4 ms·

it'd depend on the various team, but even if the team doesn't follow scrum, I feel like having stand-ups is useful, to share information across the team.

kreeben 5y ago
I do to and this is partly my point. If I had taken for granted that traditions are good then I wouldn't have questioned waterfall project stand-ups, a concept that is essentially good and I would have been much wiser for it. For me, the non-SCRUM stand-up is still in the "trial" phase. My mind still resists the very thought of it.
- linker3000 5y ago
  "I wouldn't have questioned waterfall project stand-ups" Back in 1956, Teams, Slack etc. were still pre-alpha and it was possibly difficult or technically impossible to have a group phone call, so a stand-up for larger teams spread round a building might have been the only way to quickly share info + it got the folks out of the noisy computer rooms (plus ça change there!)
linker3000 5y ago
A daily stand up is good for some dispersed teams, or close-knit teams that for some reason (forming, norming?) have not developed the ability to communicate effectively, or get a feel in real-time what their colleagues are doing. Any higher-order stuff should be dispersed by a team leader or senior team member - and that can be done 'as, and when, needed'. Does this require a mandatory daily stand-up? On some occasions, I have reduced the daily stand-up from 30 mins (yes, I know) to 20, then 15...etc and it's common for them to reach 0 without any loss of knowledge transfer because the team members have started to communicate effectively by other means. Granted, the pandemic has changed the nature of the communications challenge a bit. I am happy to see teams having a daily stand-up because they need them. I take more notice when teams have a daily stand-up because they have been told they should have one.

kreeben 5y ago

I do to and this is partly my point. If I had taken for granted that traditions are good then I wouldn't have questioned waterfall project stand-ups, a concept that is essentially good and I would have been much wiser for it. For me, the non-SCRUM stand-up is still in the "trial" phase. My mind still resists the very thought of it.

linker3000 5y ago
"I wouldn't have questioned waterfall project stand-ups" Back in 1956, Teams, Slack etc. were still pre-alpha and it was possibly difficult or technically impossible to have a group phone call, so a stand-up for larger teams spread round a building might have been the only way to quickly share info + it got the folks out of the noisy computer rooms (plus ça change there!)

linker3000 5y ago

A daily stand up is good for some dispersed teams, or close-knit teams that for some reason (forming, norming?) have not developed the ability to communicate effectively, or get a feel in real-time what their colleagues are doing. Any higher-order stuff should be dispersed by a team leader or senior team member - and that can be done 'as, and when, needed'. Does this require a mandatory daily stand-up? On some occasions, I have reduced the daily stand-up from 30 mins (yes, I know) to 20, then 15...etc and it's common for them to reach 0 without any loss of knowledge transfer because the team members have started to communicate effectively by other means. Granted, the pandemic has changed the nature of the communications challenge a bit. I am happy to see teams having a daily stand-up because they need them. I take more notice when teams have a daily stand-up because they have been told they should have one.