Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

No "Hello", No "Quick Call", and No Meetings Without an Agenda

switowski.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 279 posts

Re: No "Hello", No "Quick Call", and No Meetings Without an Agenda

#101

Post by nottorp »

maxehmookau wrote: post #59

I'm a huge advocate of full-time remote working, but those like me who feel it is the future of work need to stop being so dogmatic about how communication should happen. I don't really like posts like this. Sure, it's a great idea in a remote context to write down how you like to communicate, and how you like to be communicated with at work. (You should do it, it's great!) However, not everybody will agree with you…

Let's get to the point: some people like being in pointless meetings/calls all day, some don't.

With remote work, you get the chance to rewrite company communication so that the above pointless meetings aren't needed.

People who write articles like the OP have realized that and view the former way to communicate as the extremely inefficient and intrusive system that it really is.

If you're in a fully text based async culture, then all the conversation, including the famous watercooler stuff and how're the kids doing stuff happens text based and async. I'd say the watercooler/kids stuff can happen more often, because you know you won't interrupt them when you ask, and they'll answer whenever they take a break.

Keywords are both text based and async. Not one, both.

Re: No "Hello", No "Quick Call", and No Meetings Without an Agenda

#102

Post by quacksilver »

As a junior i often wrote "Hi, do you have a moment? (ok if not)" in slack (or lync at the time) to senior people when I had questions. I then didn't expect a reply unless the senior person was not busy or bored. If no reply within 5 mins I would ask the next person.

I did this when I had a question that perhaps 20 people who I knew could answer, though I had no way of telling who (if anyone) was free to chat something over with me. I didn't send a group email as the projects that I was working on contained need to know stuff, so sending details of it to 20 people would be a no-go but saying I spoke about this with Bob, here is the audit trail would be fine.

I still think that this was optimal in that situation, though I often see it derided with no better option suggested.

Re: No "Hello", No "Quick Call", and No Meetings Without an Agenda

#103

Post by cdrini »

Gravityloss wrote: post #73
rethab wrote: post #29

We cannot forget that we also loose something with working remotely (say more than 75% of the time) and that is the occasional bumping into each other at the water cooler or in the morning when coming in. These are situations you can artificially create by scheduling calls to socialize etc, but that is still not comparable with being in an actual office. By categorically saying no to quick calls, you're isolating you…

I notice I often breathe deeply after a telecon. As if I was holding my breath during it. Even if the telecon was quite laid back. It doesn't happen in water cooler talks. Have there been studies about what causes this, or even how to alleviate?

Yeah it became a big topic of interest during the pandemic when everyone went remote. It's colloquially referred to as "zoom fatigue". That should find you some of the research.

It's become a bit of a meme now: https://youtube.com/watch?v=Dl0rpDY9460

Personally I've yet to find a cure :P

Re: No "Hello", No "Quick Call", and No Meetings Without an Agenda

#104

Post by prmoustache »

widowlark wrote: post #74
prmoustache wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is not about avoiding calls but avoiding calls without context.

But the chilling effect it has on cross-team interactions leads to the same result.

It really depends on how it is asked.

I went through that with a coworker who kept saying hi and quick call. I reckon we are from different continents and with way different cultures so I once entered one of these "quick call" and asked him politely if in the future he could ask his question directly and I would answer when I have time and that would leave me time to check for information if needed. I also asked him if he could put some context when asking for a call so that I can decide to ask him to schedule a meeting some other day or accept it right away depending on my schedule/load.

Once in a while he goes back to his old ways but more often than not he is adding context.

Some people just think you are their personnal stackoverflow / github copilot if you don't put any limit.

Re: No "Hello", No "Quick Call", and No Meetings Without an Agenda

#105

Post by ckastner »

prmoustache wrote: post #37
ckastner wrote: post #8

For larger enterprises with complex org charts, I consider an agenda one of two invaluable tools for meetings, the other being post-meeting minutes including a RACI chart. If someone can't think up a few bullet points for a meeting in advance, that person has not prepared for their meeting, and will waste some of the participant's time. Not creating (one-line) minutes that most importantly include decisions that have…

Most times that person not preparing the call with an agenda is told in the middle of the meeting that he should have invited someone else that has knowledge on some key point and it ends up needing another meeting to be scheduled. With more context, people may have told him prior to the meeting that person needed to be included to.

