Report: Enterprise Virtual Worlds More Effective Than Web Conferencing
Forterra Systems, a company aiming to bring virtual world technology to enterprises, will shortly release a report entitled Recipe for Success with Enterprise Virtual Worlds. ReadWriteWeb was given an exclusive first look at the report. It is based on pilots conducted with consulting firms Accenture and ACS, using Forterra's virtual world product called OLIVE (On-Line Interactive Virtual Environment). One of the more interesting conclusions of the report is that virtual worlds are both more engaging and less expensive to operate than audio and web conference systems. Although as we shall see, there are still I.T. and usability issues with virtual worlds - which Forterra and other vendors will need to overcome.
There's been a lot of speculation - and hype - about using virtual worlds for enterprise learning and collaboration. In January we analyzed a Forrester report into the use of virtual worlds in the workplace, which claimed that "within five years, the 3-D Internet will be as important for work as the Web is today". However at that point there seemed to be much work to do before virtual world software became user friendly to the enterprise crowd - "you've practically got to be a gamer to use most of these tools", Forrester noted in January. Even so, Forrester cited some big names who were investing in this technology: BP, IBM, Intel, and the US Army.
The multi-million dollar question of course is: can a virtual world ever be a serious enterprise tool, or is it destined to remain merely a fun thing that powers Coca-Cola's website? Forterra's report at least shows glimpses of how enterprises can use virtual worlds.
Let's quickly explain what Forterra does. Its main product is OLIVE (On-Line Interactive Virtual Environment), which it describes as "an open, distributed client-server platform for building virtual worlds". OLIVE features an API, licensable 3D content, 3rd party system integrations, and tools to create and edit virtual world content.
Virtual Worlds Compared to Web Conferencing
Forterra includes this graph in the report, comparing virtual worlds to audio and video web conferencing:
If the graph is to be believed, and we must remind you that it was created by a virtual worlds vendor, then virtual world technology isn't much more expensive for enterprises to deploy than web conferencing. The last two challenges listed for virtual worlds though are pretty key: "proven effectiveness" and "easy entry for employees". The Forrester report had suggested that usability in particular was an issue. To be fair, Forterra acknowledges those challenges and more in the report.
How ACS Tested Virtual Worlds for Training
The two use cases Forterra conducted, with Accenture and ACS, concluded that there was interest in exploring the technology more for business use. ACS, which is a $6.2 billion
FORTUNE 500 consulting company with 63,000 employees, tested Forterra's technology for virtual training with one of their big 4 accounting clients who have
extensive global training requirements. One of ACS' testers commented that they "see this [virtual worlds] becoming even more of a viable option for training with the advent of
the next generation of network speeds and the continued increase in the
capability of computers. The graphics will only become better and the world
more immersive -- and with those changes, an even better fit for
distance/remote learning."
Another comment from ACS was that "while 3D learning may not completely replicate the effectiveness of a face-to-face experience, companies will be challenged to consider that for some course topics, a slightly reduced effectiveness is worth the savings, risks, and work efficiency gained through deployment of learning in 3D." [emphasis ours]
Conclusion: Watch This Space
So enterprises are becoming more interested in virtual worlds. The pilots showed that there are still challenges deploying the technology, but even so it is seen as a cost-effective future option for training and collaboration.
Although we still aren't seeing major deployments within enterprises - and there is no indication in Forterra's report of this changing in the near future - it's a space to watch in 2009-10.
Share
Comments
Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all ReadWriteWeb posts
Anyone else start imagining a world like the WALL-E movie?
Posted by: Andy Carroll
|
December 17, 2008 1:43 AM
Sounds like an interesting concept, but I agree with the claim that at this point those participating in virtual world trainings would have to be agile virtual world users to begin with. This will as a result either have to wait until the supposedly inevitable shift to virtual worlds by most online users (which i'm skeptical about) or will effectively have to cost companies a lot through training people on how to use avatars and educational systems in the virtual worlds themselves.
I watched a really interesting talk on TED by the creator of Second Life, who claims that the major advantage of it is that everything is possible. Thing is, first everyone has to get there and want to get there to begin with. All in all, very interesting concept and I think if all users are smooth in using these systems it could be a very handy way of facilitating interaction in trainings and workspace, but I think we're just not there yet and getting there will cost both time and money.
The shift to virtual worlds has already taken place. All of us reading this article are too old to realize it has. It only marginally applies to the business world for now simply because it's not what this generation cares about yet.
I find fascinating the possibility that virtual worlds would compete with video conferencing, and by extension the business travel industry. Airlines beware!
