[istarial]

Had mixed results.

I've felt like "group reasoning" in person is more like getting people on the same page to execute on an idea, which doesn't equate with the merit of that idea.

Once that discussion kicks off in a large-ish group, I've found it hard to pivot the direction of that conversation - if you think there's a better, independent solution that's not aligned with the group train of thought.

[koonsolo]

I can see your point.

I think it works best when there needs to be a solution where no single expert knows enough to come up with the best idea. So a group of complementary experts where the solution is more important than individual ego's :).

But when it's kind of decided already, so more 1 way, written communication works better.

I was in some situations where there was long emailing back and forth between people. Then it was decided "to just have a call on this", and came to a solution in 15 minutes.

It's definitely about trade-offs, and I can see benefits in both. So I wouldn't just throw away the power that "a bunch of people in a room" can have.

[d3ckard]

It's very likely that meeting resolves the issue in 15 minutes precisely because of the back and forth before. The back and forth syncs ideas, so the meeting can be used for the decision process.

[goodpoint]

> I think it works best when there needs to be a solution where no single expert knows enough to come up with the best idea

...then you have an organizational problem that should be solved.

[koonsolo]

Sorry for breaking the news to you, but a single person cannot know everything.

[_y5hn]

Except for everyone on HN of course. We're always fastest and know everything.