Yeah, this is one of the more common failure modes. One meeting wasted, and possibly lots of time lost when the next meeting can only be scheduled much later.

All easily preventable if the person organizing the meeting prepares for it, and shares a brief agenda so that other participants can prepare to, or find replacements if they themselves are the wrong person for the meeting.

Re: No "Hello", No "Quick Call", and No Meetings Without an Agenda

#106

Post by axitanull »

PickledJesus wrote: post #100
throwawaysleep wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like my isolation. As an employee with minimal stake in the outcome of my teams, I don’t ever want to discuss ideas in the workplace. I’ll walk the other way around the office to avoid such a chat.

Well, that's honest! But presumably you can see that it's at odds with the interests of the business..

Having employees unionize is also at odds with the interests of the business.

Re: No "Hello", No "Quick Call", and No Meetings Without an Agenda

#107

Post by orwin »

The only real point is the 3rd.

I agree the 'Hi' type are annoying, but I for sure don't expect a stack trace.

Worst case the person is from another team, and I would rather have context on why they're contacting me directly on IM. Best case is that's a coworker, and I trust that if my coworkers ask me in particular and not my team's chat, its a specific issue I will have an easier time dealing with (or I made myself available for help because I'm on toilet duty and will jump for anything remotely interesting).

If I am engaged with you and you ask me for a quick call, I either have 30 minutes ahead and agree, or I don't, and refuse. I fully expect the call to last anywhere between 2 and 30 minutes (unless you're a PO and I set aside 2 hours). The more we understand each other, the quicker the calls will be anyway, so even if the call isn't 'productive', it ultimately is.

Re: No "Hello", No "Quick Call", and No Meetings Without an Agenda

#108

Post by mewpmewp2 »

prepend wrote: post #94
mewpmewp2 wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is all of those acts take you out of flow state. I don't want and I can't randomly brainstorm when I am deep into coding. Even if I have to go take a quick water I would try to do it as quick as possible to continue with the problem I am focused on and I couldn't pay attention to the random conversation or brainstorming at a cooler.

Flow state is really powerful, but it’s not constant. I don’t want to be in flow for 40 hours per week. And to tell the truth if I get a few hours of flow a week, I’m lucky. So I don’t want to shut the door on any interactions in the unlikely chance that it interrupts me in my optimal state. What I like to do is block off “deep work” in my calendar a few times a week. Then people can think about if they want to inter…

Unfortunately as of lately my professional life has been terrible for flow state due to various reasons related to working in a corporation. So I might consider switching jobs. Interruptions, blockers, depending on others, etc.

But I love being in flow state, luckily I can still do it with my side projects. With side projects without being interrupted I can easily spend the whole day coding and at the same time building 10x to 100x as much as at a corporation job. Of course it's less realistic in a large company to have it, but I just wish my actual work was like that.

Maybe if I could make one of my side projects to bring in enough, I could just do that. I would say that would be a dream.

> This has let me look at these “quick call” or “hi” messages as just part of being human and having a pleasant team where people are happy to interact rather than dings to maximum team productivity.

It just depends on the human type I guess. Extraversion vs introversion.

Re: No "Hello", No "Quick Call", and No Meetings Without an Agenda

#110

Post by PickledJesus »

albert_e wrote: post #27

There are valid arguments here so I broadly agree with where the author is getting at. But some points are a stretch and that weakens the whole argument. Point 3.1 : you waste HOURS of time debugging the wrong piece of code -- going off on a quest based on just one single chat message with incomplete info (and not even a stack trace as you deem it so essential yourself)? You don't ask any clarifying questions to vali…

3.1: A skilled person does, but it's still easy to get led down the garden path, even for very skilled engineers, especially when something is urgent, or at least "urgent"

4: Stakeholders really like chat, and it's a constant battle to make them go through the motions to report things properly. Why wouldn't they like it, it puts the burden onto you rather than them. It's often a tricky balance to strike, depending on the organisation, they can often be more important than you.

Post reply on HN