|
Who have never been at one of this[^] kind of meeting, please raise your hand to the side pls.
|
|
|
|
|
OMG! I'm really sorry! If I'd realised you were in this mornings project update meeting I'd have said "hi". Same time next week? 
|
|
|
|
|
Sure, as long as you don't talk about cats anymore
|
|
|
|
|
I was just sharing the results of the cat scan and the lab report 
|
|
|
|
|
I know, they where transparent, right ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
I would prefer meetings those are casual.
Some meetings put pressure and increases the stress. Naahhh..... to those.
|
|
|
|
|
Swinkaran wrote: Naahhh..... to those
Since when Managers started listening to those who don't want to attend such meetings? 
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly"- SoMad
|
|
|
|
|
I prefer to develop as I see fit without interference from anybody else....
Anything that is unrelated to elephants is irrelephant
Anonymous
-----
The problem with quotes on the internet is that you can never tell if they're genuine
Winston Churchill, 1944
-----
I'd just like a chance to prove that money can't make me happy.
Me, all the time
|
|
|
|
|
That's basically it...
Meeting are important but setting up a meeting without an agenda is like doing something with no purpose.
So here are some rules of thumb I like to follow:
Set an agenda and stick to it.
Inevitably someone will start diverging from it and the moderator has to stop it right away and if necessary assess those comments offline.
Stick attendees to the bare minimum necessary. Meetings are not to be mistaken with social events.
If a specific need requires an additional person, request him and dismiss him as soon as he's no longer necessary.
If an unpredictable problem arises during the meeting that invalidates the agenda, just finish the meeting right there. Go back and reorganize it, do whatever necessary and reschedule it.
Make sure all participants have access to the agenda and any other relevant materials before the meeting.
Make sure all participants express their ideas during the meeting. If someone is playing with the phone in the corner either send him away or pull him forward. No one should ever leave a meeting without speaking, otherwise probable he/she isn't necessary there.
Do not disrupt people's productivity. Don't book meetings in the middle of a working period. Use the edges!
Keep at least a small simple log of the meeting. It doesn't need to be a complex fancy thing. Just write what was discussed, what people had to say about it and what was the agreed outcome.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't care whether the meeting is formal or a chat, sitting or standing, with or without alcoholic beverages. If there's no agenda, it's a waste of my time. Life is too short to tolerate people who can't organize their thoughts enough to write, distribute and follow an agenda. Doing so just proves the leader to be a disorganized idiot who has no respect for others' time.
Will Rogers never met me.
|
|
|
|
|
I believe, One can understand better in face to face meetings rather than Phone/Skype mattings because expressions are speaks louder than words 
Find More .Net development tips at : .NET Tips
The only reason people get lost in thought is because it's unfamiliar territory.
|
|
|
|
|
I thought the whole point of Skype was you "can" see their face.
In today's world of software whatever, face to face is not always possible. I deal with Russian software engineers on a weekly basis. Obviously, we don't meet face to face; not sure if I really want to, either.
|
|
|
|
|
Agree 
Find More .Net development tips at : .NET Tips
The only reason people get lost in thought is because it's unfamiliar territory.
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: "Skype / video call meetings",
"Phone / voice meetings (person to person or conference call)",
"Chat / message app meetings"
For me, these seem to be "Way to conduct a Meeting", not "Type of Meeting". So, I think these options doesn't fit in the expected answers category.
|
|
|
|
|
I didn't see the dilemma -
Type of Meeting:
Skype: remote user, still want face to face to read inflections.
Phone: not local and need to communicate verbally but body language not relevant.
Chat: Text based dialog in near real time is sufficient.
Cheers. 
"Religion is the most malevolent of all mind viruses." - Arthur C. Clarke
|
|
|
|
|
Quick because long meetings invariantly are foggy or escalate in a opinion clash.
Formal because noone likes formal meetings - that is good, they will last less.
Focussed beuause I'm no philosopher, I have problems that need solutions, not debates.
Quick and formal meetings with clear agendas actually help solving problems and deciding a course of action, they allow to take notes and exchange opinions and they give some preparatory time to gather documentation and ideas.
EDIT: fixed a bucketful of typos.
modified 9-Dec-14 5:40am.
|
|
|
|
|
A formal meeting is the only thing that reasonably captures requirements and has someone writing things down.
Things slip through the cracks of casual deskside chats too often.
I can't count the number of times I've said or heard "Remember, we talked about soandso?"
|
|
|
|
|
In my project admin days I was the "someone" who wrote things down and sent it around.
Recently I worked for a company that held hours-long formal meetings without minute-taking.  You can imagine the hilarity that ensued in the morning standups as we argued about what was decided in the grooming 3 weeks ago.
Current company holds 2 scrums a week and a summary is sent out. I like it 
Casual deskside chats can work when followed up by an e-mail "Just to confirm our recent chat about x and y"
|
|
|
|
|
Long as it's on paper eventually
|
|
|
|
|
Working on a very narrow field product suite, there are 8 people in my office area that work on this system. We all support all sites and servers, but we each are SME's for a particular area.
We have a regularly scheduled department meeting every Monday at 9:00 AM (there are 3 team members that are in alternate locations, so they call in).
So... it works for us. Oh.. and I'm working from home today, so this is being typed while on the Monday conference call.
|
|
|
|
|
That's not what the Scrum stand-up is for, though you could use that time to alert a colleague that you'll want some time to discuss a particular task with him later. This can give the colleague time to familiarize himself with the task and maybe gather references as necessary.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Agreed.
Scrum stand-up style, while a team 'huddle' in rugby to try and get the ball down-field, they're not casually discussing play options, they're *doing* THE play option at hand.
Scrum stand-up style meetings, while a team 'huddle', is not what most conclude a meeting is ~ gather and discuss things longer than a 30-60 second snapshot.
Scrum stand-up style Gathering is more accurate.
Report on your current day's work in 30 ~ 60 seconds.
Post-Scrum: Project Mgmt briefly touches on a top-focus issue and/or checks to ensure the sprint at hand is on target.
|
|
|
|
|
The poll says "Scrum stand-up style", not "Scrum stand-up".
In any case, I agree that this style of meeting isn't appropriate for discussions, as standups are intentionally brief.
/ravi
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
![Rose | [Rose]](https://www.codeproject.com/script/Forums/Images/rose.gif)