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

Malicious compliance by booking an available meeting room

clientserver.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 380 posts

Re: Malicious compliance by booking an available meeting room

#121

Post by vessenes »

shermantanktop wrote: post #72
exhilaration wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The root problem, of course, is that no one stands up at anymore at standups.

This is my problem, but I’m not great at standing, for reasons, but it’s physically not good. 10m is ok but there’s always some bore who wants to blather on. Or “we’re done, can x and y stay back to discuss z” and then everybody stays for some reason.

I’m prone to this, as is many a manager/leader in a standup. I always designated the spiciest admin to run the meeting and keep us on time; you need someone who can cut off the boss or these take forever.

Re: Malicious compliance by booking an available meeting room

#122

Post by idontseeppl »

jedimastert wrote: post #113

> I mean, I’d personally tell them that I wasn’t going to leave the room, but surely it worked a lot? Maybe it's because I worked in a different office or whatever, but 25 and 50 minute meetings were pretty common and if somebody else scheduled the room it was 100% respected . It wasn't really considered pedantry or anything, just the basic respect of honoring the commitment of the meeting calendar.

[flagged]

Re: Malicious compliance by booking an available meeting room

#123

Post by thaumasiotes »

apercu wrote: post #59
flerchin wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Heh some people are on time, some people are late. It's seemingly a culture thing, and neither side understands the other. You say "of course nobody will stop at 9:50am" and that is exactly what I would do.

> neither side understands the other. Being late is viewed as rude or lacking respect for others by a lot of people. Do people who are habitually late view prompt people as rude for being on time?

In my experience, being on time isn't viewed as rude, but it is viewed as a nuisance, reflecting poorly on other people.

I had a Chinese tutor who got pretty upset that I would show up to lessons before she got there. Her first approach was to assure me that it was ok if I showed up later. Eventually she responded by showing up very, very early.

In a different case, I had an appointment to meet a friend, and she texted me beforehand to ask whether I'd left home yet. Since the appointment was quite some distance from my home, and I couldn't predict the travel time, I had already arrived, but upon learning that my friend dropped everything to show up early... and asked me why I was so early. I don't see a problem with waiting for a scheduled appointment if I show up early! But apparently other people do?

Re: Malicious compliance by booking an available meeting room

#124

Post by vessenes »

morkalork wrote: post #13

>Everybody in a meeting should give input or they shouldn’t be in the meeting. This is wierd and terrible, what does it mean, no interns and juniors get to attend engineering meetings? Tagging along to those meetings is how they learn and it's not expected that they have input at every one, sometimes it's just a question or two.

If you imagine a spectrum between a 20 person PowerPoint demonstration that takes an hour, and a 10 minute meeting with say Bezos when you’ll get your next 10 minutes in 90 days and you need him to get behind your project and unlock budget, most corporate meetings would do well to shift closer to Beezy. That’s the intent.

Another way to say it, in the 90s workplace studies showed an engineering IC’s job was roughly 35 hours of meetings a week. If you work 40, that leaves 5 hours for coding. If you could get someone back just 5 of those 35 hours, you’d have double the coding output per engineer.

Re: Malicious compliance by booking an available meeting room

#125

Post by jollyllama »

morkalork wrote: post #13

>Everybody in a meeting should give input or they shouldn’t be in the meeting. This is wierd and terrible, what does it mean, no interns and juniors get to attend engineering meetings? Tagging along to those meetings is how they learn and it's not expected that they have input at every one, sometimes it's just a question or two.

Yes, it is weird and terrible, and it means that you'll be expected to voice your agreement to what the real decision makers say.

Re: Malicious compliance by booking an available meeting room

#126

Post by khedoros1 »

ctkhn wrote: post #92
gwbas1c wrote: post #14

If I was in the room, I'd be relieved. I always found that meetings at large companies dragged on unless there was a forcing factor (like a doorknock) that got someone to bring it to an end.

I've been in 90 minute standups, the 10 minute standup pedants would be my heroes.

With my current team lead, 90-minute standups aren't common, but they've happened. 30 minutes is "short", and most take 45 minutes. The previous lead kept things to about 10-15 minutes. The new guy has apparently never in his life said "OK, let's discuss this after standup".

Re: Malicious compliance by booking an available meeting room

#127

Post by frabcus »

n4r9 wrote: post #61
malfist wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's exactly how I run my standups. Everyone answers 3 questions: * Do I need something? * What is my _top_ priority for the day? * Am I blocked? The answers for the first and third question should always be "No" because you should have raised them before standup, but it's a relief valve if you didn't. What is your top priority should be short and focused. If you let people talk about what they did or didn't do yes…

> What is my _top_ priority for the day? How do you manage (if you have to) more research-heavy/blue-sky tasks that may take a few days or weeks without linear daily progress? Like, some days may just involve doing some sketches and playing around with code in order to internalise some data structure. Does that person just say "I'm continuing with task X" several days in a row?

"My top priority today is to internalise data structure B"

Re: Malicious compliance by booking an available meeting room

#128

Post by divbzero »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #120
Tomte wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fifteen minutes late used to be the academic standard in Germany (and other countries): it was noted by “c.t.” in the timetable, meaning “cum tempore”. When I studied it had already been mostly abolished. Sometimes starting times were explicitly marked “sine tempore”.

Those are strange annotations; it looks like at least one word is missing. They mean "with time" and "without time".

It seems to make sense if you interpret it as:

10am c.t. = 10am with extra time

10am s.t. = 10am without extra time

Re: Malicious compliance by booking an available meeting room

#129

Post by joostdecock »

When it's a meeting I run/control my rule is that I will wait 150 seconds for people who are late, after which I start the meeting.

You can join later, that's fine, but I'm not waiting longer than 150 seconds.

Waiting 150 seconds feels like waiting a long time. Whereas being 2.5 minutes late feels like being on time.

So I find that phrasing it this way is more impactful.

(by now you probably figured out that I am not very popular ar work)

Re: Malicious compliance by booking an available meeting room

#130

Post by devmor »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #120
Tomte wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fifteen minutes late used to be the academic standard in Germany (and other countries): it was noted by “c.t.” in the timetable, meaning “cum tempore”. When I studied it had already been mostly abolished. Sometimes starting times were explicitly marked “sine tempore”.

Those are strange annotations; it looks like at least one word is missing. They mean "with time" and "without time".

They sound like appropriate abbreviations to me. Something like: "With time to get to the location" and "Without time to get to the location"
Post reply on HN