>trying to get visibility

They could review PRs and commits and specs to get visibility and reduce comms overhead, if they had the skills and time.

The non-technical manager also takes great conveniences in making technical people spend their time translating things. But no one ever asks the manager to learn new skills as much as they make developers do it.

▲

plagiarist 3 hours ago | parent [-]

The standups are also organized around disrupting a small group of people for the convenience of one.

▲

jimbokun 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Standups should eliminate almost all other meetings engineers need to attend. Except to go deeper on questions that came up in standup that cannot be instantly resolved.

Otherwise yeah there’s really no point.

▲

depr 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Do you mean standups as part of Scrum? Scrum dictates several other meetings.

▲

plagiarist 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I would be pleased with the standup if it eliminated other meetings, but that has definitely not been my experience.

▲

parasubvert 44 minutes ago | parent [-]

there should be only 3 regular meetings in an agile engineering team - weekly iteration planning (1-2 hours max) - daily standup (15 mins max) - weekly demo & retro (1-2 hours max)

literally everything else is work off the kanban board or backlog.

in my teams everyone was told to decline all meetings unless it explicitly led to the completion of a weekly planned story/task. this way all meetings for the team have a clear agenda and end in mind.

for mandatory external meetings & running interference with external parties, there are ways to insulate the majority of the team from that.

	▲	sunrunner 22 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Is that three kinds of regular meetings? Because I count 8 meetings (and four kinds, as I don't think I've ever had demo and retro combined due to different groups of people being in both).