Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by herodoturtle | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

herodoturtle

I disagree with this, but only under certain conditions.

The standup is meant to be a quick meeting, 10 minutes tops.

It's not there for deep advice between lead and each team member.

Instead it's there to get everyone on the same page.

The deep one-on-one meetings still happen separately - when needed.

And as you say, the added benefit of daily standups is that sometimes a team member has great insight into someone else's issue.

Of course, standups that take too long are terrible.

But if done right, they're helpful, and a lot of fun.

View on HN

> Instead it's there to get everyone on the same page.

How do you get everyone on the same page if you cannot ask questions?

This whole standup theatre is complete bullshit. It's true it's a waste of time. You say it's only meant to be a quick "status update" 10 minute meeting. What is the point of that if then asking questions is not allowed? If it is allowed then it's true though that for the majority of listeners it becomes a time sink.

The best performing teams I've worked on had no standups. They talked to each other when there was something to talk about and they only talked to the folks who were genuinely interested in the conversation.

> How do you get everyone on the same page if you cannot ask questions?

Not sure why you're asking me this. I welcome questions in standups. And if a question warrants a deeper one-on-one chat, then at least everyone knows an issue has been raised (but often someone on the team knows the answer straight away). They hardly take up time.

I suspect we have radically different experiences of standup meetings, hence the polar opposite views.

In my case (16 year old company, high functioning team), daily standups are fun - hardly a chore - and you'd be surprised what surfaces in these team meetings (that wouldn't necessarily come to light if we were to simply rely on team members to speak up only "when there was something to talk about").

Just to be clear, I'm not criticising your lived experience. I don't doubt you for a second.

But let's be fair - it really depends on the team, and the environment, and the desire for daily standups to begin with.

It's a bit like project management tools. If abused, or used solely for the sake of ticking boxes, they're annoying. But if used correctly, and everyone is happy using them, then they certainly add value.

I suppose it's highly anecdotal.

It just seems highly unlikely that you are having 10 minute meetings while accomplishing anything beyond the usual small chit chat and banter that almost all social interactions require. It takes ten minutes alone to just gather a group of people, look at each other, and say hello.

I can understand why you’d think that.

If I may challenge your idea: what you describe only applies to teams that don’t meet often.

My team has been doing this daily standup for years. Those 10 minutes are succinct - and effective. We save the chit chat (of which there’s plenty) for our lunch breaks and after hours.

I wouldn’t blame someone for doubting it’s possible. But yeah, in our case, it just works.

Perhaps you work in a culture that does not have this limitation, but, in the US (a country often criticized for being work-centric), a 10 minute meeting that accomplishes anything meaningful at all is virtually impossible. In fact, the more often people meet, the more banter that crops up.

Anyway, you have something special at your company that I’ve never seen. Cherish it.

“get everyone on the same page”

Meetings are expensive, even if they are for short periods. A simple email should be typically sufficient for information that is common to all team members. I’ve almost never attended a 10 minute meeting with more than 2 people. They are always longer, especially if they are fun.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com