8 ms·

Zoom Is Not the Problem – Our Meeting-Centric Workflow Is

38 points by zzaner 6y ago

bowjack-deerman 6y ago
It’s a shame because Zoom has good fundamental tech.
- ArchReaper 6y ago
  Source? All I hear is about how buggy and insecure the platform is. Edit: source, https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/pranavdixit/google-bans-zoom https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/pranavdixit/google-bans...
  - nilkn 6y ago
    For better or worse, it's really easy to get both small and large (i.e., very large -- hundreds of people) video calls going, and it possibly has the best cross-platform support out of every option available right now.
  - whateveracct 6y ago
    It's not buggy like at all. And afaiu the security stuff has solutions that just aren't default (passwords, SSO)
    - ArchReaper 6y ago
      https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22814198 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22814198 Security and privacy issues are clearly very real.
      - whateveracct 6y ago
        Post is flagged. What was it?
        ArchReaper 6y ago
        Oh that's unfortunate. It was a post providing proof & explaining that Zoom engineers set up an internal website to monitor certain people's zoom meetings, specifically women who were doing sexual things. I wonder why it got removed, it provided DNS registrar history evidence so it wasn't just hearsay.
gargod 6y ago
I agree that video calls are great when used to create human connections and to vigorously debate - but little else. I've survived my share of Zoom meetings that should have been emails but it got WAY worse since the lockdown.
- swampendra 6y ago
  How do you get people to write though? And more importantly - how do you get them to read? Written/async communication sounds great in theory, but it takes the discipline most people don't have. Especially when working remotely. At least during a call you can confront people directly.
remram 6y ago
It seems to me that you have found two problems.
therobot24 6y ago
i think zoom is also the problem
- contravariant 6y ago
  At the very least it would be odd to blame the existence of meetings for Zoom's security/privacy issues.
ogre_codes 6y ago
> Weekly status updates? Project kick-offs? Quarterly and monthly planning? Retrospectives? All are carried out asynchronously, in the form of structured write-ups in Nuclino. Another criticism of a controversial tech that is actually a pitch for a product. It's a Hacker News staple. Maybe I'm just getting too cynical.
- SmellyPotato22 6y ago
  You are not being too cynical. I think just yesterday there was a post about some person complaining about Google Analytics and it was a pitch for their product.
  - ogre_codes 6y ago
    Yep, that post was likely why just seeing the title of this one made me suspect it was a stealth-pitch.
- ErikAugust 6y ago
  "Meetings are not the problem, but our NUCLINO (tm)-centric workflow is" - People in 2029 after NUCLINO (tm) has raised $50 billion
  - ogre_codes 6y ago
    Sounds like a huge SAP project I was involved in. Went from being "SAP is the solution" to "SAP is the problem" in less than 3 years.
haolez 6y ago
Discord (or simply voice channels) to the rescue. You can make quick p2p alignments and prevent a lot of meetings. Assuming that using sync communication is necessary :)
swiley 6y ago
I wouldn’t want to give up the morning scrum IMO, especially when isolated like this.
JamesBarney 6y ago
The meeting I find the biggest time waster is the "what I did yesterday, what am I doing today" meetings. Nothing better than sitting on a 45 minutes call while 15 people try to justify their existence to the pm on the fly. I find a slack channel called #status-updates works wonders. It persists, it's much faster to consume, it's searchable, and you don't have to read it if you don't need to.
- nilkn 6y ago
  Two problems immediately stand out here: - 45 minutes: it should be 5-10 minutes, 15 on a bad day, and literally never 45. - 15 people: this is probably just too many people in a single standup. Based on my experience, it's quite likely this can be split up into 2-3 teams that can have more autonomy, and meetings like standups will become far easier to run and far more efficient.
  - JamesBarney 6y ago
    Last ~15 person team I was made up of the following 7 devs, a tech lead, 3 qa(1 automation, 2 manual), a product champion, a pm, and a deployment expert(devops) is 14. 14 doesn't seem crazy to me. And splitting this team up runs into some issues as well. Do you now have 3 tech leads who acting as pm reporting to the head pm? Do you try to split up the code base? How do you split up QA/Production Champion/Devops? All these decisions seems to have drawbacks.
    - nilkn 6y ago
      It's impossible to say without knowing the product, technology, codebase, etc. In some cases, yes, absolutely -- you would have three separate teams with three separate leads. In other cases, there isn't a reasonable way to split it up. Either way, there's no reason for the standup to last 45 minutes. Whether the codebase should also be split up is another question that is impossible to answer in general. I can speak from experience though and say it's easy to have two teams work on the same large codebase when they're focusing on different areas, different projects, different priorities, etc. I've seen 3-4 different web teams work on the same website with the same underlying codebase without any issues at all because it was clear in advance that their work wasn't going to directly conflict in any way. It would've been hugely counterproductive to force all those people into a single standup and a single team.
pixiemaster 6y ago
content marketing at its best.
JumpCrisscross 6y ago
Some workflows require synchronous communications. Meetings, in person or virtual, are great for these. Other workflows work asynchronously. E-mail, IM and the like are great for these. Post-War America erred on the side of meetings, forcing asynchronous flows into artificial bottlenecks. Silicon Valley seems to have over-corrected, replacing ten-minute meetings with full-day Slack threads. Trying to force asynchronous flows into synchronous constructs introduces unnecessary delays, as the slowest process sets the pace. It also increases overhead, since resource C is occupied while A and B sync. Trying to force synchronous flows into asynchronous constructs introduces mistakes through mis-communications. It also increases overhead, since an additional layer of verifying everyone got critical information is introduced.
- davidjnelson 6y ago
  Insightful. Was thinking about this recently. I find meetings are usually “make a decision”, “give updates”, or “show a demo”. For decision making, have been trying to optimize that workflow with teammates all over the world and not everyone having the time or not loving textual communication. Seems like a master decision record in confluence, discussing finer points in a private slack channel, and demo and tie-breaking plus sync with busy or non text thinkers with ad hoc video meetings works well together. Another thing is quick prototypes of ux or architecture designs in codesandbox. These all work well, but it would be great to have less overhead. Even on a small team though there are so many gaps it feels impossible to reconcile without all these. Anyone have a team decision making workflow for spinning up new projects that is more efficient?
r3trohack3r 6y ago
Two things can be true.
hlmencken 6y ago
How do we make our company look like an alternative to zoom when people look for that? I know, bash meetings and say that using another nondescript wiki/document tool is the right move. You waste so much more time having to write in a document and then going back to look at what other people have written as they do than just having a quick meeting. meetings are running long because people like social interaction and we are missing it.
duxup 6y ago
Bad meetings are a problem. Zoom's technical details are a problem too.
upofadown 6y ago
If your company is well managed then pretty much anything can work. Meetings can be short and to the point. Memos/emails can also be short and to the point. When everyone understands what the ultimate goals are and are allowed to work towards those goals communication is minimal. Typically, though, goals are unclear and constantly shifting. From that flows multiple tasks that are all high priority up to the point they suddenly become irrelevant. In such an environment communication needs to be continuous. Continuous communication is by necessity synchronous.
HOPPINGGOPHER 6y ago
I really hate it if I'm half way through an article I like, just to find out it's an add.

