I disagree with your (in my view) far too prescriptive certainty that a lot of synchronous communication is universally best for collaboration. It is a common v

I disagree with your (in my view) far too prescriptive certainty that a lot of synchronous communication is universally best for collaboration. It is a common view (especially among managers) that I believe is simply wrong, and based on vibes rather than empiricism. It's not universally wrong though. All I'm saying is that it isn't universally right. It just isn't universally anything. A good manager or lead should be able to look around on some teams and realize, hmmm, we aren't getting much value out of all these synchronous touch points, and on other teams they should realize, hmmm, we could use some more frequent synchronization here. But a manager or lead coming in with their own prescriptive preference for daily synchronous meetings, and failing to notice if they aren't valuable, is not doing their best work, IMO. I have been on both kinds of teams. Indeed, right now I'm on a team for which I think daily morning meetings are working really great, regardless of my own personal preferences. But I've also been on teams where they are working terribly and only the manager is happy with the situation, and that's bad.