3 ms·
Of all the types of meetings that could be emails, stand-ups are at the very bottom of the list. A well run, efficient stand-up can head off a day's worth of pr
by naravara 4y ago
Of all the types of meetings that could be emails, stand-ups are at the very bottom of the list. A well run, efficient stand-up can head off a day's worth of productivity sucking emails and Slack messages with a 10 min conversation.
- onlyrealcuzzo 4y agoI've been in MANY different standups. The vast majority of them are not well run. Standups are also (rarely) recorded, and therefore unsearchable. Have you ever thought - maybe an email process can also be done well? Maybe the majority of your email threads are terrible. That doesn't mean they have to be. Maybe you think all of your meetings are well run - it doesn't mean everyone else thinks they are...
- naravara 4y agoI've been in many different companies and the majority of all processes are not well run. That just means things are being badly run, not that you shouldn't do the right things and run them well. And no, email processes cannot be well done. You may think your's are, but that doesn't mean everyone else does. If I had my druthers I would ban email for all in-house communication and do everything verbally, via chat apps, or workflow management tools. Anything that needs more thorough elaboration should be written down as a thoughtfully articulated memo. If you feel the need to record the contents of a 20 minute group conversation to search it later that probably means you need to focus and take better notes. I will say it is truly a wild claim to assert that an intramural basketball game is more conducive to team productivity than a stand-up meeting though.
- winphone1974 4y agoYou haven't convinced me there's a good substitute for email when it comes to threaded, easy, async, thoughtful communication. Your suggestions all fail one of these.
- naravara 4y agoThere is no reason threaded, async, or easy need to be requirements for all types of communication.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- metabagel 4y agoA 10 minute conversation can be had outside of a stand-up meeting, and without wasting the time of the people who don't need to be part of it.
- karthikb 4y ago> without wasting the time of the people who don't need to be part of it In my experience, the very people who think these cross-team sync meetings are a waste that they don't need to be a part of are the first to make noise that they weren't consulted or included in a discussion that actually doesn't impact them.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- winphone1974 4y ago10 minutes x everyone on the team x scheduled time for all x disruption and context switch loss I like in person updates myself, but it's not as obvious of a cost calc as you present. There is definitely a place for async, written updates
- onlyrealcuzzo 4y agoThe Hallmark if a bad manager is having zero consideration for their subordinates. I find bad managers usually can't grasp the cost of interruptions from meetings - because their work isn't interrupted from meeting - because their work IS meetings.
- krageon 4y agoI'm sure you're aware of this, but 99% of standups are not this way. Given that, it's safe to assume that wherever you are, they don't need to exist. The odds are quite simply much better.