Video conferencing software: the four calls that carry real weight

A hiring manager sends a link. The candidate joins from a car park, because the house is full and the only quiet place is a car. Two minutes in, the picture freezes and the audio turns metallic. The interview runs eight minutes short, and the panel's notes say "seemed hesitant".

Nobody in that story chose badly. The problem is treating a video call as a neutral container for whatever would otherwise have happened in a room. It changes who can take part, what gets recorded, who has a private space, and whether a procedure that has to be fair actually was.

This article covers video conferencing software from the people side: the four workplace calls where the tool and the organiser carry real weight, recording and consent, accessibility, the conditions nobody puts in a feature list, and what to check first. It names no products.

The call that most often goes wrong is the one in someone's first week, because nobody owns it. See how New Dynamics onboarding turns a start date into a plan with named owners, rather than a link and a hope.

If your question is where announcements live rather than where live conversations happen, internal communication tools covers it. If it is the booking and the panel rather than the call, interview scheduling software covers that half.

What video conferencing software actually is

A video conferencing tool does one narrow job: it carries live audio and video between people who are not in the same place. Around that job it has grown screen sharing, a chat panel, a waiting room, breakout rooms, telephone dial-in, recording, live captions and, increasingly, automatic transcription and summaries. Video conferencing apps, video meeting platforms, video conferencing tools and the plural "video conferencing softwares" all describe that one function with different packaging.

Two things get confused with it. An internal communication platform is about messages that persist: announcements, channels, who has read the safety notice. Its unit is the message, and a call is a feature inside it rather than its purpose. A webinar tool is broadcast to an audience who mostly cannot speak: fine for an all-hands, unhelpful for an interview. If people are missing announcements, better call quality will not fix it.

Most calls are low stakes: bad audio on the weekly catch-up costs a repeated sentence. Four calls are different, because the call is the event.

1. A job interview. Someone outside the organisation, with no access to your IT support, assessed partly on how they come across.
2. Remote onboarding in the first week. Where a new joiner decides whether this place is organised and whether they belong in it.
3. A performance or appraisal conversation. Where disagreement has to be possible and a written record has to follow.
4. A disciplinary or grievance hearing. Where fairness is not a preference, and the procedure can be tested afterwards.

No official source publishes the proportion of UK interviews, inductions or disciplinary hearings held by video call. What the Office for National Statistics publishes is the underlying working pattern. In its article on who has access to hybrid work in Great Britain, released on 11 June 2025, the ONS reports that "More than a quarter (28%) of working adults in Great Britain hybrid worked between January and March 2025". That is the reference period, and the population for whom a formal conversation is now plausibly a call. For more, see our HR statistics hub.

Why this site does not rank video conferencing apps

Many searches that reach this page want a ranked list: the best video conferencing software, a video conferencing apps comparison, five platforms scored out of ten. This site does not publish those, and will not name, rank, compare or price any product here.

The reasons are in why we do not publish a top 5 HRIS list: rankings are often shaped by commercial relationships a reader cannot see, they go stale within weeks, and even an honest one cannot know which identity provider you run, whether a third of your workforce has no corporate email address, whether your regulator requires recording, or whether you will ever hold a disciplinary hearing on it. What we can give you is the questions.

Moment one: a job interview

A remote interview is a format choice, not a different assessment, and Acas puts it that way. Its guidance on interviewing job applicants says that if you hold interviews online you should make sure "you hold the interview in the same way as any interview you hold in person", that "the candidate has a reliable method of communication, for example that they have the right technology for a video call or can download any software needed", and that "you have a backup plan in case of connectivity issues".

Read the middle point slowly, because it is the one tools break. It is not enough that your organisation can run the call. The candidate has to join it on the device they own, without installing something their current employer's laptop will block. So: can they join from a browser, with no account and no download, on a phone as well as a laptop? Is there a telephone dial-in, and does the invitation carry the number plus a named human reachable in the five minutes before the call?

The adjustment duty belongs in the invitation, not in a later email. Acas states that "By law you must ask anyone coming to an interview to tell you if they need reasonable adjustments so they can attend", with examples including a sign language interpreter for someone who is deaf. That has software consequences: can a third participant join as an interpreter without hitting a seat limit, can they be pinned so they stay visible, and can the candidate switch captions on themselves?

If the interview is recorded, permission is not optional. Acas is direct: "If you need to record the interview, you must get the person's permission first."

