I’m on a call right now about asynchronous vs. synchronous meetings in education. But the real question feels bigger than how we run classes. It’s about how we lead, how we show up, and how we build relationships — in work, school, and life. Some argue that live meetings (or classes) are essential. They say: > “You need real-time accountability.” > “You can’t lead if people can’t see you.” > “Cameras off = disengaged.” Others make a case for asynchronous flexibility: “People learn better when they can reflect, rewind, and work at their own pace.” “Not everyone can be camera-on at 2 PM with a toddler or client in the next room.” “Showing up doesn’t mean being visible on video. It means delivering value.” Here’s the tension I’m sitting with: 🧭 Can I lead a class, a team, or a company without being visible? 📡 Can I teach a class online — never live — and still build trust, grow your network, and help people change their lives? 🛠 I’m leaning toward this: You can go async and still deliver value — but you have to be intentional. If you're invisible, you better be unforgettable in the way you communicate, support, and follow up. But let’s be honest: there’s a danger in disappearing. People forget names. Connections fade. Asynchronous is efficient — but leadership is relational. And relationships take presence, not just content. So here’s my take: You don’t always need to be live. But you can’t afford to be invisible. What do you think? Can you lead and never show up? Can a class (or a company) thrive without shared time? I’d love to hear how others are handling this. Bennie Griggs III David George Gregory Ratcliff Chris Johnson, PMP Alan Hill Shane Hill Annelise Scierka Reginald Holmes, MEng, CSEP, PMP®