Design "Start zoom meeting" button

[Dschoordsch]

Relates to:

• #6187

We want to allow users to start a Zoom meeting directly from a Parabol meeting. In SPA we came up with just a button in the side panel which shows "Start Zoom meeting" which is shown to users having the "zoom" feature flag. Once clicked we will start the meeting (or the OAuth flow) and show a "Join Zoom meeting" button for all meeting participants replacing the previous button.

This is how it looks like in the prototype:

Acceptance criteria

• [ ] design and placement for "Start zoom meeting" / "Join zoom meeting" button

Estimated effort

• 2 hrs for design exploration

[enriquesanchez]

@Dschoordsch Looks good to me. I went ahead and added the EE. 👍

[acressall]

The work on Standups gave me inspiration for where this could go! In the standups activity we have a 3-dot menu in the top right corner. This feels like it has an "activity settings" potential and adding zoom there could be a subtle spot to put it. We could test:

• Do users click on the 3-dot menu?
• Do users start a zoom meeting?
• Do users join a zoom meeting?

If we find people use the menu we could add more configurations in the future. Here's the design file: https://www.figma.com/file/ODawGAaBsN8JDlhDei7gQB/Zoom-Integration?node-id=0%3A1

[Dschoordsch]

I would like to see the "Create Zoom meeting" button more prominent. For the "Join Zoom meeting" it is too hidden.

FYI: A user needs to integrate with Zoom first in order to be able to create a zoom meeting, thus the first time the button is pressed we would trigger the OAuth flow where they can authenticate. Also a Zoom provider row would need to be added, but is straight forward.

[enriquesanchez]

I have reservations about giving by default that much visual prominence (and space) to a Zoom button in our app.

The main reason is that not every user uses Zoom. Seeing that button (and having no way to make it disappear) will most likely be annoying to users who use a different video call software (Teams, Slack, etc).

That said, as a Zoom user, I think it will be super useful to have it. So instead I wonder if instead we can treat this as an Integration, and then you can turn this button on or off from the Integrations view?

[Dschoordsch]

That said, as a Zoom user, I think it will be super useful to have it. So instead I wonder if instead we can treat this as an Integration, and then you can turn this button on or off from the Integrations view?

How about doing both approaches?

1. there is always the Zoom integration row in Team -> Settings
2. user has no Zoom integration -> "Create Zoom meeting" button is in the 3 dot menu
3. user has Zoom integration -> "Create Zoom meeting" button is directly visible
4. any user has started a Zoom meeting for the Parabol meeting -> "Join Zoom meeting" button is directly visible

One catch for the "Join Zoom meeting" button: We might want to give folks the chance to create a new meeting in case the old one was closed or similar. I.e. for users with the integration, there could be a 3 dot dropdown menu to create a new meeting.

[Dschoordsch]

Thinking about this some more, I would prefer to show the "Create Zoom meeting" prominently for everyone, but have an option to hide it, because we have an issue with integration discoverability.

[acressall]

because we have an issue with integration discoverability.

I think we need to solve the general discoverability problem separately. I do like @Dschoordsch's idea of both approaches. I'll look for a good spot to put the zoom btn when it's visible

[enriquesanchez]

Agreed that the issue of integration discoverability needs to be solved separately.

How about doing both approaches?

1. there is always the Zoom integration row in Team -> Settings
2. user has no Zoom integration -> "Create Zoom meeting" button is in the 3 dot menu
3. user has Zoom integration -> "Create Zoom meeting" button is directly visible
4. any user has started a Zoom meeting for the Parabol meeting -> "Join Zoom meeting" button is directly visible

On point 2., what happens after they select that option? Do they get taken to the integrations view so they can turn it on? Do we turn it on for them?

What happens when a Zoom meeting has already been started for that particular meeting? Does the button's label change to "Join Zoom meeting"?

[Dschoordsch]

On point 2., what happens after they select that option? Do they get taken to the integrations view so they can turn it on? Do we turn it on for them?

We would trigger the OAuth flow as if they had pressed the "Connect" button on the integration provider row. We already do the same in other places, like in the Scope phase of Sprint Poker where we allow users to integrate with Jira/GitHub/... directly there.

What happens when a Zoom meeting has already been started for that particular meeting? Does the button's label change to "Join Zoom meeting"?

