ICTs have been essential for staying connected with others and continuing professional activities during this challenging period.

On a personal level, I’ve been using communication technologies for many years, especially since I moved from Brazil 10 years ago. At that time, contact with my family was mainly through Facebook, as communication technologies were not as advanced as today. Now, we've migrated to WhatsApp, which allows us to send quick text or voice messages, and even make video calls that bridge the 15,000 km between us.

While it’s easier to communicate, it doesn’t replace the warmth of a hug. The simple act of being physically together seems so much more complicated. The need to schedule a time for a call reduces some of the spontaneity of in-person encounters. Technology that can fully replicate the simplicity of being present is yet to be invented.

With my friends, I mainly use WhatsApp and Instagram.

Regarding my studies, I graduated in Tourism in 2006, but I always wanted to pursue a new degree, though I kept finding excuses not to enroll. Technology has allowed me to continue my education, and here I am at Unicesumar studying engineering. I never imagined this would happen, as I had a fear of exact sciences—especially mathematics. I decided to face this fear and started watching YouTube lessons to better understand the subject. With the help of various teachers, I realized that I shouldn’t fear mathematics. Through more effective teaching methods and without distractions from classmates, I can now understand the concepts and am passionate about the field. Without technological advances, I certainly wouldn’t have given myself this chance.

On the professional side, I work with social media, so even before the pandemic, this was already the focus of my company. What changed, however, was the work environment.

Previously, we visited the office daily to carry out our activities. Since I work in a multinational company, digital meetings weren’t new. However, when they occurred, each team was in its office, everyone dressed professionally, and there were rarely interruptions or connection issues. Now, we all work from home. There’s always someone with audio or camera issues or someone running late, blaming the connection instead of traffic. Sometimes, we hear a cat meowing, a dog barking, a baby crying, or a doorbell ringing in the middle of meetings—something we’ve had to get used to, but it does take away from the formality of some of our digital meetings.

I am responsible for training, and several tools have been implemented since the beginning of 2020 to facilitate remote work.

In my sessions, I primarily use MS Teams and Webex Trainings. Both are efficient and offer interesting features that support my work. At the beginning of the pandemic, we also used BlueJeans, but the company decided to reduce the number of tools, and now MS Teams is our virtual office.

I admit that I prefer face-to-face contact. Although the tools satisfy the basic needs, it is still challenging to connect with my trainees and explain complex concepts. I’ve also encountered connection issues and delays that affect the schedule, as remote training sessions tend to run longer. In my last class, I had some students from Manila who kept leaving and rejoining the session due to storms. Apparently, when storms occur in the Philippines, providers cut the connection to avoid the risk of lightning damaging the transmission lines.

At times, some people have difficulty operating these technologies, making interaction slower and less enjoyable than it would be in person.

Information and communication technologies are here to stay and are revolutionizing how we interact and communicate. I believe the world will never be the same after 2020. The positive aspect of this change is that we are increasingly independent of physical location and can quickly connect with people anywhere in the world, or even beyond. But there’s also the downside: we’re isolating ourselves in our cocoons, and soon, knowing how to interact with others in person may become a skill that is highly marketable.

I believe there was a significant shift in the way companies negotiated before and during the pandemic. A major factor was the travel restrictions imposed by most countries, which made in-person negotiations impossible. Even when both parties were in the same country, protectionist measures aimed at containing infection rates affected face-to-face negotiations. As a result, most businesses transitioned to digital negotiations. This is evident in the increased use of platforms such as Zoom, MS Teams, and Skype for Business, among others.

Indeed, the majority of new users on these platforms used them to stay connected with family and friends during the pandemic. However, many businesses were also forced to adopt this technology to continue their negotiations. The pandemic accelerated the shift to digital platforms. Companies save significantly on business travel and are able to conduct negotiations in a shorter time frame.

I believe that technology has evolved to a point where we can conduct negotiations remotely as effectively as in person. While there are occasional technical difficulties, if we overlook those, we can see and hear the other party clearly through video calls, which is very similar to speaking face-to-face.

During the pandemic, we witnessed shortages of various items—some commonplace, like toilet paper in certain parts of the world, others essential for protection, such as disposable masks and latex gloves, or life-saving equipment like ventilators, ICU beds, and Covid-19 vaccine doses. These should not have been negotiated; they should have been made available to those in need.