38 points by zzaner 6y ago

bowjack-deerman 6y ago

It’s a shame because Zoom has good fundamental tech.

ArchReaper 6y ago
Source? All I hear is about how buggy and insecure the platform is. Edit: source, https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/pranavdixit/google-bans-zoom https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/pranavdixit/google-bans...
- nilkn 6y ago
  For better or worse, it's really easy to get both small and large (i.e., very large -- hundreds of people) video calls going, and it possibly has the best cross-platform support out of every option available right now.
- whateveracct 6y ago
  It's not buggy like at all. And afaiu the security stuff has solutions that just aren't default (passwords, SSO)
  - ArchReaper 6y ago
    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22814198 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22814198 Security and privacy issues are clearly very real.
    - whateveracct 6y ago
      Post is flagged. What was it?
      - ArchReaper 6y ago
        Oh that's unfortunate. It was a post providing proof & explaining that Zoom engineers set up an internal website to monitor certain people's zoom meetings, specifically women who were doing sexual things. I wonder why it got removed, it provided DNS registrar history evidence so it wasn't just hearsay.

gargod 6y ago

I agree that video calls are great when used to create human connections and to vigorously debate - but little else. I've survived my share of Zoom meetings that should have been emails but it got WAY worse since the lockdown.

swampendra 6y ago
How do you get people to write though? And more importantly - how do you get them to read? Written/async communication sounds great in theory, but it takes the discipline most people don't have. Especially when working remotely. At least during a call you can confront people directly.

remram 6y ago

It seems to me that you have found two problems.

therobot24 6y ago

i think zoom is also the problem

contravariant 6y ago
At the very least it would be odd to blame the existence of meetings for Zoom's security/privacy issues.

ogre_codes 6y ago

> Weekly status updates? Project kick-offs? Quarterly and monthly planning? Retrospectives? All are carried out asynchronously, in the form of structured write-ups in Nuclino. Another criticism of a controversial tech that is actually a pitch for a product. It's a Hacker News staple. Maybe I'm just getting too cynical.

