> give them an outlet for sharing their personal feelings and opinions, not only on work issues but also on personal or political topics
Holy cow! Are people really sharing personal or political topics in work meetings?! I’ve worked with people for more than a decade whom I meet with nearly every day in stand ups and other meetings and I know nothing about their political, religious, personal beliefs and life. I would never share that kind of stuff in a business setting. It is completely inappropriate.
Separately, we have a company rule of no meeting Fridays. By far and away this is my favorite day of the week.
Not everyone works in such a formal setting. I talk about whatever the hell I feel like at work with colleagues, and they do the same. I honestly cannot imagine shutting myself down 8 hours a day like you're describing, it sound like hell.
I don't know about "shutting down"; I'm just too busy at work to think about anything but work.
(Maybe it's also a bit that I have ADHD, and know that a 15-minute conversation about non-work subjects, that I actually focus on rather than practicing "active listening" toward, would flush 100% of my built-up mental context for what I was doing down the toilet, and so blow an hours-plus hole in my productivity for the day.)
I talk to my coworkers about non-work subjects if we head out for drinks. But at work, I work. Or at most talk about "light subjects" that can fit on top of my mental "stack" without having to pop anything.
I have been in such environments and believe me not everyone you work with shares the sentiment. I strongly disagreed with the vocal people like you and to avoid my voice affecting my career I shut up. You force your personal stuff on others and they have to endure it, imprisoning them basically. People can't just get up and find another job, nor should they have to.
Bottle that shit up for 8hrs, do you really need to talk about yourself during all waking hours or can't find other people (even coworkers) to talk to off work?
I am not talking about specific political opinions mind you. This has happened to me in both conservative and very liberal leaning environments. On the former I would have to put so much effort into not saying something about very crude sexual,racial,political,etc... jokes and comments (like managers talking about all the fked up ways they will get their guy trump to win,etc... or else) or for the latter people going on and on about their atheism (I am far from one) explicit sexual stuff, illegal drug use (and they weren't just talking, they were trading and using as well, me knowing this and not speaking up to the law/hr made me culpable just by listening) and this is all in tech don't get me started on other environments. I don't say anything which helps me keep my job miserably and helps my career but also many smart people I wanted to get close to, I couldn't and they would feel alienated because I won't engage with them except I do when it is about stuff I am passionate about: the work!! But they only mention work in passing outside of official channels, I mean I can talk about coding,foss, security 16 hours a day! Haha. But it was terrible if you are not very political, can't just switch jobs and just want to work on stuff you are passionate about and go home. I had to bottle shit up in place of people like you so please be considerate.
I have strong views on just about anything and honestly I don't have much to give a shit about outside of work and I think it is the opposite extreme end of "you should only hire people with specific appearance,politics, religion,etc..." when you say "hire anyone despite their politics, religion,race,sex,etc... and let them all talk about their opposing views" you are either activly discriminating against workes in both illegal and immoral grounds or you work in a very toxic and harmful environment where only the few that dominate/lead/manage dictate a heavily biased environment that makes only them comfortable are happy.
Do you not see the wisdom in "don't shit where you eat"? 8 hours to work, 8 hours to pursue personal life and 8 hours to rest. That's what most adults get, you should be able to focus on work during work and personal stuff during personal time plus weekend, you get 72hrs/wk for personal stuff and only 40 typically for work. Especially wfh workers have no excuse, watch cnn or fox with someone when you are not on a zoom call lol or get on reddit or your favorite social medial and vent off. Anywhere but work!
> 8 hours to work, 8 hours to pursue personal life and 8 hours to rest
The 8 hours of personal time are usually spent supporting and enabling the 8 hours of work time. Very little of it is usable for real personal development.
This is why people say shutting down at work is difficult, when most of your real life is work.
As someone who has taken several language courses after work, I find this very true. Just enduring 2 hours of “personal development” after work is extremely mentally exhausting. You work 8-16, commute, eat, chill a bit, language class 18-20, go home, blank stare because that’s as far as your mental energy reaches now.
I don’t have to pretend for the last 4-6 hours or so, like in many other countries, but 8 actual hours of unhinged freedom before bedtime? Nah.
Well of course you do those things but they are still on your time, eating , chilling a bit,personal development (not worl development) are all personal things and you could chat with someone during your chill tile, before and after language class, have lunch/dinner with them,etc.... you can associate with who you want. You can also go wild in gay club for those 8hrs and no one will tell you different those are your choices. For personal development obligations I don't know about you but I don't have to do those for more than at most one or two months total in a year. If you choose to be a loner like me that's fine just don't use work as a place to fulfill your social needs, or work for a politicial or a religion lol
I am sorry but I have been adulting a long time and that has not been my experience. Even when I was driving across town and doing 12hr night shifts I still has 2-3hrs a day to watch a move or waste time on the internet. I don't have a social life but if I did I can imagine spending it at bars,clubs, hanging out with people,etc... but my lack of social life is my own problem or choice.