During the pandemic, the party holding power in negotiations largely depended on what was being negotiated. If we consider Covid-related protection products such as masks, gloves, or even ventilators and vaccine doses, the power rested with the manufacturers. Due to shortages, they had control over pricing, quantities, and the buyers they chose to sell to. Government actions could influence this process, but ultimately, the manufacturers had the final say.

When discussing the essential elements of communication, the manufacturers held all the power in these negotiations. Time was critical, as the pandemic was a temporary crisis and lives were at stake. The longer negotiations took, the less power the manufacturers held, as competitors entered the market, the pandemic began to be controlled, and if they couldn't meet demand, they lost business opportunities, and their power was drastically reduced. We only need to look at the start of vaccination efforts: initially, there were two vaccine manufacturers, but today there are many, across various countries.

Information also played a crucial role in these negotiations. During the pandemic, I observed a negotiation process on behalf of my company. We were interested in purchasing licences for the Grammarly software, and the entire process was conducted online using Zoom. The salesperson explained the tool and clarified our doubts. We negotiated the number of licences required for my company, the price, support provided, and all the features we needed. We had several meetings before reaching a final decision on whether or not to purchase the software. We explored alternatives and other suppliers, but ultimately we concluded that Grammarly offered the best value for money. The negotiation process was very pleasant, as we didn’t waste time on travel or commuting, given that each of us was in a different office in different countries. No one needed to socialise after work hours, and the negotiation was much more efficient and cost-effective than it would have been in person.

As we learned in the course, a company should not focus solely on communication during a crisis. Leaving a newly hired engineer in charge of the communication project is a major mistake, as I am still familiarising myself with the company's vision, mission, and values, all of which are crucial for an effective communication plan. Therefore, my first task would be to assemble a team of communication professionals to carry out the communication planning. These would be my recommendations:

Internal Communication Plan

Workers involved in the construction

For the workers involved in the construction, a thorough analysis of what happened must be conducted. Interviews with each of the workers involved are crucial to understanding what occurred and initiating the communication strategy. A face-to-face conversation would be the most appropriate for this stage. Additionally, these workers should be protected, and their identities should be kept confidential (as far as possible), as they should not be exposed to the media. Emotional and psychological support should also be provided, along with coaching on what they can or cannot say if approached by the media.

Other employees

For other employees, the company’s manager should be the designated spokesperson to clarify what happened and provide instructions on what can or cannot be discussed with the media. The manager should be well-prepared before making the public statement, which should take place in person at the company’s facilities. Additionally, an internal email should be sent with clarifications and guidelines for external communication during the crisis period.

External Communication Plan

Victim’s families

For the victims' families, all possible support should be offered. The company should keep its doors open for family members to seek information about what happened. The person responsible for providing the clarifications should be the CEO of the company, who should be briefed on what can be communicated and how to do so. A public apology should also be considered, keeping in mind the potential legal implications. An indirect apology, with great empathy, delivered by a spokesperson specialised in crisis communication to the mass media, could yield positive results in dealing with the victims' families. The company's legal team should be involved in this stage of communication.

General public

Clarifications to the general public are important. Keeping the public regularly updated on the investigations, the causes of the accident, restoration procedures, and studies conducted before the start of the project is crucial. Generally, the local public is most affected when such a tragedy occurs, so I would use local communication channels more frequently than national ones. Television, radio, and newspapers (both traditional and online) could be utilised for this purpose. Statements should always be made by the company’s spokesperson. Monitoring social media and creating a trained service team to respond to comments and inquiries on virtual platforms is also vital. In today's world, it is essential to monitor the online environment and have a service team answering queries related to the issue. An official statement should be prepared for the service team to use, and the team should monitor public sentiment and report back to the communication team for adjustments based on the prevailing mood.

General experts

It is also important to consider the scientific community. The lead engineer should take charge of communication with the technical public. Communication channels for this audience could include specialised engineering magazines or blogs. Here, the communication should be more technical, focusing on the procedures carried out before and during the project.

Authorities

Another group that should be considered in the communication process is the authorities investigating the accident, such as forensic police, the victims’ lawyers, and investigators. Communication with this group should be led by the legal team, in collaboration with the engineer responsible for the project. This communication should take place at a location determined by the authorities, without involving the general media.