When a connection fails, the panel has to decide whether that disadvantaged the candidate, and the honest answer is usually yes. A frozen picture reads as hesitation; dropped audio reads as a thin answer. Agree the rule before the day, because in the moment nobody wants to raise it.

Moment two: the first week, remotely

The first week is the call nobody owns. A start date arrives, a dozen introductions get booked, and the new joiner spends four days in thirty-minute windows with strangers who each assume somebody else covered the basics.

What this asks of the tool is modest and specific:

• An invitation a person outside the account can accept on day one, before their identity account is fully provisioned. Provisioning slips; the induction should not slip with it.
• A recording of the sessions worth re-watching, with permission, so they can hear the pension explanation twice without asking twice.
• Captions, because a new joiner is the least able person in the organisation to decode an unfamiliar accent, a room microphone and three acronyms a sentence.

What it asks of the organiser is larger. Sequence the practical calls first, keep them shorter than you would in a room, and give one named person who is not the line manager, so a question that feels too small to ask has somewhere to go: onboarding check-ins and the onboarding buddy cover that. The failure here is a first week made entirely of calls, with no written plan behind them.

Moment three: a review or appraisal conversation

An appraisal held by video is a real conversation with a record attached, and the record is the part software touches. Acas says it is "important to keep a written record of what is discussed", shared with the employee afterwards.

That has an implication people miss. The written record is not the chat panel, the automatic transcript or the meeting summary. Those are artefacts of the call. The record of a review belongs where review records live, with the same visibility rules as every other review, so next year's conversation can start from it and a manager who leaves does not take it with them. If the only trace of a review is a transcript in a meeting tool, you have a retention problem and a visibility problem at once.

Two things to settle before you run a cycle on calls. Cameras: agree the expectation rather than issuing an instruction, because a requirement to be on camera at home is a requirement to show your home. The draft first: send the written review far enough ahead to read.

For the craft of the conversation, including proximity bias, see remote performance reviews. For the cycle, performance reviews is the feature page.

Moment four: a disciplinary or grievance hearing held remotely

This is the one to get right, and almost nothing written about video conferencing software mentions it. What follows describes the position in England, Wales and Scotland. It is general information and not legal advice; take advice on your own case.

Start with what the hearing has to contain. Acas is explicit that "By law, an employee or worker has 'the right to be accompanied' at a disciplinary hearing. This means they can bring a 'companion' with them." The same right applies to a grievance: "By law, any employee or worker can bring a 'companion' (relevant person) to a grievance meeting."

Now read what the companion is allowed to do. Acas says the companion must be allowed to set out the employee's case, respond for the employee to any comments or points made at the meeting, "talk with the employee during the hearing", take notes, and sum up the case at the end.

Hold that against an ordinary video call. Where, exactly, does the employee talk with their companion during the hearing? In a room they lean sideways and speak quietly. On a call with everyone in one grid there is no sideways, and if the companion is dialling in from elsewhere there is not even a shared room to lean into. That is a documented part of the procedure that the format can quietly remove.

So a remote hearing needs arrangements an in-person one does not:

• A private channel between the employee and companion during the hearing: a breakout room, or an agreed pause where everyone else leaves. Say in advance which it is, and that asking for it is normal.
• The evidence sent in advance. Acas expects the employer to put the alleged misconduct, the evidence and the possible outcomes in writing in good time before the hearing. Sharing a document on screen for the first time is not that.
• A private space, confirmed. An employee attending from a kitchen with family next door is not attending privately. Acas notes an employer should check whether other arrangements would help, for example holding the hearing somewhere else if the employee is worried about coming to the workplace. The logic runs both ways: offer a room on your premises to someone whose home has none.
• A notetaker who is not the chair, and a stated position on recording. Acas expects a written confidential record of the hearing; it does not ask for a recording.
• A rule for a dropped connection mid-evidence: who calls whom, how long you wait, and that the hearing is adjourned rather than finished from memory.
• Adjournments offered out loud, because on a call the chair cannot read the atmosphere.
• An in-person alternative on request, without requiring a reason. Acas says everyone, including the companion, should make every effort to attend, and someone who cannot take part properly by video is being asked to attend something they cannot attend.
• Interpretation and adjustments. For grievance meetings Acas says the employer should arrange an interpreter if the employee has difficulty speaking English, and consider reasonable adjustments for a disabled employee or anyone they bring. The call has to carry those extra people.

