Communications Tooling: Video Conferencing
Status: Accepted
Last Modified: 2023-07-24
Related Issue: #99
Deciders: Lucas Brown, Billy Daly, Sarah Knopp, Sumi Thaiveettil
Tags: communucations, open source, video conferencing
Context and Problem Statement
The project aims to implement a reliable video conference platform to facilitate seamless communication for both internal collaborations involving HHS and contractors, as well as external engagements with members of the public. The primary objective of this ADR is to evaluate and ultimately choose a suitable video conference tool that aligns with the project's requirements. The selected platform should enable efficient virtual meetings, ensuring clear and effective communication among project stakeholders, and accommodating diverse use cases, from internal team discussions to public outreach and engagement.
Decision Drivers
Must Have
Public Access: If they have the right link, members of the public can join a video call without creating an account Waiting Room: Meeting organizers can configure their meetings to require that attendees must be admitted before they can join the call
Video Recording: Meeting organizers can record a video call from within the platform
Screen Sharing: Attendees can share their screen (if given the appropriate permissions by meeting organizer)
Chat: Users can post comments and questions in a chat that are visible to other attendees
Phone Support: Users can join by phone if they don't have access to a computer for video
Live Transcription: The platform supports live transcription for attendees that may need closed captioning
Authority to Operate: The platform should be covered under the existing ATO for Grants.gov
Nice to Have
Webinar: The platform supports a webinar format, i.e. attendees who can join and post questions but not see one another or unmute without permission
Breakout Rooms: A meeting organizer can split users out into virtual "breakout rooms" for small-group discussions
Open Source: The code to run this platform is open source and offers a self-hosting option
Attendance Tracking: The platform allows host to access attendees to make follow up and attendance tracking easier
Community & Support: The platform has a strong community for ongoing support, updates, and bug fixes
Scalability: The platform should be able to hadndle a growing number of participants and meetings wihtout performance issues
Options Considered
Decision Outcome
Zoom stands out as the optimal choice for our video conference tool. It fulfills all the key decision drivers we have outlined, including public access, waiting room feature, video recording capability, screen sharing, and interactive chat. Moreover, Zoom provides phone support, live transcription for closed captioning, and is FedRAMP approved. Its robust features and ease of use make it a reliable platform for both internal and external meetings, ensuring a seamless and inclusive communication experience for all stakeholders involved.
Positive Consequences
Improved Communication: Video conferencing enables real-tme face-to-face communication, fostering better understanding, transparency, and collaboration among team members, stakeholders, and the general public.
Enhanced Collaboration: With screen sharing and chat features, participants can work together on documents, brainstorm ideas, and address issues efficiently, enhancing overall teamwork.
Extended Reach: The tool allows you to connect with participants from different locations, making it easier to work with remote teams, partners, and the public.
Flexibility and Convenience: Participants can join meetings from their preferred location, whether it's their office, home, or while on the go, promoting flexibility and convenience.
Accessibility: Video conferencing tools often offer closed captioning and accessibility features, making meetings more inclusive for individuals with impairments.
Negative Consequences
Technical Challenges: Technical issues, such as poor internet connectivity, audio/video glitches, and compatibility problems, can disrupt meetings and lead to frustration.
Security Concerns: Video conferencing tools may pose security risks, like unauthorized access, data breaches, or potential privacy violations if not properly configured and managed.
Fatigue and Burnout: Frequent video meetings can lead to "Zoom fatigue" or virtual meeting burnout, affecting participant engagement and focus.
Distractions and Multitasking: Participants may be prone to distractions or multitasking during virtual meetings, reducing attention and active engagement.
Learning Curve: New users may find it challenging to navigate and fully utilize the features of the video conference tool, leading to a learning curve for some team members.
Bandwidth Consumption: Video conferencing consumes significant internet bandwidth, which may impact other online activities if the network is not robust enough. This could also be limiting for individuals with low or slow broadband connection.
Back-up Options
Jitsi serves as a strong backup option for our video conferencing needs. Jitsi aligns with several essential decision drivers, such as public access, waiting room functionality, and screen sharing capabilities. Additionally, its open-source nature allows for self-hosting, offering an added level of control and privacy. Our project could contribute code to functionality that may fall short. Jitsi could be a reliable and accessible alternative for hosting our meetings with both internal and external stakeholders.
Comparison Matrix
✅ Feature available, meets requirement
❌ Feature not available, does not meet requirement
🔄 Partial feature, limited feature availability, feature in progress or undergoing improvements
1-3 Strength level
❓Unknown
| Factor | Zoom | Microsoft Teams | Google Meet | Jitsu | Meet.coop |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Public Access | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ |
Waiting Room | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | ❓ |
Video Recording | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ |
Screen Sharing | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ |
Chat | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ |
Phone Support | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ |
Live Transcription | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | ❌ | ❓ |
Authority to Operate | ❓ | ✅ | ❓ | ❓ | ❓ |
Webinar* | ✅ | ✅ | 3 | 🔄 | ❓ |
Breakout Rooms* | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | 🔄 | ✅ |
Open Source* | ❌ | ❌ | ❌ | ✅ | ✅ |
Attendance Tracking* | ✅ | ✅ | 🔄 | ❓ | ❓ |
Community & Support* | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 |
Scalability* | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | 🔄 |
*Nice to have
Pros and cons of each option
Zoom
Zoom is a widely used video conferencing platform known for its ease of use and comprehensive features. It offers virtual meetings, webinars, breakout rooms, screen sharing, chat functionality, and phone support.