I didn't know it was a goalpost but are you saying 2-3 hrs of socializing everyday is insufficient? Actually let's say the whole thing isn't enough, so what? You burden your coworkers with your need to talk about politics all the time? Really? If you think you should work less I am all for 4 day work weeks but you know we have to work to eat right? A certain amount of hours a week. Can you not make listen to whatever unrelated political or religious thing you think other people should listen to from your mouth as I try to make money to support myself and survive? If I had a choice I would be home not socializing at all and I am sure you would be on a podium in front of a large crowd telling them how amazing your revelations are but neither of us get what we want. So be courteous and shit in the toilet,eat in a clean dining area, get naked in front of people that aren't being coerced to see you and keep controversial opinions and views where an honest discussion (instead of circle jerking between you and buddies) means heated arguments that will affect how comfortable and productive everyone is outside of places where people have to work and associate with each other like a workplace?
The key assholery you don't seem to get is that I am not a willing participantin that discussion. You are doing it in violation of my consent. I don't even care if it means you never get to express your views or whatever, talk to the mirror at home I don't care. Or see a therapist about your constant need for external validation or to feel heard by strangers. Don't make it other people's problems. You wouldn't like it if you needed a job and everyone is talking about political shit that is horrible just to listen to but speaking up might cost you a job would you?
How is this shit even legal? Or allowed by HR people???
This is common sense. Then they wonder why society is being torn apart by its fabrics. People these days engage only within their bubble and force others outside of their own bubble like this. It's your obligation in a democracy not to do that else you bear the responsibility of the consequences.
Initially my post was getting upvotes but now it's at 0.
Let ke clarify a bit more, the only reason I didn't speak up and put an end to this at past jobs was because I was being essentially held hostage by these people but if ever I can I will do everything I can to to put an end to this.
Right now I work at a large multinational (not primarily US based) we have people from all over and not even once have I heard politics or religion mentioned even in passing. I have turned down higher paying jobs to stay here. But in my entire adult life working in the US this was the one thing that always made any job unbearably miserable. It's like trying to have a meal in a nasty public toilet.
Oh and people who have time to post on HN and social media will tell you they don't have time outside of work to talk about these things.
> Are people really sharing personal or political topics in work meetings?!
Sure! We're a fully remote company and as a result the beginning of every video call is people gossiping about their kids, pets, the weather, and interesting stuff happening in their towns.
Everything you listed there is pretty tame stuff, politics and religion are not discussed in professional settings specifically because it can cause problems that affect people's abilities to work together.
This sounds very American :). In my (European) country this is not a weird thing to discuss informally among colleagues. Of course you do learn to avoid the topic quickly with certain people, but that goes for more things: vaccinations, choice of school, sports results
Definitely disagree with don't talk money. It's an outdated stigma that only benefits the employer and leads to people getting significantly underpaid and/or taken advantage of.
"Talk money" can mean "talk compensation", but it can also mean "talk relative wealth and socioeconomic privilege." It's the latter thing that's a bad idea.
Imagine having grown up in poverty, having self-taught and bootstrapped your way into your white-collar job to have a better life than your parents; and then your coworker turns out to be a trust-fund baby who's doing this for fun. Things can get awkward quickly.
If the idea that this could be a problem has never even occurred to you, that's probably because you've been working for companies that have tightly constrained the socioeconomic class range of their hires so that everyone is around the same. This is most of what HR departments mean by "culture fit."
People work at different levels and competency. If you're amongst friends sure, but it doesn't usually lead to good vibes talking money amongst coworkers.
Go ahead, but don't be surprised if you cause rifts. Glassdoor is a click away and anonymous, no need to bring money into personal conversations and compare dick sizes.
-- edit @rexpop --
> I am not sure "good vibes" is a healthy super-ordinate goal among adults.
You don't think good vibes is a healthy goal?
I would strive for good vibes in the workplace. Your coworkers would appreciate a peaceful work environment.
Your political or religious debate is not that important, wait for the bar with your friends.
Because life is fraught with real peril, and high stakes projects that we, as adults, are burdened to tackle. "Good vibes" is nice for the holidays, but it can't be cultivated nonstop. The "bad vibes" must be dealt with—piecemeal, or in catastrophe.
i've always had the feeling that it's been way more stigmatic to talk about money* than about politics or religion at work. politics and religion were welcome conversations.
*by money, i mean things you bought with your money or what you're doing with your money. salaries, depending on who you're around, was also easy conversation.
To strangers, and in the most formal contexts... MAYBE, but teams of coworkers are most effective when more traditional human bonds form between them and that won't happen without being somewhat informal with them.
Working is one of the most formal contexts. Politics and the workplace don't mix.
Don't be that annoying activist bothering your coworkers and making people feel uncomfortable with incoherent political rants.
-- edit @ cutemonster --
> GP mentions how to create a more trusting and closely bonded team
Yes my counter is that you aren't bonding, you're most likely isolating others.
You can rarely change someone's core religious or political beliefs, especially with the weak arguments of today. The workplace is not a place to try to do so.