SmellyPotato22 6y ago
You are not being too cynical. I think just yesterday there was a post about some person complaining about Google Analytics and it was a pitch for their product.
- ogre_codes 6y ago
  Yep, that post was likely why just seeing the title of this one made me suspect it was a stealth-pitch.
ErikAugust 6y ago
"Meetings are not the problem, but our NUCLINO (tm)-centric workflow is" - People in 2029 after NUCLINO (tm) has raised $50 billion
- ogre_codes 6y ago
  Sounds like a huge SAP project I was involved in. Went from being "SAP is the solution" to "SAP is the problem" in less than 3 years.

haolez 6y ago

Discord (or simply voice channels) to the rescue. You can make quick p2p alignments and prevent a lot of meetings. Assuming that using sync communication is necessary :)

swiley 6y ago

I wouldn’t want to give up the morning scrum IMO, especially when isolated like this.

JamesBarney 6y ago

The meeting I find the biggest time waster is the "what I did yesterday, what am I doing today" meetings. Nothing better than sitting on a 45 minutes call while 15 people try to justify their existence to the pm on the fly. I find a slack channel called #status-updates works wonders. It persists, it's much faster to consume, it's searchable, and you don't have to read it if you don't need to.

nilkn 6y ago
Two problems immediately stand out here: - 45 minutes: it should be 5-10 minutes, 15 on a bad day, and literally never 45. - 15 people: this is probably just too many people in a single standup. Based on my experience, it's quite likely this can be split up into 2-3 teams that can have more autonomy, and meetings like standups will become far easier to run and far more efficient.
- JamesBarney 6y ago
  Last ~15 person team I was made up of the following 7 devs, a tech lead, 3 qa(1 automation, 2 manual), a product champion, a pm, and a deployment expert(devops) is 14. 14 doesn't seem crazy to me. And splitting this team up runs into some issues as well. Do you now have 3 tech leads who acting as pm reporting to the head pm? Do you try to split up the code base? How do you split up QA/Production Champion/Devops? All these decisions seems to have drawbacks.
  - nilkn 6y ago
    It's impossible to say without knowing the product, technology, codebase, etc. In some cases, yes, absolutely -- you would have three separate teams with three separate leads. In other cases, there isn't a reasonable way to split it up. Either way, there's no reason for the standup to last 45 minutes. Whether the codebase should also be split up is another question that is impossible to answer in general. I can speak from experience though and say it's easy to have two teams work on the same large codebase when they're focusing on different areas, different projects, different priorities, etc. I've seen 3-4 different web teams work on the same website with the same underlying codebase without any issues at all because it was clear in advance that their work wasn't going to directly conflict in any way. It would've been hugely counterproductive to force all those people into a single standup and a single team.

pixiemaster 6y ago

content marketing at its best.

JumpCrisscross 6y ago

Some workflows require synchronous communications. Meetings, in person or virtual, are great for these. Other workflows work asynchronously. E-mail, IM and the like are great for these. Post-War America erred on the side of meetings, forcing asynchronous flows into artificial bottlenecks. Silicon Valley seems to have over-corrected, replacing ten-minute meetings with full-day Slack threads. Trying to force asynchronous flows into synchronous constructs introduces unnecessary delays, as the slowest process sets the pace. It also increases overhead, since resource C is occupied while A and B sync. Trying to force synchronous flows into asynchronous constructs introduces mistakes through mis-communications. It also increases overhead, since an additional layer of verifying everyone got critical information is introduced.

davidjnelson 6y ago
Insightful. Was thinking about this recently. I find meetings are usually “make a decision”, “give updates”, or “show a demo”. For decision making, have been trying to optimize that workflow with teammates all over the world and not everyone having the time or not loving textual communication. Seems like a master decision record in confluence, discussing finer points in a private slack channel, and demo and tie-breaking plus sync with busy or non text thinkers with ad hoc video meetings works well together. Another thing is quick prototypes of ux or architecture designs in codesandbox. These all work well, but it would be great to have less overhead. Even on a small team though there are so many gaps it feels impossible to reconcile without all these. Anyone have a team decision making workflow for spinning up new projects that is more efficient?

r3trohack3r 6y ago

Two things can be true.

hlmencken 6y ago

How do we make our company look like an alternative to zoom when people look for that? I know, bash meetings and say that using another nondescript wiki/document tool is the right move. You waste so much more time having to write in a document and then going back to look at what other people have written as they do than just having a quick meeting. meetings are running long because people like social interaction and we are missing it.

duxup 6y ago

Bad meetings are a problem. Zoom's technical details are a problem too.

upofadown 6y ago

If your company is well managed then pretty much anything can work. Meetings can be short and to the point. Memos/emails can also be short and to the point. When everyone understands what the ultimate goals are and are allowed to work towards those goals communication is minimal. Typically, though, goals are unclear and constantly shifting. From that flows multiple tasks that are all high priority up to the point they suddenly become irrelevant. In such an environment communication needs to be continuous. Continuous communication is by necessity synchronous.

HOPPINGGOPHER 6y ago

I really hate it if I'm half way through an article I like, just to find out it's an add.