The findings of the work of the JISC funded project "Virtually Sustainable" carried out by Peter James and Lisa Hopkinson from HEEPI and the University of Bradford
Video-Conferencing in the UK HE & FE Sectors - Research Findings
1. Conferencing in the Sector
- Research Findings
Peter James and Lisa Hopkinson
SusteIT, University of Bradford, UK
www.goodcampus.org
6 March 2012, University of Warwick
2. Previous Research
• SusTEL
- 7 partners in 5 countries
• Multiple surveys
- 10,000 + responses
- conferencing & flexible
working at BT & customers
- conferencing at DFID
• New ways of working
- can reduce global carbon by
0.5% by 2020 (Smart 2020)
3. Virtually Sustainable
• One of 3 JISC Green IT projects
• Surveys in 9 universities
- Aberystwyth, Bangor, Bradford, Glasgow, Leeds,
MMU, Staffordshire, Swansea, UCLAN
- 1120 users; 684 non-users
• Survey of university travel coordinators
• Three workshops with c 150 attendees
• 11 Briefing papers and case studies
- e.g. Llandeillo College; University of Kent
4. Virtual Meetings
• Content – audio; text; video; web
• Location – suite, mobile VC, desktop, portable
• Interactiveness – 1:many; 1:few; 1:1
• Diverse use of technologies
- Janet Videoconferencing enabled
- Skype
- Blackboard Collaborate
- Adobe Connect
- Flash Meeting
- Audio (BT MeetMe)
5. Conferencing Works!
• Last virtual meeting
- completely successful for 65%
- partially successful for 28%
- avoided travel for 54%
- average 300/1346 miles avoidance
- saved £106 of travel/subsistence costs
- released 8 hours unproductive time
• Desire for more
- 81% of current users see more opportunities
- 46% of non-users if easier to access and use
- teaching & learning; meetings; collaborative research;
conferences; interviews
6. Sector Patterns
• Last call averages
- 1 hour length
- 4 locations
- 9 participants
• Access mainly from office/suite
• Main uses
- continuing regular discussion
- specifically set up call
• Limited use for teaching and learning
7. Key Benefits - 1
• Reduced stress & time of
travel (75%)
• Better control of time (61%)
• Easier to stay in touch (49%)
• Better work-life balance
8. Key Benefits - 2
• Compensate for travel
difficulties
• Easier to arrange meetings
• Involve more people
• Improved communication
with external partners
• Tangible travel and
subsistence savings
9. Disbenefits
“In a virtual meeting do you get virtual tea and biscuits?”
• Reduced face to face contact (19%)
• Less effective meetings (16%)
• Bad experiences
• Can’t replace face to face
• Better when relationships
established
10. Barriers to Greater Use
• Difficulties (perceived or
actual) in setting up
• Lack of confidence or ability to
use technology
• Lack of equipment or facilities
• Lack of support from
colleagues
• Lack of knowledge about
facilities
11. Travel Coordinators - 1
• 52 individuals from 44 separate institutions
• 31%: institutional travel plan encourages virtual meetings
& teleworking
• 66%: institution has no quantified targets to reduce staff
business travel
• A few, e.g. Glasgow, have specific VC targets
• 72%: considerable or very considerable potential at their
institution, especially business meetings & intra-site travel
12. Travel Coordinators - 2
• Main barriers similar to university surveys
• 3 best means of encouraging greater uptake:
• Senior manager support e.g. by using it more (66%)
• Simple technical guides to technologies (53%)
• Demo projects in pilot areas e.g. estates, IT (53%)
13. Conclusions
• Considerable benefits from, and opportunities for
more, virtual meetings
• Virtual meetings don’t always replace travel
- new uses; stimulating contact
• Considerable CO2 benefits for all
- largest element in research unis is (long haul) air
• Air generally dominates CO2 equivalent travel
• But overall business benefits are mainly related
to short-medium distance travel air travel
• Best to target UNPRODUCTIVE travel?
14. What’s Needed - Universities
• Technical support
• Training
• Ease of booking
• Suitable dedicated facilities
• Conferencing “champions”
• Institution-wide policy and support
• Culture of usage supported by senior staff
• Target areas of existing use (audio, skype etc)
15. What’s Needed - Sector
• Sector support for wide
variety of technologies
• Interoperability of
different technologies
• Senior level support
• Leadership from sector
bodies
16. Assessing Carbon Impacts
• 1. Scoping
- e.g. identifying the reference case
- determining impact significance
- work/private travel; buildings; eqt
• 2. Calculating impacts per virtual meeting
- net MINUS gross (i.e. eqt, rebound etc.)
- applying air uplift
- range of cases (low, medium, high)
- how many participants avoid how much travel?
- how many virtual meetings in a university?
• 3. Conducting reality check
• 4. Producing figures