%®Ô�Å®�}Ê�¢��¸»���~År}¢Ú�§®»��¿Ê~~�¿¿�Ê¢�Å�r§¿

Ł�¨���®Ô�%Ê��¢Ú�!>�~r¨���¢¸ł

�������

������������� ���������� �����������������

�;5�+4%9�?4�%�+5%�%�?/�4��/�#?4#,:4?5#�5?5#�?*,45?-/��%�5��(<?48���44�8(?5��*4?�/�?*���?8-?,�?��5:��+?�� ?-�,-(�?�+�?�,**8+%��5�?�/�.8�+5(<?%+?�?+�58/�(?:�<?:#�/�?�((?5��*?*�*��/4?���(?�+"�"��?�+�?-�/5?,�?6#�?�,+9�1�5%,+�? �+?6#%4?�+�(<4%4�?:�?:%((?�;-(,/�?6#%4�?(,,'%+"?�5?4�9�/�(?�%��/�+5?458�%�4?5$�5?�%4�844�?

>?�#�?,-5%*8*?4%=�?�,/?�?5��*>?�#�?�<+�*%�4?5#�5?�+��(�?5��*4?5,?��?-/��%�5��(�?*,/�?-/,�8�5&9�?�+�?48���44�8(>?�#�?#8��(�?4-���?�+�?5#�?,--,/58+%5<?%5?-/�4�+54?5,?48--,/5?5#,4�?5��*4

�+?���%5%,+?:�?:%((?4#,:?<,8?#,:?5#�?�8��(<?��?�,)(��,/�5%,+?��*�/�?��+?�*-,:�/?5#�?:,/'�(,:4?�+�?�<+�*%�4?,�?5$�4�?5��*4?�<?�,-�+%+"?8-�?#8��(�?4-���4?�8��(<?���4?8(5/��:%��?�+"(�?(�+4�?4,!:�/���+$�+����?�345�(��(��/?9%��,?.8�(%5<?�+�?4*�()?�,/*?���5,/?"%9�?5��*4?5#�?��;%�%(%6<?5,?:,/'?%+?5#�?:�<4?+�����?5,?/���#?6#�%/?,-5%*8*?(�9�(?��?-/,�8�5%9%5<�?

�#�/�?�/�?,5#�/?���58/�4?6#�5?*�'�?�8��(<?��?�?*845�#�9�?��9%��?�,/?6��*4?%+?5#�?*,��/+?:,/'-(����?:#&�#?<,8?��+?/���?*,0�?��,85?�5?#8��(<�,*�?�85?#�/�?:�?:%((? �84?,+?#,:?5,?�8%(�?-/��%�5��(<?*,/�?48���44�8(?5��*4?�+�?#,:?<,8?��+?84�?�8��(<?��?7,?*,9�?5#�?-/,��44?�,2�/��?

c��~���Ú¨r§�~¿�¢�r��Å®�¸»���~År}¢Ú�§®»��¿Ê~~�¿¿�Ê¢�Å�r§¿Ķ

One of the more self-evident, but still key findings was the importance of everyone within the team being equally heard and acknowledged. With fewer team members meaning team members meaning fewer connections within a network, consistent connections are more easily made, with the complexities increasing as shown in the diagram to the right. the right. We will further discuss the ideal size for a team in this document later, with additional supporting research.

Across the study, they consistently found that there were two specific best predictors of productivity for teams: their engagement and energy outside formal meetings. Regardless of the structure of an organization or the nature of their goals, these observations proved to be true.

Sandy and his team defined "energy" as the number and the nature of exchanges among team members, with a single exchange defined as a comment and some acknowledgement, with one example being a simple "yes” or nod of the head.

They defined "engagement" as the distribution of energy among team members, characterizing They defined "engagement" as the distribution of energy among team members, characterizing engagement as "extremely strong" if all members of a team have relatively equal and reasonably high energy with all other members. Even when members have high energy communication in a meeting, if some don't or can't participate, then the team won't perform as well as when they do.

Face-to-face will always be the best way to communicate naturallFace-to-face will always be the best way to communicate naturally. There are hundreds of small nonverbal cues that we pick up when we can see each other during a conversation - body language, movement, gestures and posture, among others, provide context for the tone of voice and words spoken.

In the absence of face-to-face communication, there is quite simply nothing that comes close to high quality video-conferencing for natural communication.

In short, more frequent and natural conversations within smaller teams.

In 2012,In 2012, Alex "Sandy" Pentland, an American Computer Scientist and Director of the MIT Connection Science and Human Dynamics labs, performed a study that sought to identify the group dynamics that characterize high-performing teams. They wanted to observe, quantify and measure those dynamics that make some teams more energetic, more creative and ultimately more successful than others. And, crucially, they wanted to learn how to strengthen those dynamics.

c�Ú�O�ß��7rÅÅ�»¿

This idea is also supported by the theory of the Ringelmann Effect, sometimes also referred to as "social loafing". This is the tendency for individual members of a group to become increasingly less productive as the size of their group increases. As the number of people in a team As the number of people in a team grows, their individual sense of responsibility becomes more diffused, their motivation decreases along with their engagement and their average output decreases.

