Doesn't anyone have to hit the can between meetings? Or are we all using catheters now?
That’s so inefficient. I just ask Claude to pee for me.
Start your meetings at 5 minutes past
121–130 of 235 posts
Re: Start your meetings at 5 minutes past
#122We do this at my work and guess what - meetings tend to run 5 minutes late because everyone knows the next meeting doesn’t start until 5 past.
This is standard at the large tech company where I work and is extremely effective and universally respected.
You have correctly identified that this is a cultural issue not a meeting software issue.
I often have meetings with people who have to deal constantly with urgent operational issues, that cost $mega if not solved on time. I accept they may be late, but try hard not to keep them waiting.
At previous companies this wasnt the case, so we started meetings on time
Re: Start your meetings at 5 minutes past
#123Earlier quoted context omitted.
That almost sounds insulting. Like management is the only party with vision, drive and a goal and everybody else is just there to help. When often management just manages and true innovation really comes from people of all positions.
Eh. It's a relatively common term. I wouldn't read too much into it. I'd rather not have by ass kissed with a term like "everyday innovator". -- "Individual Contributor" is fine.
I like it - though we use SME- Subject Matter Expert.
E.g. If you aren't an SME or a Manager, then why are you in the meeting?
(SME encompasses PM and BA roles, as they too should be experts in their domain and ideally on the domain we are working on.)
Re: Start your meetings at 5 minutes past
#124Perhaps reduce the number of meetings so they're not back-to-back?
Re: Start your meetings at 5 minutes past
#125Earlier quoted context omitted.
Individual Contributors - not managmenet
That almost sounds insulting. Like management is the only party with vision, drive and a goal and everybody else is just there to help. When often management just manages and true innovation really comes from people of all positions.
True. It is part of the general industrial ritual of reducing workers to a number or a letter combination. That way, managers reduce the emotional attachment to the people, and they can fire them more easily.
If, instead, you would be Tom, Bill and Biff, there is a risk that the manager would build attachment, and make it harder to treat you bad. If you're IC1, IC2 and IC3, you can be exchanged like machine parts when you break, without anyone crying.
Welcome to the modern world! =)
Re: Start your meetings at 5 minutes past
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
Individual Contributors - not managmenet
That almost sounds insulting. Like management is the only party with vision, drive and a goal and everybody else is just there to help. When often management just manages and true innovation really comes from people of all positions.
What alternative term would you suggest?
Re: Start your meetings at 5 minutes past
#127[dead]
Re: Start your meetings at 5 minutes past
#128How about just be punctual, respecting the time others have agreed to meet with you? Simpler solution than what this article suggests. People will abuse that system just the same anyway.
How do you plan to show up on time if one of your meetings ends at 2pm, the next one starts at 2pm, the meeting rooms are 3 floors apart, and you need to go to the restroom because you've been in meetings since lunch and need to pee? You're going to clone yourself?
You have to reject one meeting invitation and tell them why.
Isn't the easier solution to stop meetings 5 minutes to the next meeting slot?
Re: Start your meetings at 5 minutes past
#129Earlier quoted context omitted.
At the start of the first meeting, you annouce that you need to leave at 1:50 and ask the meeting to respect that.
The thing is, a lot of meetings start with presenting evidence of a problem, then have some discussion of the problem and potential options, and only in the last 10 minutes do the proposed actions turn into firm decisions with names against them. And often if I'm in a meeting it's because I think the problem is important and I want it solved. Getting permission for my team to fix things, or getting other teams to agr…
In my experience, this is a time management problem. Meetings tend to fill the time available. Rarely are there meetings that have to last a full hour and could not have been over after 50 minutes.
Or what makes 60 minutes so magical that you can wrap up a meeting quickly once that marker approaches? People need to leave, that's why. If it had been clear from the start that people will leave after 50 minutes, you can wrap up by then, same way you wrap things up at 60.
There is a lot of slack in meetings. What you need is someone to manage the available time and move things along, make sure that there is room at the end to get to a conclusion. You will have these last 10 minutes after 40 minutes instead of 50 if you pay attention to time and keep things moving.
This can be done, even with time to spare for pleasantries. I know this because I've been in meetings and I have run meetings like this. It helps if you can start on time and don't have to wait for stragglers in the beginning who needed a break between their back-to-back meetings.
Re: Start your meetings at 5 minutes past
#130Well, I simply don't accept nor attend meetings that are setup directly after another meeting. There must be also time to pee, poop, drink, prepare, etc. in between them.
At least 30mins gaps between meetings is a must have for me.
But yeah, this guy work for google, says it all.