3 ms·
Hey thanks for the critique. I agree that this is a status report, but I think (virtual) stand-up is also appropriate, because the questions are more or less wh
by matthewmueller 11y ago
Hey thanks for the critique. I agree that this is a status report, but I think (virtual) stand-up is also appropriate, because the questions are more or less what's asked of you at an in-person standup.
By having stand-up conducted by a bot, it's less invasive and easier for remote workers to give updates on their own time. But I do agree that nothing beats in-person meetings :-)
- wpietri 11y agoI appreciate that you're trying. But this misunderstanding, which you are helping support, does substantial harm to teams. I agree that some people use those questions to help people get started doing stand-up meetings, but they are at best training wheels. They are only formally part of Scrum's "Daily Scrum" practice. The stand-up meeting comes instead from Extreme Programming. Those questions are not a bad place to start, but every well-meshed team I've seen has grown beyond them. Saying that it's a stand-up meeting because it has the same questions as some people's stand-ups is missing the point. The whole reason stand-ups were created was to replace status updates. The goal is to get people together and focused on working as team. This tool enabling remote workers to do things on their own time is the exact opposite of that. If people aren't standing up and talking with one another, it's not a stand-up meeting. For those wondering what the hell I'm talking about, good places to read more: http://guide.agilealliance.org/guide/daily.html http://guide.agilealliance.org/guide/daily.html http://martinfowler.com/articles/itsNotJustStandingUp.html http://martinfowler.com/articles/itsNotJustStandingUp.html And the earliest mention I know of it comes from Ward's original wiki: http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?StandUpMeeting http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?StandUpMeeting