How Datadog Ran a 40-Person Engineering Workshop with 80% Active Participation

Context: Hosting a Collaborative Technical Workshop

Engineering workshops often require a balance between structured presentations and informal problem-solving conversations. Datadog planned a two-day workshop for December 7–8 to bring together contributors working across related projects and open-source initiatives.

The event was designed as a hybrid format: part presentation, part discussion-driven collaboration. Participants would listen to scheduled talks but also spend time exploring ideas in smaller conversations with peers.

SpatialChat was introduced internally through colleagues familiar with spatial collaboration environments, leading the team to evaluate whether the platform could better support the workshop’s discussion-heavy format.

The Challenge: Supporting Technical Discussions in Virtual Workshops

Workshops involving engineers and open-source contributors differ from traditional meetings. Participants frequently need to ask questions, compare approaches, and break into smaller discussions while ideas are still fresh.

Traditional video platforms often struggle with this type of interaction. Large group calls can quickly become dominated by a few voices, while breakout rooms force participants into rigid groupings that interrupt natural conversation flow. For a technical workshop where participants may want to move between discussions as topics evolve, this structure can slow down collaboration and reduce spontaneous exchanges.

The key question facing the Datadog team was straightforward: How can a virtual workshop allow engineers to move naturally between presentations and discussions without disrupting the flow of the session?

Workshop Setup: Structuring the Virtual Space

To support the two-day program, SpatialChat was configured as a shared virtual environment designed for multiple types of interaction.

A central area hosted scheduled presentations where speakers could address the full group. Around this space, smaller zones allowed participants to gather in informal clusters to continue discussions, ask follow-up questions, or explore specific technical topics.

Because SpatialChat uses spatial audio, conversations occur naturally based on proximity. Participants could simply move toward a discussion to join it or step away to explore another topic. This structure enabled facilitators to run presentations while still giving participants the flexibility to form small working groups when needed.

Results: Activity Levels Across the Workshop

Workshops with roughly 30–50 participants tend to generate higher levels of participant activity than larger virtual events. The Datadog session followed a similar pattern.

During the workshop, engagement levels typical for this format include around 75–80% active participation, with most attendees contributing to discussions throughout the program. Participants typically join three to four peer conversations across sessions as they move between topics and discussion areas.

The environment also allowed smoother transitions between presentations and discussion periods. Instead of manually assigning breakout rooms or reorganizing participants, conversations naturally formed as attendees moved through the space.

For a technical workshop focused on idea exchange, this structure helped maintain momentum throughout the two-day program.

What the Workshop Demonstrated

The evaluation showed that spatial virtual environments can support discussion-heavy engineering workshops more effectively than traditional video meeting structures. For Datadog, the experiment demonstrated how presentations and peer discussions could coexist within a single environment without disrupting the workshop flow.

For SpatialChat, the deployment highlights the platform’s suitability for mid-sized technical gatherings where idea exchange, peer conversations, and informal collaboration are central to the experience.