I'd personally be very suspicious of anyone who tells you not to do that. There is literally no downside unless you're trying to hide something.
I'd personally be very suspicious of anyone who tells you not to do that. There is literally no downside unless you're trying to hide something.
If there is reason to believe that there are disagreements in actions to be taken, then messaging everyone to get on the same page is ok. If someone is actively throwing someone under the bus unceremoniously & quickly, then one should prepare an exit strategy & a strategy for working around the problematic coworker as a cautionary step because the spinner could potentially stop at oneself. If it is more than one problematic coworker, then the exit strategy approach becomes increasingly pertinent.
I think it is self-defeating to do other than this approach in general, and far from naive.
Perhaps these companies were outliers, and I don't think anything I experience was a result of malice. However, when the higher ups are looking for answers, middle management tends to put blame on the developers. I can't tell you how many times I had to dig up old email chains to essentially prove what was communicated. People forget, people misremember, and people will fabricate to avoid repercussions. I have found this to be a universal truth of business, so I can see why someone would say your comment is naive.
Also like the comment above yours states, there is literally no downside to re-affirming the discussed points. I've had instances where once things were put in writing, my manager noticed something that wasn't clear and we were able to circumvent issues.
If you think documenting plans and discussions is "self-defeating", I really don't know what to tell you.