Yes, once there is a Zoom meeting for our Parabol meeting, everyone will see a "Join Zoom meeting" button.

[acressall]

Here's the updated design! Loom: https://www.loom.com/share/f8fc9ba7650d4a3b9bc86a4a14a19414

Figma: https://www.figma.com/file/ODawGAaBsN8JDlhDei7gQB/Zoom-Integration?node-id=0%3A1

[Dschoordsch]

@acressall Once this issue has passed design review, please create an implementation issue in "Todo" for it.

[acressall]

@enriquesanchez can you give this another review? Extra note: I think a future MS Teams and/or Google Meet integration could work in the same way

[enriquesanchez]

@acressall

I prefer the style you are using here (colored icon with black regular text). It feels more consistent.

And I'd also use that same style for the sidebar CTA. If we use both a colored icon and bold blue text, it stands out much more than anything else on the meeting. I think this is a secondary action in the overall hierarchy of the meeting view, specially since it's a 3rd party tool.

I'd even go as far as reducing the surface area on the sidebar (smaller icon, shorter area), but maybe that's just me? What do you think? How much do we want to highlight this option?

.

Oh, I think we should also mock how it'll look/feel with the Mattermost and MS Teams icons.

[acressall]

Thanks for the feedback! I've deferred mocking other options because I decided the 3-dot nav is the area we should simply test. I don't think we want it to be the main area for integrations long-term (wouldn't want to put everything there) but we might get some interesting learnings on if users are more likely to add an integration during a meeting or not, and iterate based on that info. Here's the testing rationale: https://www.notion.so/parabol/Squad-2-Notes-515904adde5441febd81750e4c7a1e65?p=008a6d0388b5492d828d70396f3db1a4&pm=s

The design: https://www.figma.com/file/ODawGAaBsN8JDlhDei7gQB/Zoom-Integration?node-id=39%3A4018

And a Loom: https://www.loom.com/share/a8f20384a7fa4f05a670c5fa19a4a8fc

LMK if there are any outstanding questions

[acressall]

@ackernaut can you give this one a maintainer review?

[ackernaut]

Taking a card!

[ackernaut]

I looked at #6187, the concepts in Figma, the Loom updates, and the experiment doc in Notion. I have a few questions:

• What does the 3 dot menu pattern look like on mobile? What other things do you think might go in this menu?
• How might you solve for the double button problem (the Join button in 2 places) if you want the Zoom link to be visible in the interface?
• How would you handle this if folks had 2-3 initial options for video call integrations?
• What if folks already have a Zoom link elsewhere, like on a calendar item? Do they just ignore this? If somebody adds here too, how would they know which one to use?
• It looks like this originated as an internal idea, as an experiment/proof of concept. I didn’t find any user feedback around elsewhere, but I may have missed it. How might we test this with a small group of folks?

[acressall]

Thanks for the great questions @ackernaut!

What does the 3 dot menu pattern look like on mobile? What other things do you think might go in this menu?

I've wondered if it could be like a meeting settings menu, for example, if we one day wanted to have the ability to add icebreakers after a meeting has started, or turn from public to private retro?

How might you solve for the double button problem (the Join button in 2 places) if you want the Zoom link to be visible in the interface?

I'm not sure I understand this question.

How would you handle this if folks had 2-3 initial options for video call integrations?

My first thought is to show a list, but it could be a small row of just the icons, or maybe once you've add one the others go away... lots of bad ideas

What if folks already have a Zoom link elsewhere, like on a calendar item? Do they just ignore this? If somebody adds here too, how would they know which one to use?

Great point. I think they would need to decide where is the most valuable spot for them to have a link like this. Do they stick with a calendar? or do they want to feel like they have video in the app?

It looks like this originated as an internal idea, as an experiment/proof of concept. I didn’t find any user feedback around elsewhere, but I may have missed it. How might we test this with a small group of folks?

Yep, you're right here! I think we could do a rapid prototype style test, or we could put it behind a feature flag (maybe look for teams that seem to do sync meetings more?)

Next steps

• LMK if you think this is safe to try or needs more exploration
• @Dschoordsch I'm thinking this is lower priority for the remainder of the trimester, so we can save implementation for another time. What do you think?

