There’s a version of the enterprise XR story where everyone predicted it would happen in 2023, it didn’t, and now we’re quietly pretending those predictions were always about 2026. Which is roughly where we are. And the funny thing is that in 2026, enterprise XR collaboration has actually found its footing — not for everyone, not for all meetings, but for specific use cases it’s genuinely become the better option.
So here’s an honest look at what the main platforms actually do, who they’re for, and when strapping a headset on for a meeting is worth more than firing up Teams.
The Platforms Worth Knowing About
Spatial has evolved into the most accessible enterprise XR option. You can join a Spatial session from a Quest headset, an iPhone, a Mac, or a flat browser window — which is a significant selling point. Not everyone in your organisation has a headset, but they can still be in the same virtual space as colleagues who do. The aesthetics are polished. Avatar quality is good enough that the uncanny valley problem that plagued earlier platforms has largely been solved. Spatial works well for design reviews, creative brainstorming, and any meeting where you want to walk around and react to 3D content together.
Meta Horizon Workrooms is deeper in the Quest ecosystem but gives you things Spatial doesn’t — a physical desk that maps into the virtual space, so your real keyboard and hands appear inside the meeting room. If your team is already on Quest 3 hardware, Workrooms offers more integrated productivity features. The whiteboarding is particularly good. The limitation is that it’s a less open environment: participants without a Quest headset get a degraded flat-screen experience.
Immersed solves a different problem. It’s less about meetings and more about solo or paired heads-down work: putting multiple virtual monitors in front of you in a headset, larger than any physical display you could afford. You can be in a shared Immersed space with a colleague working alongside you without necessarily talking — the presence element is about ambient co-working rather than active meeting. If you’ve struggled to justify a headset for traditional meetings, Immersed might be the more compelling use case.
ENGAGE is built specifically for training, events, and education. The interaction model is different — it supports large rooms with presenters and audiences, interactive demonstrations, and structured learning scenarios. If you’re running compliance training or new employee onboarding and you want something that actually has higher completion rates than a video, ENGAGE is worth a look.
When XR Meetings Actually Beat Video Calls
Here’s the thing: most meetings don’t benefit from XR. Status updates, standups, and anything where screen share plus voice is fine — there’s no reason to put on a headset. The use cases where XR genuinely adds something are more specific.
Spatial design review is probably the clearest one. Architects, product designers, and engineers who need to review 3D content together get something video calls can’t offer: the ability to walk around a model, point at specific parts, and understand scale. A 30-minute XR design review replaces an hour of trying to describe spatial relationships over video.
Hands-on training simulations — particularly for procedures that are dangerous, expensive, or logistically difficult to practice for real. Medical device training, manufacturing process walkthroughs, construction safety demonstrations. These aren’t meetings; they’re structured experiences where the medium genuinely changes what’s possible.
High-presence executive engagements where the social signal matters. An XR meeting feels more like being in a room with someone than a video call does. For relationship-building moments — senior leadership all-hands, important client relationship conversations — the presence difference is real and has measurable impact on how people remember the interaction.
What’s Still Annoying
Battery life on standalone headsets means you’re realistically looking at 2-hour sessions maximum before someone needs to break off. For anything longer, tethered headsets are a better choice but add setup complexity.
Audio quality in VR environments has improved a lot but still lags behind a good pair of headphones on a video call. Spatial audio — voices coming from where the avatar is standing — is genuinely immersive and helps large-group conversations, but the overall fidelity isn’t quite there yet.
And there’s the practical reality: asking a client or external partner to put on a headset is still a significant ask in 2026. For internal teams who already have headsets, this is a non-issue. For anything involving external participants, the flat-screen access options that Spatial and some others offer are essential.
The Honest Assessment for Enterprise Teams
For teams that are already doing creative, design, or training-heavy work, the ROI calculation on enterprise XR collaboration has shifted. The hardware costs have come down enough (Quest 3S is under £300), the platforms have matured enough, and the productivity gains in specific scenarios are well-documented enough that a pilot programme makes sense.
For teams whose work is primarily document review, code review, and conversation? The current generation of XR collaboration is still looking for reasons to exist in your workflow. That might change — the trajectory is clearly upward — but it hasn’t arrived yet for generic knowledge work.
The smart play is a pilot: identify the one or two use cases that match your actual work, run six weeks of structured trials, measure whether outcomes improve. If they do, you’ll know exactly what you’re expanding. If they don’t, you’ve answered the question without a multi-year hardware commitment.