4 ms·
If the meetings are useful, that's fine, but I have a hard time taking pride in a long series of meetings to decide the contents of a 15-page document describin
by anonymoushn 4y ago
If the meetings are useful, that's fine, but I have a hard time taking pride in a long series of meetings to decide the contents of a 15-page document describing the design for feature that could be like 200LOC but now must be 2000LOC and involve integration between multiple teams' services because the promo criteria says "collaboration."
- xnorswap 4y agoThat sounds like a Big Company problem. There are hundreds of thousands of software development jobs in companies where the whole software development department are fewer than 10 people. If you absolutely abhor integrating software between teams then they can be a breath of fresh air. That said, you will very likely find other frustrations, from their (lack of) tooling, greater impact of colleagues, more idiosyncratic approaches to development, lack of onboarding / documentation. But if you're keen then they can be great places to work. You can make a real stamp on how they work and feel like more of your time is delivery. But you will have to juggle different concerns. You might turn up and find they don't have a bug tracker or source control. Or worse, they do have source control but their entire knowledge of git is "git commit -m 'Checking in end of day'" (and "delete; git clone" for when Things Go Wrong).
- UncleMeat 4y agoThen tell people. Make it better. You can improve process in the same way that you can identify broken components of a codebase, take ownership of them, and improve them in measurable ways.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- innocentoldguy 4y agoIn my opinion, it takes a damn good meeting to beat no meeting at all, and most meetings don’t even approach darn good. Most meetings I attend are held out of habit more than need.