4 ms·

I tried to get people to record meetings and link them to features being discussed, so that working on a feature you can review everything that was said. IMHO i

by dreen 5y ago

I tried to get people to record meetings and link them to features being discussed, so that working on a feature you can review everything that was said. IMHO it would reduce the amount of unnecessary conversation by 50% and save everyone a lot of time and trouble. The initiative failed, because not everyone was eager to give consent. Its their right, but I think if you dont want something to be recorded, it probably shouldnt be said at all in a work meeting.

mewpmewp2 5y ago
Might be easier with transcripts, but with recordings it takes a lot of effort to find the correct recording, and correct place to find the correct information that you have a question about. As well as needing to know that your question might be in one of the recordings. So it just also becomes easier to re-ask the question even if it was already discussed somewhere.
- dreen 5y ago
  I agree, and tbh we had automatic transcripts as well (a feature of MS Teams), but its the same issue, you need to be able to record/capture in the first place
NikolaNovak 5y ago
It's a tricky balance between a useful records, and stifling peoples comfort to discuss and speak openly. General solution is to send "meeting notes" at the end - sounds bureaucratic, but it's exactly what you describe - a chance to document and verify "hey all, this is why we agreed on, right?" As well as provide that summary to others who missed it. Ultimately way more useful than transcripts and thus always worth it's time - yes one person will spend 20mjn writing it up, but it'll save time of at least 20min times number of people missing or distracted , plus any time that would've been lost due to misalignment or poor memory etc.
- dreen 5y ago
  Yep thats the normal way. But this can fail on many levels, for instance if the notetaker doesnt understand the problem as well as people talking, they kinda just agree to whatever was written because the thing is still fresh in their mind, then someone who wasnt even there comes to work on the feature a month later and the notes are no good, they need to chase a bunch of people. Even with a noisy transcript you at least dont loose anything, and everyone can still make notes in an async collaborative way > stifling peoples comfort to discuss and speak openly I know some people feel this way, which is why I wouldnt force it on anyone. But I think its a bit silly and they should get over it, were not on the meeting for appearances.
  - jon-wood 5y ago
    That's why notes are then distributed for review, allowing people to say when the notes as taken don't accurately reflect what was discussed.
  - NikolaNovak 5y ago
    It's not appearances or self consciousness. Have you actually asked people and tried to deeply understand why they don't like it? It's difference between freely brainstorming with colleagues, and speaking on the formal record that anybody can access at any time under any context or lack thereof for any purpose and with full attribution. No more jokes, informal chit chat, putting out there ideas, or sticking your neck out etc. And linking it to features sounds like a great way to fingerpoint, scapegoat and blame :-( It's all theoretical and unlikely and paranoid until it inevitably happens :-/ (fwiw, after 20+ years in the field, I am not consenting to recording; and if I do, you'll get the appropriately shortest most formal safest contribution imaginable. Only the things I would be comfortable preceding with "it is the formal position of the company / team to...". Feel free to judge, until or unless you experience or witness the downfall that can be of sufficient magnitude to eliminate all upside of recording :)
    - dreen 5y ago
      Thanks for your post, I understand these issues better now. But I think there still can be some middle ground solution. I struggle with memory, I cant remember what was said on the meeting a few minutes ago. I often have to chase people even if I was there for the note taking because they often lack some context. For the few meetings we did record, I was able to go through it while working to keep the context fresh in my mind constantly. But of course, I would not want to create a situation where that can be abused. A recorded video can be transcribed and deleted, and the transcript can be anonymised and potentially summarised by an algorithm. I think this could at least lead to better (although much longer) notes, while protecting the participants. What would you think about such tool, if it existed?
nvarsj 5y ago
Meeting recordings have terrible signal to noise ratio. Instead of putting effort into creating a concise document to describe the meeting output and actions to take, the burden is placed on others to shift through an hour video. I also see it used as a CYA technique: "oh but we recorded this decision, it's your fault for not watching hours of our meeting videos to know this".
JohnBooty 5y ago
As an in-the-trenches developer, I've almost never been able to get a productivity initiative such as this into effect. The obvious answer is, "it's my fault" and that's highly possible. However, I never really see anybody else accomplishing such things either.
Graffur 5y ago
Hard disagree. Why would I consent to be recorded in the workplace? My job isn't to be recorded.

