, and improved speed to adapt

Performance
Category Initial stage Reactive stage Proactive stage Preemptive stage

Consistent, reliable performance

Performance varies widely

No agreed measures of performance

Performance is not monitored

Performance varies

Basic measures of performance, such as room utilization, uptime, and usage change over time

Performance is monitored, but is often broken by inter-process relationships

Little meaningful comparison of VC vs other comms platforms

Consistent performance with some variance

Measurement tied into problems with business value; for example, employee productivity
Impact of inter-process relationships and dependencies on performance

Service value from customer perspective is published

Robust performance

Measurement shows service impact on a broad range of specific business problems

Impact of inter-process relationships and dependencies is embedded

A known investment produces a known collaborative outcome

Speed of adaptation

Can adapt very quickly, but with little or no governance

Capable of pivoting, albeit with a lack of strategic intent

Struggles to scale due to a lack of agreed process or targeted outcomes

Unlikely to adapt, pivot, or scale quickly due to a lack of coordination, a lack of processes, and a lack of clarity on how to deliver business value

Fast adaptation, pivoting, and scaling are all possible, but a lack of service change analysis often leads to poor practice being introduced into the network and then multiplied

Speed of adaptation is built into success criteria

Research-driven findings allow an iterative approach to help determine best outcomes

Ability to scale is pre-planned.  Threshold measurements define when scale needs to be activated, and when it needs to slow down, pause, or stop

Governance and business planning
Category Initial stage Reactive stage Proactive stage Preemptive stage

Governance

No governance

No concept of service improvement

Little or no governance

Technical focus, little or no service focus

Some customer feedback is captured

Performance reported to internal stakeholders

Ad-hoc change management, often driven by problems

Regular governance meetings 

Balance of technical and service focus

Customer feedback captured and acted on

Performance reported to internal and external stakeholders

Formal change management in place

All activities are subject to management control and governance
 
Strong service focus 

Business value drives service improvement

Regular service reviews with customers validate continued effectiveness

Continual improvement in place

Integrated with business planning No integration

Annual budget bid for IT infrastructure spend

Annual budget bid from some individual business lines choosing to upgrade their VC equipment and rooms 

Emergency funding requests via change requests, driven by performance problems

Core infrastructure centrally funded

Scheduled, co-ordinated annual budget bids from business lines following an agreed product upgrade path

Emergency funding requests mainly driven by spikes in demand above pre-planned thresholds
 

Centrally funded
VC facilities are transportable assets, not fixed rooms. Service owner agrees on investment plan with stakeholders based on delivering measurable business value

Robust performance and known outcomes lead to few, if any, emergency funding requests
 

Was this helpful?
How can we improve it?