“ If daily stand-ups really are so awful, why do some managers insist on them? Hard truth: it’s because they’re lazy, incompetent managers.”
I must have been a “lazy, incompetent manager” by the words of this author. We had few-times-a-week stand ups because:
1. I suggested we do daily standups when COVID (and with it, WFH) started and review how it goes. A month or so later, checked with the team, and we decided to reduce it to 3x/week. We reviewed this later every now and then and the team decided it still works, so we kept it.
2. It was the very few times a week when everyone from the team got a sense of what everyone else is doing - and how they can help. We cheered on successes, cracked jokes, and shared information. Call me old-fashioned, but I really liked these occasions, as it gave me a sense of belonging to a group of people. And no, this was not about me, as a manager wanting to micromanage.
We were a team in one location/timezone, and this standup was one of the few things that helped feel connected. We also had multiple recent joiners with less industry experience who found the standups far more important/engaging than most others: this is also a dynamic worth noting (that will not apply to every team).
I’m not arguing that this works for everyone, not that it’s the way to go for a distributed team across 6+ time zones, like the company of the author is set up.
But assuming the world is black-and-white (“daily standups: bad, managers insisting on daily standups: incompetent”) is ignorant thinking at best; deliberately wanting to spark attention so people like me to grab a keyboard to type this out at worst.
I’m happy this team figured out what works for them: I’d encourage all teams to find your jam. And don’t assume everything else must be bad.
Asking a team what they want or prefer doesn't always equate to what it actually is they need or prefer. Often it's either peer pressure or a false believe something has value while in reality it doesn't.
Not saying this is the case with your team, but be aware this can happen.
It can also be the Abilene Paradox [1]. No one likes the stand-ups but no one wants to rock the boat so everyone says they do like the stand-ups. Not saying that it's happening here, just that you need to be aware of that.
It is almost impossible to not ask the question in a loaded way.
"Do people want to continue doing this thing that we always do, that I come out of my office and round up everyone every morning and lead as your benevolent leader, or does someone else want to say my way is bad and have an idea on how we can achieve a not necessarily defined objective?"
How such a discussion will go depends on the context in which it takes place. If you have a culture where people feel comfortable expressing dissenting views, they can do this. But if people are nervous of rocking the boat, they’ll probably stay quiet. I’ve managed teams where people would certainly say “this isn’t working, let’s change it”.
I agree. If processes are regularly evaluated, if management regularly looks for ideas and encourages communication and individual initiative, if communication is open in the team and questions are welcome (this starts with example and encouragement from more senior developers and management), it's possible to talk about this sort of thing, and more.
The original idea of nudging a vote this way was brought to my attention in a book by Viktor Suvorov (it was either Aquarium or The Liberators).
Some communist asshole wanted his nephew or something hired for some government position. He made the mistake of doing a vote by asking "all in favor?" because no-one raised their hands. What Suvorov suggested was the guy should've used "all opposed?". He said no one would've raised their hands neither but the result would've been very different ;)
Exactly, most of the time engineers already know what managers truly want - say if the manager asks the team about 4 standups per week, then obviously 4 times a week is manager's preference. Most of the time no one will object, and just do the bloody stand ups.
If a manger thinks that that's not the case in their particular team, and the team members always speak their mind, then I have a bridge to sell to that manager.
Or to look at it the other way around: how many times engineers themselves _asked_ their manager to do those stand ups? Yep, wouldn't be that many.
Yes: you need trust so people on the team feel safe to share what they think.
I’ve personally tried to earn as much trust with actions as possible. E.g. this was my approach in having (eventually) all team members lead projects [1].
For example, on the projects people led, I gave them free hand on most, if not all things. People were free to decide how to do standups (or not do them at all, like some did) and hopefully these experiences helped them both shape their opinions and share these more freely in other situations as well.
As an engineer, I also hated being micromanaged and remembered situations when I was not comfortable speaking up. I tried to remember all of these and create and environment where this does not happen - eg never shoot down anyone’s idea, don’t assume I know better just because I have a manager title. Basically, try to live up to the manager I would have wanted back in the day.
And yes, managers’ words always carry more weight, which is the nature of a hierarchical dynamics (as much as I wish it was less so). I don’t know how to counter that beyond trying to foster a safe place where criticising the manager (me) is also completely fine, and to be celebrated (as it takes courage) and never result in any real or perceived retaliation.
This will never be the case. Never. Engineers can sometimes be slightly more open in technical arguments... senior engineers to much lesser extent - seniors learned that sharing what everyone truly thinks is prohibitively expensive to their career, no matter how much amazing boss you think you are.
Anything more than technical stuff, especially management style -- forget it. No one will share what they think, unless the situation is beyond repair, and at this point junior engineers will rather share to the skip level manager or HR (futile, thus junior engineers), and seniors will just a) check out or b) leave.
