[depr]

Micromanaging includes closely observing, and not just controlling, an employee.

If the point of standups in scrum are to find out what an individual has been working on, every day, then this could feel like micromanaging to some people.

[Ayaz]

That is an interesting observation. For me, closely observing would translate to nagging individuals several times a day about what they are doing as well as how they are doing something.

The end goal of standups, the way I understand it, is to figure out what people in your team are doing and what they are stuck at in order to:

* align people towards individual goals in the sprint that require collaboration; * remove impediments that are beyond the control of team members and that may cause delays; * improve task and load distribution, so that some members aren't overburdened while others are slacking off (if you run a short sprint and give team member autonomy to work, tasks that require collaboration from several team members can tend to become bottlenecks, as I have experienced).

I suppose you could well call it micro-managing if these standups were used to manage individuals instead of the process. In my view however, standups help you gather data to manage and improve the process, so as to make things favourable for the team.

[tomc1985]

I'm very much in agreement with the other posts that you can get most-if-not-all of this information by keeping your ears to the ground (listen to your team's chatter) and paying attention to activity notifications.

If you have to closely observe or repeatedly needle your team for information, something is wrong. Programmers are largely introverts doing high-focus activities; we need to be left alone.

We (as in my team) don't strictly follow formal practice, though we have standups and I try to follow LEAN. Our git server sends email notifications with each push and I find these are wonderful for peering into what other people on my team are up to.