Additional details and pricing
Pricing:
Free with limitations like 40 minutes per meeting, 100 attendees per meeting, whiteboard basic, team chat, mail & calendar
Pricing starts at $149.90/year/user and goes up from there.
The Enterprise plan offers rooms and webinars but no pricing is available on the site. We would need to contact Zoom for specific pricing for our project.
We do not need each every user to have access to our paid instance since anyone can join a Zoom session with the invite link.
We would need around 15-30 users with access to the paid instance.
Pros
User-friendly interface and easy to set up for both organizers and participants.
Robust features like breakout rooms, screen sharing, and virtual backgrounds enhance collaboration.
Offers a wide range of integrations with other apps and platforms.
Availability of a free plan with limited meeting duration.
Cons
Security concerns in the past, but the platform has made significant improvements.
Free plan has limitations on meeting duration and participant count.
Frequent updates may require users to adapt to changes.
Microsoft Teams
Microsoft Teams is a collaboration platform integrated with Microsoft 365. It offers video conferencing, chat, file sharing, and integration with other Microsoft applications. It is ideal for organizations already using Microsoft's ecosystem, fostering seamless collaboration among team members.
Additional details and pricing
Pricing:
Prices starting at $4 user / month
Webinar hosting is only available in the Business Standard package which is $12.50/user / month
Pros
Part of the Microsoft 365 suite, providing seamless integration with Office apps.
Allows for large meeting participants and live event hosting.
Extensive collaboration features, including document sharing and real-time editing.
Supports third-party app integrations for enhanced functionality.
Strong security features, making it suitable for enterprises.
Cons
Initial setup and learning curve can be overwhelming for new users.
Resource-intensive, leading to occasional performance issues on lower-end devices.
Limited to Microsoft 365 users, which may restrict external collaboration.
Frequent updates can lead to occasional disruptions.
Potentially paying a premium for the Microsoft 365 suite when the video conferencing is all that is needed for the project.
Google Meet
Google Meet is part of Google Workspace (formerly G Suite) and is well-suited for Google users. It provides straightforward video conferencing with high-quality audio and video. While it may lack some advanced features, it offers a user-friendly experience for those already using Google's tools.
Additional details and pricing
Pricing:
Google Workspace pricing is for the whole suite, starting at $6 per user/ month. The Enterprise has more advanced options and features.
We do not need each every user to have access to our paid instance since anyone can join a Google Meet session with the invite link.
We would need around 15-30 users with access to the paid instance.
Live Transcription: Yes but in English only
Pros
Seamless integration with Google Workspace (formerly G Suite) apps for streamlined collaboration.
High-quality video and audio, even in low-bandwidth conditions.
No additional software installation required for users with Google accounts. Users can access simply through a browser.
Good performance on various devices, including smartphones and tablets.
Provides live captions for improved accessibility.
Cons
Advanced features are limited compared to some other platforms.
Some features may require a paid G Suite subscription.
Limited customization options for meeting settings.
Live transcription is in English only.
Potentially paying a premium for the suite of Google products when the video conferencing is all that is needed for the project.
Jitsu
Jitsi is an open-source video conferencing solution that stands out for its simplicity and self-hosting capabilities. It supports public access, open meetings, and offers easy setup.
Additional details and pricing
Pricing: Free
Webinar: Not a built-in feature (third-party integrations available)
Breakout Rooms: Not a built-in feature (third-party integrations available)
Open Source: Yes
Attendance Tracking: Unknown if this exists. The team could potentially contribute and build this since Jitsu is open source.
Pros
Open-source platform with a self-hosting option, providing greater control and privacy.
Simple and lightweight, making it quick to set up and easy to use.
No account creation required for participants, enhancing public access.
Strong focus on security and privacy, allowing for end-to-end encryption.
Availability of web-based access without software downloads.
Cons
Fewer advanced features compared to more established platforms.
Limited support and community compared to larger video conferencing tools.
Self-hosting may require technical expertise and maintenance efforts.
Video and audio quality may vary depending on server capacity and network conditions.
Meet.coop
Meet.coop is a European based solution that provides online meeting and conferencing tools, powered by renewable energy, running on cooperatively owned infrastructure. Meet.coop emphasizes cooperative values, democratic governance, and shared decision-making. The platform's cooperative principles guide its development and operations. The community-driven project encourages open collaboration, knowledge sharing, and the creation of decentralized architecture
Additional details and pricing
Pricing:
Prices starting at $12 / month for 10 participants and goes up to $115 / monthe for more users.
Pros
Prides themselves as an ethical, sustainable, and community-driven solution which aligns with Simpler Grants values
Data ownership is with the users
Fosters a strong sense of community engagement and collaboration amongst its users, providing a platform for shared learning and support
Cons
Users may not be as familiar with the Meet.coop and how to use the tool, however the tool does seem user-friendly
Features and capabilities are not as mature as the alternatives
Meet.coop may lack immediate and direct support options that come with commercial platforms
There may be some risks in scalability to accommodate a larger number of users and meetings.
Links
Last updated