Interestingly enough, there is some notable anecdotal evidence to support the 4-7 theory. The average team size at Google was observed to be 7 in 2013 and Amazon stays true to the rule too. Jeff Bezos, the world's now richest man who transformed a 3 person operation in 1995 into the multi-billion monster that we all know and multi-billion monster that we all know and probably feel ambivalent about today, has a very simple rule for meetings: if a team cannot be fed by two pizzas then that team is too large. His reasoning is pretty straightforward - more people means more bureaucracy and slower decision making. According to my own research, and that of According to my own research, and that of the sadly under-utilized "Pizza Algorithm" website, 2 large pizzas will feed 4-7 people, which may go some way to explaining Amazon's astonishing success.

What is the perfect size for a team? The scientific consensus is somewhere between 4 and 7. Research by Marcia W. Blenko, Michael C. Mankins, and Paul Rogers published in the Harvard Business Review in 2010 put the perfect number at 7 people. Their study showed that smaller, flexible teams working in informal structures have great advantages when it comes to decision making, with fewer people in a team reducing the number of decision nodes in a network, increasing efficiency.

Another way to look at it is to take a more subjective approach and look at team members' own perceptions of the impact of group size on process and performance. In a 1970 study by Hackman and Vidmar, they set a series of various tasks to groups of 2-7 and asked them two questions: "is your group too small for the task?" and "is your group too big for the task?". The percentage of those who thought their team too small fell as those who thought the opposite rose, and the lines intersected at a team size of 4.6 members, as shown in the diagram below.

T����§¸®»År¨~��®��Å���%Ê��¢��O¸r~�

Bluejeans’ 2015 “State of the Modern Meeting” report states that over 25% meetings take place with one or more remote participants and that number continues to grow. For these optimal-sized teams of between 4-7, video enabling huddle spaces is a panacea for the spaces is a panacea for the obstacles they face - in 2014 the Wall Street Journal reported that 40% of employees waste up to 30 minutes a day simply searching for meeting space. Huddle spaces present a huge opportunity to combat this problem. combat this problem.

The key to “opening up” huddle spaces and rooms is low cost, simple equipment with high quality video and wide angle lens that give these teams flexibility. This scenario is precisely what Huddly GO was designed for, with key features that are tailor-made to features that are tailor-made to make huddle spaces a force for enabling the workflow of high-performing, predictably successful teams.

A key element to enabling the workflows of high-performing teams is what’s known as “the huddle space.” These are spaces where small groups of people (usually comprised of 6 or fewer) can go to have meetings away from the distractions of the bustling modern office environment. A huddle room will have walls, as opposed to a huddle space, and may or may not be designated specifically for impromptu meetings.

There are a few reasons these spaces are still not yet enabled for many organizations. With participants usually close to the screen, a wide angle view is crucial for everyone to be included and engaged. There are lighting challenges associated with these spaces, with small dark rooms or bright open spaces that make it difficult to experience a visually “natural” or true-to-life image.

Embedded laptop cameras, with narrow angle lenses and poor image quality, don’t suit the needs of these teams. Traditional teleconferencing equipment is bulky, expensive and more suitable for larger, dedicated meeting rooms.

%®Ô�%Ê��¢Ú�!>�~r¨���¢¸

Į�Works with everything• Ultra-wide angle lens • High resolution video• Intelligent software features

8ʨ®�O�Å�§rİ��Ù�~ÊÅ�Ó��b�~��H»�¿���¨Åİ�7®}�¢��rÅ�>¸�»r�O®�ÅÔr»�

ŋT���%Ê��¢Ú�~r§�»r��r¿�Å»r¨¿�®»§���r�¿§r¢¢�ºÊ��Å�»®®§�Ô��Ê¿����®»�¸�®¨��~r¢¢¿��¨Å®�r�Ó���®�»®®§�'�~r¨�Ê¿��Ô�Å��§Ú�Å�r§ĵ�%Ê��¢Ú�ō®¸�¨���ʸŎ�Å��¿��»®®§¿İ�r¢¢®Ô�¨��Ê¿�Å®��rÓ��Å�r§�§��Å�¨�¿�Ô�Å��®Ê»�»�§®Å��®å~�¿��¨�r�§®»��è�Ù�}¢��ÔrÚŎŎ

With a standard, narrow-angle video camera, participants either have to squeeze together or manually move the camera to be seen. Engagement is lost and your collaboration suffers

Huddly GO’s 150° wide-angle lens lets you capture everyone in the room, transforming even the smallest rooms into high-quality conference suites. Using our Huddly Vision embedded software, the image is dewarped and perspective corrected in real-time, rendering a true-to-life image

7®¿Å�~r§�»r¿�~r¨ŎÅ�¿����Ó�»Ú®¨�%Ê��¢Ú�!>�¢�Å¿�Ú®Ê�¿���Å��� '!�¸�~ÅÊ»�

O�r¨�H�»~�Ór¢İ�Hr»Å¨�»İ�0rÅr¸Ê¢Å��~~�¢�»rÅ®»

Unreliable picture quality, poor performance in bad lighting conditions and low-resolution images can make you look unprofessional and lead to a loss of important details

Huddly GOHuddly GO’s 16 Megapixel sensor captures an immense amount of visual data in fine detail and delivers remarkably consistent image quality. The embedded Huddly Vision software corrects both color and perspective in real time and auto-adjusts to lighting conditions. Huddly GO makes sure you always look your best, no matter where you are

7®¿Å�~r§�»r¿��rÓ��¸®®»��§r���ºÊr¢�ÅÚ%Ê��¢Ú�!>���¢�Ó�»¿�~»Ú¿År¢Ņ~¢�r»�Ó���®

T�®§r¿�O�µ}�»��2�r��T�~���®¢¢r}®»rÅ�®¨İ��8

��������

��

�������������� ��

������� �