Acas's guidance on unfair dismissal says it might be unfair dismissal if an employee worked for their employer for at least 2 years and "the employer did not follow a fair procedure". A hearing in a format that stopped the employee consulting their companion, or cut short by a dropped connection and finished from memory, is a procedure argument handed to the other side. The tool did not cause that. The arrangements did. But the tool is where they have to be possible. For the procedure stage by stage, see the disciplinary procedure.

Recording, transcription and the consent question

This is the legally serious part, and it has sharpened as transcription and summaries arrive switched on.

Start with the regulator. The Information Commissioner's Office, in its guidance on monitoring workers, notes that "many video conferencing apps also have the capability to record audio". It goes on: "Using audio recording, particularly where it is continuous, is considered more privacy intrusive than purely visual recording. You will therefore require a much greater justification if you use it. You should switch off by default any capability to record audio."

On telling people, the ICO is equally plain. "Apart from in very exceptional circumstances where covert monitoring is justified, you must inform workers about any monitoring", and you "must tell workers about monitoring in a way that is accessible and easy to understand". Its fairness test: "you should only monitor workers in ways they would reasonably expect and not in ways that cause unjustified adverse effects on them".

The same guidance lands squarely on calls into people's houses. The ICO notes that Article 8 of the Human Rights Act 1998 concerns the right to respect for a private and family life, that this is increasingly important due to the rise of homeworking, and that "Workers' expectation of privacy are likely to be significantly greater at home than in the workplace". A camera pointed into a living room is not a camera in a meeting room.

Note what consent does and does not do. The ICO is sceptical of consent in employment generally, because of the imbalance of power between employer and worker, and expects a lawful basis, transparency and often an impact assessment instead. Consent still carries weight in two places: Acas requires permission before recording a job interview, and at a hearing, recording without everyone's agreement is a fight you do not want inside a procedure that has to look fair.

Positions worth adopting whatever tool you land on:

1. Recording and transcription off by default, host-enabled per call, with the reason recorded.
2. An announcement that is spoken, not only displayed. A banner is not an explanation.
3. Never record a disciplinary or grievance hearing without the explicit agreement of everyone in it. Keep the written confidential record as the record.
4. A retention period set as a date, not a default. On records generally the ICO says: "Under data protection law, you must not keep information for longer than you need to."
5. Know who can read a transcript. An automatic summary of an appraisal in a shared drive has changed who knows what about somebody's performance.
6. Treat an AI summary as a draft, and run a data protection impact assessment before switching on anything that looks like monitoring.

Accessibility: a call excludes people differently from a room

A room excludes people in ways organisations have learned to notice: steps, no hearing loop, a whiteboard nobody describes. A call excludes differently, and less visibly, because everyone appears to be present.

The UK frame has two parts that get confused. The first applies to public sector bodies and their websites and apps. GOV.UK states that "The accessibility regulations came into force for public sector bodies on 23 September 2018", requiring the WCAG 2.2 AA standard, and lists what is exempt. The list includes "live audio and video". The second part does not stop at that exemption: the same page says that even if you are exempt, "under the Equality Act 2010 or the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (in Northern Ireland) you're still legally required to make reasonable adjustments for disabled people when they're needed". On employment, GOV.UK states that "Employers must make reasonable adjustments to make sure workers with disabilities, or physical or mental health conditions, are not substantially disadvantaged when doing their jobs", listing "changing the recruitment process so a candidate can be considered for a job" among the examples.

So live captions are not mandated by those regulations. They may well be a reasonable adjustment. Stop asking whether captions are required and start asking whether the call can be joined properly by the people who need to join it:

• Live captions, switchable by the participant and not only the host, working on a phone.
• Room for extra participants, so an interpreter, a support worker or a companion is never a licence problem. Acas notes that reasonable adjustments might mean allowing someone else to be a companion at a hearing, for example a support worker.
• Keyboard and screen reader support for the join flow, which is where this usually fails.
• Speaker view that can be pinned, so a lip reader or an interpreter stays on screen.
• A real alternative, telephone or in person, offered without requiring a reason.

The ONS article has a second half that belongs here: "Disabled workers (24%) were less likely than non-disabled workers (29%) to hybrid work between January and March 2025". One measure over one reference period, and not a statement about access to calls, but a caution against assuming remote working is itself an adjustment.

The conditions nobody lists, and what to check first

Feature comparisons describe the software. These describe the circumstances it runs in.

