Editor’s note: Besides following tech developments and innovation, our author is a musical composer (Juilliard-trained). He has provided a musical composition for you to listen to while reading this column. This piece is called “Hybrid Time.”
It is commonly accepted that a group of minds working is smarter than a single mind working alone. This is why there are boards of directors, congressmen and senators, and advisory groups of peers called mastermind groups. Our world is moving so quickly and changing so much that many people are struggling to keep up. No one can read everything that is published in any given field. The only hope of keeping up is to be part of a group of people who are all paying attention. As a young CEO, I had a small company that could not afford to hire a conventional board of directors, but instead I joined a group called the CEO Club of America. The other members were invaluable and helped me make decisions because I was young and relatively inexperienced. The group members acted as each other’s informal boards of directors. Unlike a legal board corporate directors, these people had no legal authority, were not compensated, but were enormously helpful to me and each other. Napoleon Hill wrote about these groups almost 100 years ago. They are still very much alive and well.
So much is being written about artificial intelligence today. Many companies are releasing large language models into the marketplace, and specialized AI models are also in play. Even if you were a techie, as I am, you can’t keep track of what’s going on by yourself, but if you have a group of people tracking parts of it together, you have a much better shot at developing a comprehensive point of view. Having a bunch of seasoned professionals discussing AI is far more useful than asking your kids or grandchildren what is happening.
A group mind can be formed around any field. Groups of authors sometimes read each other’s work and give each other feedback. The same is true for groups of scientists, musicians, and anyone interested in a specific topic that might sometimes make your company successful. This is not a new idea. What is a new idea is that these people do not have to live near you, because you can now meet online and develop relationships which are substantial enough to provide valuable advice and feedback to each other.
The MIT generative AI Impact Consortium is another example of a mastermind group formed around AI. Some groups are small, and some are large. The size group you join depends on what you want to do with it.
It may have taken a pandemic to make video groups commonplace. Still, now that heyt have taken hold, many individuals who initially acquired Zoom or one of the other tools for professional reasons have found themselves getting together with groups like family members and friends who are distant and distributed. We think nothing of saying, “Oh, I have a Zoom meeting in half an hour.” Everyone is doing it: young and old, rich and poor. You don’t even need a computer to do it. You can use your phone, tablet, or whatever new mobile devices come up next.
Now, there are challenges in meeting with many people who are not in the same room. You can’t kick someone under the table to tell them to shut up, but then again, you can mute them and turn their microphone off. How people interact includes much body language, which is more apparent in person than on a screen. But we all get used to it, and video meeting etiquette has evolved quite rapidly to the point where most people know how to behave, what is expected, and what is possible.
Just because we have transcended geographic proximity and entered the realm of ideational or professional proximity does not mean that we are facing an either-or proposition. Just as when television was invented, we did not stop listening to the radio; just because we can teleconference does not mean we don’t want to get together in person.
Increasingly, a hybrid approach is being adopted, combining some people physically present with others connected remotely. There are many reasons to consider this hybrid method. For instance, a storm may prevent some individuals from attending an in-person meeting, while others can still make it. This scenario occurs frequently and is relatively easy to manage. Cross-country job interviews can also be conducted remotely when interviewers are in different cities from the interviewee’s location. This approach significantly reduces travel costs and time, making it a clear way to use resources responsibly.
A hybrid mastermind, which enables participants to attend either in person or remotely, offers an impressive range of advantages, whether professional, social, or familial. It enhances accessibility and diversity by allowing members from various locations to participate, bringing together a broader spectrum of perspectives. Experts or guest speakers can contribute without traveling, which enriches the discussions. The flexibility and convenience of a hybrid format can accommodate participants’ schedules while minimizing travel time and costs. Individuals facing time constraints or unexpected conflicts can still join virtually, ensuring consistent participation without logistical hurdles.
This approach strengthens connections by blending in-person social bonding with the inclusivity of remote engagement, fostering dynamic and enriched conversations. Technology enhances collaboration through tools like screen sharing, recordings, transcription, and chat, improving documentation and knowledge retention. Meetings can be recorded for later review, ensuring no one misses out. Additionally, cost savings are significant as fewer logistics expenses are required compared to fully in-person meetings, eliminating the need for all members to travel, which can be costly and time-consuming. Imagine getting together with people you have not seen in a long time. Do it right now! Certainly, all of these advantages come with some disadvantages. A hybrid model can present challenges related to engagement and inclusion, as remote participants might feel like outsiders compared to those attending in person. Side conversations among in-person attendees can unintentionally exclude virtual participants, making it more difficult for them to contribute meaningfully. Technical issues, such as inconsistent audio and video quality, poor internet connections, or microphone problems, can disrupt discussions, leading to miscommunications and interruptions that hinder the flow of conversation.
Maintaining energy and flow can also be difficult, as conversations between in-person and remote attendees may feel fragmented. Spontaneous brainstorming becomes more challenging when some members cannot physically interact with whiteboards, notes, or body language cues. Effective meeting facilitation requires a strong moderator to ensure balanced engagement, as remote participants might receive less speaking time. Additionally, the absence of in-person body language makes virtual communication less nuanced, potentially leading to misunderstandings or disengagement.
The technology will continue to advance and make the experience better and better. In contrast, the negative issues will continue to shrink until it will seem like the most natural thing in the world to be part of a hybrid group.