I agree with Paulina. Sounds coming interesting...
In a virtual world conference you could slap somebody if you disagreed with them
This article is ridiculous. I work for a Fortune 3 company w/ great exposure to Sr. leadership and no corporate or enterprise leader that I know is going to introduce virtual worlds instead of conference rooms.
Total bologna!
"Enterprise virtual worlds" -- haha. How stupid. I say this as a MMORPG game designer AND as a market analyst. Wake me up when we are all wearing headmounts and I'll take another look.
Didn't Second Life already bring virtual worlds to enterprises? Is the advantage of this solution simply more security and higher resolution virtual suits, or am I missing something?
Lots of us work in virtual teams now, even when sitting at our desks. Most of my projects nowadays are with people I am unlikely to ever meet, or get expense approval to travel to.
I much prefer team meetings in these environments than voice conferences/webex. In the absence of physical presence, this is the next best thing.
Joseph: I think you are missing something - there are more virtual platforms day by day. Second life is great for meeting/networking, but (including the recent announcements) can fall short for working with people. There are other platforms where you can all stand around (say) an office document and all edit it together. Much better than endless emailing of documents for approval/edits.
Ok Ben, you are changing my mind to a degree and I respect that you actually work in this type of environment. But is it worth the premium over near free solutions like, say, Skype for chat + Google Docs/Zoho for document collaboration? Do you actually fee more of a human connection because of the avatars? I'm genuinely curious.
It's a matter of opinion at the end of the day Joseph. I dont think its something that can be easily explained. During trials, we got some negative feedback that it wasnt possible to 'multitask' during these meetings, as some do during voice conferences (checking mail/ebay/whatever). Because your actions in the environment (not possible in screen sharing sessions) signify your engagement in the process, and its that which makes you feel more as though you have had a 'proper' meeting.
Once I was in Second Life, when Godzilla walked past - his feet were visible through a window, we all went outside to see what was going on. Its a silly example, but it illustrates that its the *shared* experience of what is occuring on the screen that can bring people together.
@Ryan Graves, you're right to be skeptical. One thing I should point out tho is that these virtual worlds will most likely be used for distributed teams - where real world conferences aren't a viable or cost effective option.
@Richard MacManus - More likely but still very hard for me to imagine.
I think that especially in corp America leadership is still older than smaller more progressive businesses. I'm trying to imagine myself presenting this idea to my Sr. mgmt and all I'm seeing is getting laughed out of the room. (Not that that doesn't already happen)
Just seems to be a very tough sell, even for distributed teams.
Products like Basecamp help distributed teams get things done, virtual worlds seem to distract from work more than add to it.
Definitely open to more discussion or thought.
Great article... except the last part. 3 of our clients (and 2 of them are major companies) will use massively a similar solution in S1 2009.
The part about the price is surprising too... These companies investment is related too what they will get, but also to their organization and structure. What a challenge to compare costs to audio conferencing !
Anyway, return on investment are very fast and, more than that, it helps to avoid many business trips, and thus, reducing dramatically companies carbo footprint.
@Ryan Graves : Being skeptical i a quality but keep your eyes opened too ;-)
I believe it is a question of time before we are all using high-end visual platforms with a number of comms streams built in - I'm pretty sure that in the first instance (in mainstream comms) we will see web browser worlds with avatars combined with voice, IM, twitter etc etc and I believe that this will be a next-gen version of something like Facebook. In the longer-term we will see top-end virtual worlds adopted but they will be unlike the current offering IMO.
At the top end of virtual worlds, like OLIVE and Second Life, there is already use in team communications in some disciplines and high potential for process-driven training (in oil rigs for instance).In addition to higher productivity and performance enhancement there may be potential to save on localisation costs also.
Right now, there is a business case for using virtual worlds in certain businesses and disciplines. I don't believe standard comms cuts it right now though on its own. The suppliers of these platforms need to focus on specific horizontal markets as well as verticals and through third parties pick off the low hanging fruit.
There are areas beyond training where budgets may not suffer 09/10. I'm working on those right now. Happy to chat with you about these. Also please take part in the survey we are running:
http://www.questionpro.com/akira/TakeSurvey?id=1055081
Martine
This seems to be a normal trend for 3D virtual worlds, as these new worlds mature people are discovering new usage for augmented reality each and every day which makes it exciting and inspiring.
Here is an interesting article which is related to virtual world and their economy as this will become a more important aspect in the future as virtual worlds keep growing.
http://virtualworld.sl/news/unlocking-the-virtual-world-economy/