> foster a safe place where criticising the manager (me) is also completely fine, and to be celebrated (as it takes courage) and never result in any real or perceived retaliation
There's one thing that gets utterly lost in the discussions about standups vs. async that bothers the hell out of me: in the end it's about people and how they function as a team.
Any manager proclaiming "the way we do it at company X is the way, and everyone else is incompetent" is way over his head imho.
The essence of the matter is simple: in person meetings CANNOT replace textual documentation and proper task workflow. And writing everything down is no aid when it comes to human relationships in company culture.
There's a big point in what you are saying: ask your team! And make sure you have built the trust and culture needed to get true answers.
There's nothing wrong with periodically talking to each other and it does wonders for how people feel about their peers. The pitfall is when spending this time together is mandatory for the workflow to function, and above all, when one or the other workflow is forced & sole source of truth.
Have standups so extroverted team members can socialize and ponder issues together. Have a kanban and issue tracking so introverted team members can stay in the loop. Use both tools to maintain the big picture as a manager.
What fucks up companies is not "the wrong way of doing things", but forcing individuals to partake in a mode of work that isn't right for them because "that's how we do it"
> Have standups so extroverted team members can socialize and ponder issues together.
This comes at the expense of the morale of the less extroverted members of the team.
Furthermore, strengthening social bonds is too important to be relegated to being an incidental side effect of a daily status meeting.
To clarify: at Supercede we hold informal coffee break chats (and also some other events) expressly for the purposes of social bonding. No obligation or even social pressure to join. Fancy coming along to gab with your colleagues? Great. Busy? No problem.
By your own admission you didn't do daily standups as a rule. The only time you did daily standups was as a temporary policy in response to a massive and sudden change in the dynamics of your company.
One thing [people who become] managers completely underestimate is that they now have actual, real power, and that this dramatically alters the quality of the feedback they get.
You're not a neutral observer in this interaction, not by any fault of your own, but simply by the position you occupy. And there is virtually nothing you can do about it, no matter how hard you try. And no, it doesn't mean your team is actively trying to please, it just happens that way.
As an example (not quite the same thing, but similar): one time that I was managing a team I was just finishing some stuff up on Sunday and sent some e-mails that went to the team. Then I got a response. That same Sunday. Note to self: even if you write that e-mail on a Sunday, wait until Monday to send it!
I’m completely with you on this: the power balance shifts as soon as you get the manager title, even if you wish it did not (I ended up managing former peers at Uber: one day I was a team member, the next day a manager).
This makes everything more tricky, as it’s true that the same behaviour as a manager or as an IC spark different responses.
It’s a tough one to navigate and I won’t say I have it all figured out. It also makes transitioning into management a lot more lonely, in my experience.
I would quit any job with daily or 3x a week meetings. What an energy drain.
Really great developers don’t need your help dude.
What value occurs in these meetings other than you getting to pry into the micro details of what everyone is doing for the sake of your own sense of control? Does anything really change that much day to day that needs you to constantly check in on what people are doing?
Sorry man - it’s clueless old school management. Creative developers don’t need to be harassed three times a week.
Extremely junior intern level developers might need it. Even then it’s excessive (3x). Anyone with experience will leave. My guess is you are the type that likes to build a little fiefdom you control, it doesn’t work anymore.
My entire career (20 years working at startups and fangs), the super star developers check in every two weeks. Or maybe a once weekly sync. 3x is …. Why?
The point of a standup is to tell your team what you're working on, and what help you might need, and conversely to hear what they're working on, and offer help that they might need.
To avoid silos and silent struggles, and to have the "superstar" devs support those "extremely junior devs".
If what you're working on doesn't require a standup, maybe it's not actually a team project?
I must have been a “lazy, incompetent manager” by the words of this author. We had few-times-a-week stand ups because:
1. I suggested we do daily standups when COVID (and with it, WFH) started and review how it goes. A month or so later, checked with the team, and we decided to reduce it to 3x/week. We reviewed this later every now and then and the team decided it still works, so we kept it.
2. It was the very few times a week when everyone from the team got a sense of what everyone else is doing - and how they can help. We cheered on successes, cracked jokes, and shared information. Call me old-fashioned, but I really liked these occasions, as it gave me a sense of belonging to a group of people. And no, this was not about me, as a manager wanting to micromanage.
We were a team in one location/timezone, and this standup was one of the few things that helped feel connected. We also had multiple recent joiners with less industry experience who found the standups far more important/engaging than most others: this is also a dynamic worth noting (that will not apply to every team).
I’m not arguing that this works for everyone, not that it’s the way to go for a distributed team across 6+ time zones, like the company of the author is set up.
But assuming the world is black-and-white (“daily standups: bad, managers insisting on daily standups: incompetent”) is ignorant thinking at best; deliberately wanting to spark attention so people like me to grab a keyboard to type this out at worst.
I’m happy this team figured out what works for them: I’d encourage all teams to find your jam. And don’t assume everything else must be bad.