SpatialChat

Virtual events are broken. Everyone knows it. Nobody fixes it. Thinkies World Congress did. 300 participants. 40+ countries. 100+ ideas pitched, not by a panel, not by speakers, but by every single person in the room. They built their Idea Garden on SpatialChat. People walked in, claimed a conversation, and started pitching. No waiting. No moderation. No wasted talent sitting on mute. In one session, they got more collective thinking done than most organizations manage in an entire quarter. This is what happens when you stop running events like it's 2012. Watch Full Video: https://lnkd.in/gJVkfQvs 

Panorama Education had a problem that every team had. How do you bring people together when you can't be in the same room? They didn't settle for a Zoom link and a prayer. They built a space. Across 6+ virtual events on SpatialChat, 300+ Panorama team members showed up not because they had to, but because it actually felt worth showing up for. → All-hands on a broadcast stage where 200+ people gathered in one room. No one on mute, no one invisible → 10+ breakout rooms running simultaneously, small group conversations that didn't feel like a calendar obligation → Spatial audio that made a 45-minute session feel shorter than a 20-minute Zoom call No rigid grids. No muted rows of faces. Just people, moving through a space that felt alive. What Panorama figured out before most: Virtual connection isn't about the technology. It's about whether the space makes people feel like they belong. That's a hard thing to design. They did it anyway.

SpatialChat hosted a 3,000-person global webcast for EY 2 time zones. 2 sessions. 0 access issues. EY needed their entire global workforce in one event, split across EST and BST with no margin for error. They needed 2 independent sessions on SpatialChat. What did the heavy lifting > Large room capacity → 3,000 attendees, no performance drop  > Browser-based access → no downloads, no IT friction, instant entry  > Spatial audio → attendees could actually talk, not just watch  > Flexible session setup → two fully synced sessions across time zones How SpatialChat impacted EY’s event 2,000–3,000 attendees across a single event; 2 sessions covering EST + BST simultaneously; 1 global workforce, same conversation, same day; 0 access issues across a 3,000-person enterprise rollout This is what enterprise-scale events look like when the platform doesn't get in the way.

The Washington Post ran into a problem every enterprise eventually hits. 280 people. One annual event. A format that couldn't handle either. A single virtual stream for a newsroom that size isn't an event. It's crowd control. So they rebuilt it on SpatialChat. Here's what changed: → 200 rooms. Live at the same time. → Conversations stayed intimate. You only hear who's around you. → No moderators. People moved on their own terms. → A 3-day persistent space that never went dark. The data tells the rest: > 75%+ active participation sustained across all 3 days > 3× more cross-team interactions vs. single-stream > 2× longer dwell time > Zero drop-off by Day 3 Most virtual events die on Day 2. They didn't lose momentum for a second. This isn't a meeting tool. It's event infrastructure.

LinkedIn had 72 teams experiment with SpatialChat. They created 17 spaces across engineering, culture, and ops, all bottom-up, no mandate. What stood out wasn’t just adoption. It was behavior: → 70%+ teams created spaces independently → 2–3 teams experimenting in parallel at any given time → 4 active users driving early exploration across spaces → Multiple cross-functional setups (engineering, culture, ops) This is how new tools actually enter enterprises. Not through rollouts. Through curiosity-driven experiments at the edges. Even in environments dominated by Slack and Zoom, teams are still looking for more human ways to interact, especially for moments those tools weren’t built for. Small signal. But the right kind.

Harvard Kennedy School Executive Education just proved something most universities ignore: Engagement is not a content problem. It’s a room design problem. They ran a 300+ person academic event that didn’t feel like a webinar. Here’s what actually drove it:- 1. One Stage. Clear control. No fragmented sessions, no confusion Impact: 100% of users knew where to start, and 0 drop-off at entry 2. No forced breakout rooms. People chose conversations based on interest Impact: 2–3x higher active participation vs assigned rooms 3. Movement = engagement. Users could enter/exit conversations freely Impact: Higher dwell time + more interactions per user 4. Onboarding wasn’t an afterthought. “How to use the space” was built into the environment Impact: First-time users activated in minutes (not 15–20 min friction) Most virtual events fail because: > You lock people into static formats > You control too much > You remove autonomy Harvard did the opposite. They designed for behavior, not broadcasting.

Oregon State University ran a 150-person academic event that felt nothing like a lecture. No slides droning. No ignored chat box. No cameras-off silence. Their School of Chemical, Biological, and Environmental Engineering hosted a live, interactive session on SpatialChat. Where 150 participants actually moved, talked, and connected in real time. Academic events don’t have a content problem. They have an environment problem. Their results using SpatialChat prove it: • 70%+ active participation. The highest their school has seen for virtual lectures • 2× longer engagement vs. standard virtual formats • 0 facilitation needed for peer conversations Nobody volunteers to be a case study after a forgettable event. Oregon State did.

Twitch ran a virtual event that turned part-time streamers into full-time creators. 15% of attendees leaped. Not from a masterclass. Not from a course. From a single event. Here's what they did differently  “The old way” One stage. One speaker. Hundreds of people watching. Nobody talking. Everyone leaves the same way they arrived, alone. “The SpatialChat way” Multiple rooms. Free movement. Creators finding each other, sharing strategies, having real conversations in small groups, without a moderator pushing them through an agenda. The difference? Traditional formats are designed for attendance. While SpatialChat is designed for transformation. The numbers don't lie: > Twitch saw 75% more engagement sustained across the entire event, not just the opening hour > 3+ meaningful peer connections per attendee on average, no icebreakers required > 15% of part-time creators transitioned to full-time streaming after the event This event was career-changing for real people. And it didn't come from better content. It came from a better environment. While everyone else is still running webinars and wondering why nobody shows up energized, Twitch built a room where ambition became contagious.

Terex Corporation, one of the largest manufacturers of heavy equipment globally, ran one of the most interesting virtual collaboration stories we've ever seen. They got their global teams. Distributed regions. And a Zoom-and-slide-deck culture that was quietly killing internal engagement. The results weren't incremental. It created a different category of outcomes entirely: > 1.8× jump in active participation, overnight! > 65% of attendees in live peer conversations, not passive listening > 3× more cross-team interactions per session than before > Post-session energy that spilled into follow-up conversations days later While most companies still argue over camera-on policies, Terex quietly solved the engagement problem entirely. They didn't get better at running Zoom calls. They stopped running Zoom calls. The companies winning at distributed culture right now aren't the ones with the best slide decks. They're the ones who stopped mistaking a meeting for a room.

250 people. One virtual space. Zero support team on standby. Brightly Software (a Siemens company) ran one of the cleanest enterprise virtual events we've seen. And they did it entirely self-serve. Most enterprise virtual events are a juggling act, managing the platform, chasing glitches, and herding attendees. While simultaneously trying to run the actual event. Brightly experienced none of that. SpatialChat ran as infrastructure. And the numbers backed it up: > 2× higher dwell time compared to standard webinar formats > 65% of attendees actively engaged in conversations, not just cameras on > 0 support incidents. The entire event ran without a single escalation Brightly didn't just want to run an event. They wanted to prove it worked with data they could take back to leadership. Engagement reports. Dwell time. ROI they could point to in the next planning cycle. That's the difference between running an event and owning one. If your team is still spending more energy managing the platform than running the experience, you're solving the wrong problem.