3 ms·
One-on-ones are the reason for that. Two people mean both are actively involved. Either listening to someone speak to them directly, or talking to someone direc
by jasonlotito 4y ago
One-on-ones are the reason for that. Two people mean both are actively involved. Either listening to someone speak to them directly, or talking to someone directly.
> Teams that work together on the same project should regularly get together in a synchronous conversation.
This doesn't prevent that. It seems that it only prevents you from automating the decision on when to do that. If you need to synchronize, you can. However, if you don't, there is no need to hold a meeting. But people tend to make meetings opt-out rather than opt-in. This seems to enforce an opt-in approach first.
- chadlavi 4y agoTeams work in cycles. This would mean, for example, that a monthly/quarterly retro with the whole team is now not allowed. That's bad.
- tlholaday 4y agoIt's worth experimenting with ... - any team member can propose an ad-hoc whole-team meeting at any time. - any two team members can propose an ad-hoc whole-team meeting at any time. - any team manager can mandate an ad-hoc whole-team meeting up to four times yearly The Shopify rule is "no team member and no manager can mandate a recurring meeting with more than one other person."
- watwut 4y agoAny team member thing suits few dominant or extroverted personalities. But people who are not comfortable socially won't propose whole team meeting. Also, I would expect the management to be the ones to care the most about hoe team functions overall. They should be the ones to notice communication is dying or that we are splitting into subgroups or that someone is isolated work wise (unable to get answers to questions or whatever). Team dynamic is literally work of leadership, so they should be able to decide on meetings.