No chairs in meetings (1 Viewer)

[Saint by the Bay]

In the Agile Project Management Methodology there's a concept called a "Daily Stand Up". It's a 15-minute meeting once per day. In the old days we actually stood up for them and they were really productive and rarely lasted 15 minutes.

Over the years I find fewer and fewer people actually "stand up" for the Daily Stand Up. They aren't nearly as productive as they were 10 years ago and most of them last upwards of an hour with people rambling and continuously having to be brought back on topic.

So yeah, meetings with no chairs work.

 

[soupcan dan]

been doing it for years now-----we walk through the garage and praise or shame the techs on how their trucks represent professionalism to customers, then walk the showroom to rip my rear end for not vacuuming and discuss the equipment and updates to the computer system as well as any new security items that have been purchased and what still is needed and finish in the warehouse. It takes a half an hour, everyone's updated and they have a chance to touch, question and report problems

 

[CapitalCitySaint]

In the Agile Project Management Methodology there's a concept called a "Daily Stand Up". It's a 15-minute meeting once per day. In the old days we actually stood up for them and they were really productive and rarely lasted 15 minutes.

Over the years I find fewer and fewer people actually "stand up" for the Daily Stand Up. They aren't nearly as productive as they were 10 years ago and most of them last upwards of an hour with people rambling and continuously having to be brought back on topic.

So yeah, meetings with no chairs work.

Sounds like you need to add some Lean principles to them and cut the waste

 

[zeetes]

In the Agile Project Management Methodology there's a concept called a "Daily Stand Up". It's a 15-minute meeting once per day. In the old days we actually stood up for them and they were really productive and rarely lasted 15 minutes.

Over the years I find fewer and fewer people actually "stand up" for the Daily Stand Up. They aren't nearly as productive as they were 10 years ago and most of them last upwards of an hour with people rambling and continuously having to be brought back on topic.

So yeah, meetings with no chairs work.

first thing that popped into my head. god damn i hate agile, especially those that stick to every rule.

it has always been a waste of 15 minutes waiting on everyone to be present and start, then rarely do they actually last only 15 minutes. minimum of 30 minutes of wasted time.

 

[FL_Saint]

A meeting without chairs is clearly one that doesn't require my presence.

 

[Saint_Ward]

been doing it for years now-----we walk through the garage and praise or shame the techs on how their trucks represent professionalism to customers, then walk the showroom to rip my rear end for not vacuuming and discuss the equipment and updates to the computer system as well as any new security items that have been purchased and what still is needed and finish in the warehouse. It takes a half an hour, everyone's updated and they have a chance to touch, question and report problems

Yeah, depends on the type of work. A daily huddle or walk through can be good and effective.

If you do work that requires coordination and could risk safety of yourself or hardware, it's smart to take 5-15 min to talk about the task at hand, if everyone has what they need, understand the task, and when it is expected to be done. If there is a real issue with that, speak up. Also, a chance to look around and make sure the starting assumption is accurate. I.e. if something needs to be moved, but is bolted to a fixture, make sure it is actually bolted before you try to move it.


A smart, well run meeting (rare), should focus and energize the team. Clear goals, expectations, and tasks.

 

[Zack Lee]

even better than a meeting with no chairs, a meeting with one chair

 

[Zack Lee]

on a serious note, I can't stand for long periods of time for back issues. But I can walk for long periods of time better than I can sit. Why not take your damn crew outside. Lets go for a walk people and you can talk while you walk. I honestly think this would be more stimulating and far more productive.

 

[Swamprat]

Yeah, depends on the type of work. A daily huddle or walk through can be good and effective.

If you do work that requires coordination and could risk safety of yourself or hardware, it's smart to take 5-15 min to talk about the task at hand, if everyone has what they need, understand the task, and when it is expected to be done. If there is a real issue with that, speak up. Also, a chance to look around and make sure the starting assumption is accurate. I.e. if something needs to be moved, but is bolted to a fixture, make sure it is actually bolted before you try to move it.


A smart, well run meeting (rare), should focus and energize the team. Clear goals, expectations, and tasks and good snacks.

Don't forget the snacks.

 

[tomwaits]

IMO meeting effectiveness has nothing to do with chairs. You want shorter meetings, schedule them for 4:30 pm.

 

[GeauxWhoDats]

I had a Business Professor in College who told a story about going on a job interview and there was a room full of applicants and no chairs. It was some sort of sociological tatic that the employer was using to see how people responded in an out of place environment.

 

[tomwaits]

I had a Business Professor in College who told a story about going on a job interview and there was a room full of applicants and no chairs. It was some sort of sociological tatic that the employer was using to see how people responded in an out of place environment.

What were they looking for? If I went and got a chair out of another room, would that have had the reaction of, "Good, this guy is self-motivated problem solver" or would they think, "This guy can't accept how we do things and is not a team player willing to stand like the rest".

 

[GeauxWhoDats]

What were they looking for? If I went and got a chair out of another room, would that have had the reaction of, "Good, this guy is self-motivated problem solver" or would they think, "This guy can't accept how we do things and is not a team player willing to stand like the rest".

I am not sure what they were actually looking for. My professor was just giving us advice on job interviews that if something seems out of the ordinary then chances are your reaction was being gauged. It was more of a lesson on keeping your composure at all times.

He didn't get the job by the way.

 

[tomwaits]

I am not sure what they were actually looking for. My professor was just giving us advice on job interviews that if something seems out of the ordinary then chances are your reaction was being gauged. It was more of a lesson on keeping your composure at all times.

He didn't get the job by the way.

Well, then keeping his composure may have been the wrong way to go. Maybe he should have freaked out. The interviewers were looking to see if their interviewees knew how to recognize an unstable situation and knew when to get the heck out of there.

 

[stevo3]

I did some consulting work in the engineering dept of a large Oil & Gas Co last year. Twice a week we had those 15 min Agile stand-ups. Few actually stood up, but the point of them was to present any issues preventing those present from completing their assigned tasks (Waiting on another Co-worker, Customer, Vendor, Management, etc). This way the issue was made known, and determine if someone else needed to assist or if the dependency should be re-assigned.

I found them very useful if run correctly and the person in charge of the meeting prevented any off-topic discussions, deviations, or prolongued back and forth to ensue. Also served as a reminder to some that others were waiting on them to be able to do their jobs and possibly re-assign priorities.