[michaelochurch]

I am pretty strongly against micromanagement and process-for-authority's-sake. However, I think Standup is a necessary evil. It sucks. But it just might suck less than the alternative, which is opacity (which gives power to management). Standups deserve some kind of timer, though. One minute per person, and split the standup if it gets beyond 10-15 people. Everyone should also have the right to opt-out.

Here's why Standups can be powerful and, actually, a bit subversive. They create Common Knowledge (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_knowledge_(logic) ) of what you are doing. That's different from shared knowledge. Shared knowledge means everyone knows it. Common knowledge means everyone knows everyone knows it (and, recursively, everyone knows everyone knows everyone knows, and so on...). Bob knows you are getting useful work done. So does Tom, your boss. But, thanks to Standup, Tom also knows that Bob knows you are getting your work done. At least in theory, this limits Tom in his ability to isolate, disempower, disparage and ultimately create cause to fire you. Standups move authority away from managerial hands. They're not intended toward that effect, but if they work well, that is something they accomplish.

(Of course, in a closed-allocation company, your boss can just give you impossible or extremely boring work if he wants to flush you out.)

It also needs to be made clear and constitutional that the daily standup is the only status-reporting overhead, except in a production crisis. If there's Daily Standup and your boss gets to interrupt you regularly with status pings (which is a show of power; he probably won't even remember that he asked you, just like people look at their watches but forget to read the time) then you're just getting screwed.

Also, I agree that standup before 10:00 or after 4:00 is just shitty. I'm usually up at 6:00 am, but the idea that you have to have the same schedule as the boss to be a worthwhile human being is just garbage.

[kami8845]

>(Of course, in a closed-allocation company, your boss can just give you impossible or extremely boring work if he wants to flush you out.)

I found your post very insightful until you brought in your standard and (imo) off-topic closed-allocation rant.

[michaelochurch]

It's not off-topic. To assess whether managerial power exists (and whether it is toxic) one must know that form it will take when it is expressed.

Standup prevents a manager from saying, "This guy isn't getting any work done". In a closed-allocation company, there's nothing to prevent the manager from assigning terrible or impossible work. It's still unilateral firing; it just takes longer.