4 ms·
I prefer ditching standups in favor of constant communication, people should know who they need to talk to and avoid waiting for specific checkpoints. A not-to
by mpdehaan2 11y ago
I prefer ditching standups in favor of constant communication, people should know who they need to talk to and avoid waiting for specific checkpoints.
A not-too-long team meeting once or twice a week to talk about big themes is pretty reasonable, but usually I can't even remember what is said in a standup, because much of it isn't things I need to remember.
If it's forced short, there's usually not enough data, if it's it's too long, everything gets tuned out. It's really another kind of status meeting, and I think meetings should instead produce actionable items.
- Nursie 11y agoAs I said to the other response like this, I dislike team meetings as without strong leadership (something I have found lacking in a lot of places) it usually degenerates into an hour or more of griping and grandstanding. You don't really need to remember exactly what's said in a standup, IMHO, participate in it and offer your skills or resources to help other people who are stuck, and get an idea of what's going on.
- mpdehaan2 11y agoYeah, those could be bad. I've always seen it done with strong team leads or technical managers when they existed instead of standups. I have seen that devolve though, and I know what you mean. I was very hands on when running meetings when I did it that way. Usually had an agenda, broke when we didn't have anything else to do, and kept on topic.