Bandwidth is not evenly distributed. A candidate on a shared connection in a flat, an employee in a rural area, a site worker on a phone signal. What matters is whether the tool degrades to audio gracefully rather than freezing, and whether dial-in exists at all. Test it by throttling your own connection, not by reading the specification.

A private space is not evenly distributed either, and this is the condition that most often disadvantages the person with the least power in the call. For an interview it means offering a different time or a telephone alternative. For a hearing it means offering a room on your premises, in the invitation.

Devices, permissions and data. A corporate laptop that blocks downloads, a phone with 400 megabytes free, a shared site terminal with no camera. If joining requires an app, some of the people you most need cannot join. And asking a frontline employee to sit an hour-long call on their own mobile data is asking them to pay to attend work.

The connection that fails mid-interview. A workable rule: the organiser telephones within two minutes, the lost questions are re-asked rather than inferred, and if a significant part was affected the candidate is offered a fresh slot. Acas asks for a backup plan in case of connectivity issues; that is one written down.

Then the questions for a provider and for your own IT and HR teams.

1. Can an external person join from a browser, with no account and no download? Make them show you on a phone.
2. Is there a telephone dial-in, and does it reach the same call?
3. Can a participant switch on captions themselves, and does the join flow work with a keyboard and a screen reader?
4. Who can start a recording or transcription, and is it off by default? Show me the administrative setting, not the marketing page.
5. Where do recordings and transcripts live, who can read them, and what is the retention setting? A default of "forever" is an answer.
6. Can two participants have a private side conversation during a call, with everyone else told it is happening? This is the hearing question.
7. How many participants before a licence problem, including an interpreter and a companion who is not an employee?
8. Where is the data processed and stored, what is in the export when we leave, and what gets switched on by default after an update? Features arriving enabled is how organisations record by accident.

For a wider selection process, choosing HR software covers the method: write the requirements before you watch a demonstration.

What usually goes wrong

• Treating every call as the same call. The tool gets chosen for the weekly catch-up and then used for a hearing.
• Recording because it is easy. One click, nobody owns the retention question, and two years later there is an archive of performance conversations with no owner.
• The companion left out, or present but unable to speak privately with the employee, which is a procedural problem rather than an inconvenience.
• A camera-on instruction, which is an instruction to show people your home.

Frequently asked questions

What is video conferencing software?

It is software that carries live audio and video between people in different places, usually with screen sharing, a chat panel, a waiting room, telephone dial-in, recording and captions around it. It is narrower than an internal communication platform, which is built around messages that persist.

What is the best video conferencing software?

This site does not publish vendor rankings or comparisons, and will not name, rank or price products in this category. A ranking cannot know your identity provider, your sector's recording rules, whether part of your workforce has no work email address, or whether anyone needs captions. Use the questions in this article instead.

Can you hold a disciplinary hearing by video call?

It can be done, and it needs more care than a hearing in a room. Acas says that by law an employee or worker has the right to be accompanied, and that the companion must be allowed to talk with the employee during the hearing, so a remote hearing needs a private channel between those two, offered adjournments, evidence sent in advance, a confirmed private space and an in-person alternative on request. This is the position in England, Wales and Scotland, and general information rather than legal advice.

Do you need consent to record a meeting or an interview?

For a job interview, Acas is explicit that if you need to record it you must get the person's permission first. For workplace monitoring more generally the ICO treats consent as rarely appropriate in employment, because of the imbalance of power, and expects a lawful basis, transparency and often a data protection impact assessment. It also says you should switch off by default any capability to record audio.

Does a video call have to have captions?

The UK public sector accessibility regulations exempt live audio and video, so captions are not required by them. GOV.UK states that even where you are exempt you are still legally required to make reasonable adjustments for disabled people when they are needed, and for an employer captions are often exactly that. Make them switchable by the participant, not only the host.

Your next step: pick the hardest call, not the easiest

1. Write down the four calls that carry weight in your organisation and name who owns each one.
2. Check the recording and transcription defaults in the tool you already use, and turn off what is on by accident.
3. Add a private channel for the employee and companion to your remote hearing arrangements, and offer an in-person hearing in the invitation.
4. Write the failed-connection rule for interviews, then join your own interview link from a phone, on mobile data, with captions on.

For the arrangements behind all of this, read and download our remote work guide. The guide is free to read, and the PDF uses our short download form.

Want an appraisal record that lives somewhere better than a meeting transcript? Book a New Dynamics demo and bring your current review form. You can also email contact@new-dynamics.com.