Standups (weekly, not daily) worked pretty well for us at 5-20 people: maybe 5-12 devs and 2-8 other stakeholders. Smaller than that, and communication was so e

Standups (weekly, not daily) worked pretty well for us at 5-20 people: maybe 5-12 devs and 2-8 other stakeholders. Smaller than that, and communication was so easy and natural we didn't need standups. Bigger, and it became tedious and low signal (everyone didn't need to know everything). We now have more than 50 devs, and we've remained quite flat and autonomous. It would be literally impossible for me to track what all the other devs are working on, never mind going over it every day in 15 minutes. It probably works better for siloed dev/product teams that stay under 30 people, but that's not how we work. I share all this to give perspective on a pretty bold statement: "If you [don't like standups], then I don't want to work with you." Ten people is a good size for standups, and I think you may be overgeneralizing your experience when judging people who don't like standups. Even still, I'm curious how much is changing daily to warrant daily standups? We have a rotating "release team" who runs QA and ultimately performs releases, and they check in daily. But daily checkins for feature development seem very frequent to me.