3 ms·
A standup's supposed to be a time for everyone to give a very brief status update, and not much more than that. If your standup has a dozen people and takes 45
by bunderbunder 10y ago
A standup's supposed to be a time for everyone to give a very brief status update, and not much more than that.
If your standup has a dozen people and takes 45 minutes, that implies that either everyone's taking about four minutes to say what they should be able to cover in 2 or 3 sentences. That or someone's missed the point and your standup has turned into the kind of meeting that standups are explicitly not supposed to be, only without the chairs.
- collyw 10y agoTo me this is a major problem with agile. No one actually agrees on what it actually is. Any criticism is met with "your not doing it right".
- zzalpha 10y agoNo, the definition of a stand-up meeting is literally a quick meeting that you stand up for because it's so fast. A 45 minute meeting is by definition not a stand-up... physically it just makes no sense.
- collyw 10y agoCan you point me to an official definition of a stand up meeting? Or is this just another case of "your doing it wrong"?
- bunderbunder 10y agoWell, there's no governing standards committee on the English language, so I can't really provide you with an official definition. But here's the Wikipedia article - based on my skimming, its description seems about right to me: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stand-up_meeting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stand-up_meeting I'm not wild about people trying to be pedantic about rigidly adhering to some idealized Agile-with-a-capital-A. But it's not rules lawyering to say that someone's completely missed the boat. And it sounds like whoever implemented the process at your former employer completely missed the boat.