by dreen 5y ago

mewpmewp2 5y ago

Might be easier with transcripts, but with recordings it takes a lot of effort to find the correct recording, and correct place to find the correct information that you have a question about. As well as needing to know that your question might be in one of the recordings. So it just also becomes easier to re-ask the question even if it was already discussed somewhere.

dreen 5y ago
I agree, and tbh we had automatic transcripts as well (a feature of MS Teams), but its the same issue, you need to be able to record/capture in the first place

NikolaNovak 5y ago

It's a tricky balance between a useful records, and stifling peoples comfort to discuss and speak openly. General solution is to send "meeting notes" at the end - sounds bureaucratic, but it's exactly what you describe - a chance to document and verify "hey all, this is why we agreed on, right?" As well as provide that summary to others who missed it. Ultimately way more useful than transcripts and thus always worth it's time - yes one person will spend 20mjn writing it up, but it'll save time of at least 20min times number of people missing or distracted , plus any time that would've been lost due to misalignment or poor memory etc.

dreen 5y ago
Yep thats the normal way. But this can fail on many levels, for instance if the notetaker doesnt understand the problem as well as people talking, they kinda just agree to whatever was written because the thing is still fresh in their mind, then someone who wasnt even there comes to work on the feature a month later and the notes are no good, they need to chase a bunch of people. Even with a noisy transcript you at least dont loose anything, and everyone can still make notes in an async collaborative way > stifling peoples comfort to discuss and speak openly I know some people feel this way, which is why I wouldnt force it on anyone. But I think its a bit silly and they should get over it, were not on the meeting for appearances.
- jon-wood 5y ago
  That's why notes are then distributed for review, allowing people to say when the notes as taken don't accurately reflect what was discussed.
- NikolaNovak 5y ago
  It's not appearances or self consciousness. Have you actually asked people and tried to deeply understand why they don't like it? It's difference between freely brainstorming with colleagues, and speaking on the formal record that anybody can access at any time under any context or lack thereof for any purpose and with full attribution. No more jokes, informal chit chat, putting out there ideas, or sticking your neck out etc. And linking it to features sounds like a great way to fingerpoint, scapegoat and blame :-( It's all theoretical and unlikely and paranoid until it inevitably happens :-/ (fwiw, after 20+ years in the field, I am not consenting to recording; and if I do, you'll get the appropriately shortest most formal safest contribution imaginable. Only the things I would be comfortable preceding with "it is the formal position of the company / team to...". Feel free to judge, until or unless you experience or witness the downfall that can be of sufficient magnitude to eliminate all upside of recording :)
  - dreen 5y ago
    Thanks for your post, I understand these issues better now. But I think there still can be some middle ground solution. I struggle with memory, I cant remember what was said on the meeting a few minutes ago. I often have to chase people even if I was there for the note taking because they often lack some context. For the few meetings we did record, I was able to go through it while working to keep the context fresh in my mind constantly. But of course, I would not want to create a situation where that can be abused. A recorded video can be transcribed and deleted, and the transcript can be anonymised and potentially summarised by an algorithm. I think this could at least lead to better (although much longer) notes, while protecting the participants. What would you think about such tool, if it existed?

nvarsj 5y ago

Meeting recordings have terrible signal to noise ratio. Instead of putting effort into creating a concise document to describe the meeting output and actions to take, the burden is placed on others to shift through an hour video. I also see it used as a CYA technique: "oh but we recorded this decision, it's your fault for not watching hours of our meeting videos to know this".

JohnBooty 5y ago

As an in-the-trenches developer, I've almost never been able to get a productivity initiative such as this into effect. The obvious answer is, "it's my fault" and that's highly possible. However, I never really see anybody else accomplishing such things either.

Graffur 5y ago

Hard disagree. Why would I consent to be recorded in the workplace? My job isn't to be recorded.