4 ms·
I have this little idea I think about called the "status update chain". When I worked in small organizations and we had issues the status update chain looked li
by willcipriano 5y ago
I have this little idea I think about called the "status update chain". When I worked in small organizations and we had issues the status update chain looked like this: ceo-->me, as the organizations got larger the chain got longer first it was ceo-->manager-->me then ceo-->director-->manager-->me and so on. I wonder how long the status update chains are at companies like this? How long does at status update take to make it end to end?
- tacLog 5y agoI am sorry, I didn't have enough context to understand what your saying. When you say: status update chain: ceo --> me. What information is flowing from the CEO to you? or is it the other way around?
- willcipriano 5y agoBoth directions, he is asking "What is going on" and I am telling him. As the org gets larger the request to know what is going on passes down the chain and the reply passes back up.
- NordSteve 5y agoIn well designed incident comms systems, the upward comms occurs automatically, not on request. My goal has always been that my execs know what is going on, so that they are never caught short by status queries.
- sjtindell 5y agoUsually there’s a central place where status is being updated and shared by everyone (a Slack channel for example) and everyone in the chain can just read/ping/respond there. Less of a chain.
- tacLog 5y agoThanks, that makes sense. I haven't experienced that myself yet so I wasn't sure.
- Rygian 5y agoIf the situation is serious enough, you'll have several layers sitting together at the status update meetings to hear it straight from the dog's mouth.