71–80 of 380 posts
10 minute standup , woof
In my world stand-ups are mainly status, blockers and other ops/admin updates. No functional/topic discussions. If they’re required you schedule those in the standup and decide who participates. No need to expand beyond 15min in that mode.
10 minute standup , woof
The root problem, of course, is that no one stands up at anymore at standups.
The author of this story seems to be just adjusting. Like "really, we mean 60 minutes?" New rule is, book for 60 if you need 60. Leave it at 50 if not.
at the same time, do you really need a meeting room for a standup?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> meetings continue, regardless of the wall clock, until the next group of people come and kick you out. The meeting itself might continue, but as an individual, once the meeting passes the scheduled finish time, you stand up and say "sorry, I've got another meeting to get to". The worse your company's excessive meeting culture is, the better this works.
I always felt this was wholly ineffective coming from someone who wasn’t contributing or necessary to any given meeting, but it’s important to establish and hold boundaries like this. Even more points when a participant speaks up at the very beginning, to announce, “I’ve got a hard-stop at 9:50, so I’ll need to leave at that point no matter what.” Then the responsibility for wrap-up is placed squarely on leadership.…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I always felt this was wholly ineffective coming from someone who wasn’t contributing or necessary to any given meeting, but it’s important to establish and hold boundaries like this. Even more points when a participant speaks up at the very beginning, to announce, “I’ve got a hard-stop at 9:50, so I’ll need to leave at that point no matter what.” Then the responsibility for wrap-up is placed squarely on leadership.…
If you're not needed at the meeting, probably best not to be there in the first place.
If the meeting fails to accomplish its objectives in 50 minutes, then participants may excuse themselves with a clear conscience, but they may find themselves less-informed than coworkers who chose to stay for the entire session. Especially if there is "Q&A" for clarifications at the end of it.
what the engineers did seems fair to me. The rule is 50 minutes, they booked right after, so yea the meeting room is theirs. The author of this story seems to be just adjusting. Like "really, we mean 60 minutes?" New rule is, book for 60 if you need 60. Leave it at 50 if not. at the same time, do you really need a meeting room for a standup?
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?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At most European universities, it is practice to start lectures cum tempore , i.e. with time , meaning 15 minutes after formal calendar time. It'll say 10:00 c.t. on the event, meaning it actually starts at 10:15. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_quarter_(class_timing...
Odd. Over the course of my education I went to 3 different universities in the EU. Classes/lectures/labs, they all started at the advertised time and I’ve never encountered a concept of “c.t” or “s.t”. Not a formal one anyway. People “talked” about the “academic 15 minutes” but like it was a thing of the past.
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?