[Dschoordsch]

I'm biased having done a POC of the Zoom some time ago. I think since integrations are the biggest indicator of user activation I think adding more can them can only improve this. It also appears as if the type of integration does not matter too much since both Jira and Slack integrations are strong indicators of user activation (we need more samples to know this conclusively) ^1.

I would like to bring this to a ready to implement state while it's still fresh, we can postpone the implementation.

[JimmyLv]

both Jira and Slack integrations are strong indicators of user activation

I also agree that people always like what's "familiar" things. And Zoom is (probably) the most familiar/popular product in the meetings area, so if Parabol could be integrated with Zoom, there could be more narrative to tell.

[ackernaut]

Thanks for the extra details there. @acressall

I should have asked: if folks intend to add a Zoom call to a meeting, do they have to do it every meeting? Or do they add it once per team? Are we adding an extra step to every meeting vs having a single Zoom link on a recurring calendar item?

Also, the double button issue was what you noted where the Join meeting is both in the left nav and in the right menu in one of the iterations.

[acressall]

I should have asked: if folks intend to add a Zoom call to a meeting, do they have to do it every meeting? Or do they add it once per team? Are we adding an extra step to every meeting vs having a single Zoom link on a recurring calendar item?

@Dschoordsch might be able to better answer this as I'm not sure which is technically possible... I think it should be different meeting links until we have recurrence, otherwise there's a risk of having two different retros on the same team with the same link, but they could be entirely different meetings. It might be unlikely, but if you look at the example of the growth team currently running retros around email brainstorming and launch planning, I would want those to be treated as separate in the off chance there was sync time happening concurrently.

Also, the double button issue was what you noted where the Join meeting is both in the left nav and in the right menu in one of the iterations.

I'm not actually concerned about the join meeting button being in two locations, as long as they do the same thing. Right now we don't have a consistent place to put meeting info between standups and other meeting types, so it needs to go somewhere. I could see the facilitator who started the meeting using the 3-dot menu, and participants using the more visible one. Long-term we might want a better spot for standups that could be different, but for the sake of experimenting I'm ok with it being the same.

We could exclude it from standups to solve this, but I'd like to keep it because I suspect people still do standups sync fairly often. This might give us some more insight into that too

[Dschoordsch]

I should have asked: if folks intend to add a Zoom call to a meeting, do they have to do it every meeting? Or do they add it once per team? Are we adding an extra step to every meeting vs having a single Zoom link on a recurring calendar item?

Without re-occurance we can only create one off zoom meetings, thus we should create a new one each time. I think we should also only create one when someone presses the "Create zoom meeting" button.

[ackernaut]

@acressall that’s a good point regarding the possibility of multiple meetings happening in sync.

My biggest concern here is about having a source of truth for the video call (what if 2 folks start one at the same time? Is that possible?) and having to repeat the action of adding a Zoom call every time. Today I like that I can use my calendar to set up recurrence and add my Zoom link once. Participants hop on Zoom. We start a Parabol meeting (or pick back up on one that was already started). I think the calendar is a better source of truth for sync needs. For low frequency recurrence (like Pokers and Retros which are avg every 2-3 weeks) we didn’t need to build recurrence. The calendar works best for that, too.

I don’t want to have to compete with the functionality of a calendar until we start working on something like ‘zappy donuts’ where we can set up workflows with recurrence. Maybe a workflow could start meetings on the right team, create corresponding calendar items, or have a standing zoom link, etc.

As for the UI, what if we found a single pattern using an icon button and menu that could work across meeting types? Pardon my explorations but I just wanted to see some patterns quickly. I’d say take a look at those patterns and consider one of those if you think it’s more viable.

I’m curious to see how many folks 1) add Zoom 2) add a Zoom call to a meeting 3) join a Zoom call in the meeting UI. I assume we want to track those behaviors? I’m curious what we learn about adoption in general. Maybe having Zoom on our list of integrations is a good checkbox item for customers even if they like having a single Zoom link on their calendar item.

Safe to try!

[jordanh]

@Dschoordsch this one is getting kind of stale. Would you like me to keep it open for a Slack week or shall we close it for now?

[Dschoordsch]

Let's icebox it for now. There are enough other integrations to tinker with.