4 ms·
(I dont mean to nitpick one paragraph, but: ) > "One Wednesday morning this spring, after staff at Washio had gathered for their daily “stand-up” meeting—a rit
by mmanfrin 12y ago
(I dont mean to nitpick one paragraph, but: )
> "One Wednesday morning this spring, after staff at Washio had gathered for their daily “stand-up” meeting—a ritual suggested in the Manifesto for Agile Software Development, a 2001 work-processes manual that advocates keeping employees on their toes by having them give status updates literally on their feet"
What an absurdly overwritten way of saying 'at their morning meeting'.
- md224 12y agoEh, I think you're thinking about this sentence as an engineer and not a writer. The author wants to draw you into the philosophy of software development, with its mix of processes and productivity hacks; the elaboration in that sentence serves to paint a more vivid picture of the tech work environment. Of course, we already know all this, but many readers from outside our field may find these descriptions illuminating.
- cgriswald 12y agoAs I writer, I feel the author is painting a picture that has been painted a thousand times before. In that particular paragraph, the additional material dominates the paragraph at the expense of the main point (which itself is strangely spread over a block of paragraphs). As a reader I felt my time was wasted. Some explanation was in order, but I did not need to know the origin of the technique. "Work-process manual" is snooze-inducing. Rewritten: This spring, after staff at Washio had gathered for their daily "stand-up" meeting–in which employees are kept on their toes by giving status updates literally on their feet–operations manager San Nadler broke some bad news. This draws the reader a bit into the meeting and explains what is meant by a "stand-up meeting" without bogging the reader down in details or the "philosophy of software development." If that philosophy was important for the author to communicate, it really deserves its own paragraph.
- ameister14 12y agoExcept that it implies that stand-up meetings actually work to keep employees on their toes figuratively. In the first version, it's more of an implication that this is what the manual says and this company is just trying to build a business like you would a table.
- forgottenpass 12y agoIn that case, I still agree with the parent. Either it's not important so don't mention it, or dedicate a paragraph taking standups to task for being agile cargo cult bullshit.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- xcntktn 12y agoThere is a big difference between a simple meeting and the overly-gimmicky nonsense ritual that is known as the "standup". I've even seen standups where people are forced to hold a heavy book as they talk just to ensure they don't talk too long. How about people drop all the BS and just learn how to properly run a meeting? The gimmickry of the standup is a covert way of saying "no one here trusts anyone else to exercise restraint and common courtesy, so instead we have to come up with these harebrained schemes to enforce it".
- forgottenpass 12y agoHow about people drop all the BS and just learn how to properly run a meeting? The tribal knowledge in startup management is to half-ass a blog post you once read about how to manage employees. Why would someone invest valuable mental cycles making a company run better when they could be planning their exit?
- anigbrowl 12y agoThe point is that most businesses don't formalize the requirement to hold meetings standing up. Either people stand up as a matter of course (eg construction workers), or they hold their meetings in comfy chairs (generic office workers).
- analog31 12y agoMy feet start to hurt after the second or third hour of consecutive morning stand up meetings.
- jdale27 12y agoNot to mention that the Agile Manifesto doesn't actually say anything about meetings, standing or otherwise.