I’d go that far! Whatever’s present in a cramped meeting room (or, in modern big tech, some random chairs because all the meeting rooms are reserved) that isn’t in a zoom call, I don’t want ;).
It all leads to constant interruptions and people speaking over others because all of the natural cues we rely on are missing or time-shifted.
Not to mention the ability to "read the room". You're often trying to gauge what other people are thinking -- are they receptive, confused, afraid to ask a question, satisfied, etc. This is far, far more difficult over Zoom.
Presenting some idea to the team on Zoom when everyone has their cameras off is really bad. People speak but you can't tell when they're going to speak, or who looks confused and might have a question on the tip of their tongue.
Even with cameras on it's hard to tell this stuff.
In person it's easy. It's possible some people (e.g. me) rely on these cues more, or are just uncomfortable with everyone constantly speaking over eachother, or effectively having to interrupt and talk over others.
If two people start speaking at the same time on Zoom, the optimal strategy is probably to just keep speaking and the other person will stop.
One glaring example to me has always been talking over one another. There’s no clear indication of who should talk next and it’s very hard to interject something quickly.
When I was in high school I was in a class where we were on a panel with other classmates and asked questions. During the course of a question several of us would have a response, which we indicated to each other by moving our hands forward. The first person to do this spoke first.
Zoom does have a “raise hand” feature but few people use it. If for example there was a key you could hold down to actively raise your hand, this problem would be partially solved.
The bandwidth for communication in person is orders of magnitude higher.
It is obviously possible to waste or reduce that bandwidth to the point that you would be as efficient online but it is also possible to utilize that higher capacity effectively.
The statistic folks are citing for the 90% or 10x is based on a study of how much attitude information is conveyed non-verbally during a negotiation.
Engineering should be more about meaning content than attitude content, and engineering workshopping should not be a poker game.
The stat is not about conversation content, but conveying attitude. The study found attitude was conveyed 55% nonverbal, 38% vocal, and 7% words only.
By that study, using the telephone would be 55% info loss about attitude (tone and words convey 45%), and using video chat adds facial expression (majority of non-verbal attitude). Attitude info, not meaning info.
So no, it's not 10x more info in person, even for the narrow case of conveying negotiation attitude blind over telephone, plus most non-verbal attitude is conveyed by facial expression which comes through on video chat.
Even the biggest fans of remote work won't go that far. I think you've forgotten what it's like to work in person.