Talk politics with your friends, not with your coworkers, they are too nice to say they don't want to hear it.
-- edit @ blowski --
> Quite a lot of overgeneralisation there
I'm not generalizing, I'm saying if you're amongst friends and know they're okay with talking politics go ahead.
If you're amongst coworkers and don't know then shut your mouth so we can all work in peace.
> In some cultures your comment woud be 100% true, but in others, your refusal to discuss such topics would look aloof.
Oh, which cultures? That's kind of my point though, don't force people to talk politics. They shouldn't have to worry about their refusal to discuss a topic or looking "aloof".
Quite a lot of overgeneralisation there, I suspect you're projecting your own personal preferences onto everyone else. In some cultures your comment woud be 100% true, but in others, your refusal to discuss such topics would look aloof.
Choose to work in a culture you like, rather than trying to impose a culture you like on one you don't.
You imply that any political discussion is activism. That is nonsense. And not all political topics are divisive. And it’s fine to disagree and move on.
I think that it's natural to create a strong interpersonal relationships between people in a more familiar environments.The pressures of a deadline can bring out the short fuses and some passion for the product. Leave working in the workplace; you'll both know that there's nothing wrong with happy hour.
I don’t know what that has to do with “the elites.”
In my experience, discussing sensitive topics at work tends to bring out the people with the loudest and least nuanced opinions, and leaves everyone else feeling uncomfortable.
Yes, it's become really common. (Between a few different gigs and hearing from friends, I've gotten to see inside lots of companies' product teams over the last few years.)
There's a constant drumbeat of forced intimacy and incessant prying into your personal life. "What did you do this weekend?" "Tell two truths and a lie!" "What'd you think of the $SPORT game?" "Where are you going for vacation?" "Are you thinking about moving, getting married, having kids?" "Don't forget to vote!" "Don't forget to donate!"
Combine that with the endless oversharing that's used as a mock-facade for true psychological safety, and the net result is very little time spent on actual work. I know way too much about which engineers are on which antidepressants, who's having weddings/babies/whatever, how they're voting, and what race/gender/etc they identify with... but simple conversations about schema-design or even code-review still veer into awkward, passive-aggressive intensity within a matter of minutes.
It's honestly absolutely exhausting. I do my best to duck out for the few minutes (or 20 minutes) of the meeting that gets frittered away on it. But it's inescapable, sooner or later. I've learned to have some bland nonsense ready to answer this sort of thing.
And this one is prying in just about any context, work or not:
> "Are you thinking about getting married, having kids?"
But these?
> "What did you do this weekend?"
> "What'd you think of the $SPORT game?"
> "Where are you going for vacation?"
> "Don't forget to vote!"
Those are just normal ways of making conversation! 99% of the time if someone's asking you this, they're not trying to get inside your brain and invade your privacy... they're just trying to talk to you. Honest question: do you prefer to have zero social interaction with your coworkers?
Edit: Also, it's bonkers to me that you think that this "has become" a thing. People have been making idle conversation at work since the dawn of civilization.
Thought about it a little more since my original comment does make me sound like a grumpy old geezer.
First off: you're right about there being a spectrum here, and some things do fall under the banner of plain ol' smalltalk.
I think what's gotten to me is how relentless it is lately. Back in the olden days, before the pandemic, whether you were meeting in a large group or small, remotely or in-person, everyone would just show up to the meeting and get on with it. The socializing would then happen afterward in small, occasional, in-person settings. You'd go for lunch or coffee or drinks or dinner, and you'd end up talking to the 1 or 3 people next to you and having an actual conversation.
Nowadays, it feels like the socializing is much more broad and shallow. And it's constant. It feels like nearly every meeting starts with several minutes of this sort of desperate veneer of friendliness. You have to constantly be upbeat and chipper and "on" as you click your way from one virtual meeting room to another, repeating the same bland story about your weekend several times a day.
TL;DR: You're right it's always been a thing, but I do think something has shifted in our post-pandemic world. Now, it feels much more like an ever-present demand for constant emotional labor, rather than actual social interaction.
I work at a company that has been operating remotely since a decade. In our weekly syncs (or 1:1 with manager), there's little to no small talk, and the meeting gets called off if there's not much agenda. For socials, we have a monthly sync, that is voluntary. Both don't get mixed.
Is someone asking about your weekend or if it's gotten cold where you live yet really emotional labor?
Those questions help orient everyone to the call. It's very much like when I call a friend and don't launch into what I need right after their 'Hello', I first ask them how they are doing. This lets them get their headspace into our conversation.
In person meetings have lots of physical clues to orient people so there's less chit chat needed. Remote though is more challenging. Everyone who just signed on was moving in different directions and speeds, and a couple minutes of 'hey, how's it going' gets people synced for the ensuing conversation.
And I say this as someone who prefers to do everything over Slack and avoid all meetings.
That’s a really sad way to look at it, there’s nothing wrong with connecting with the people you spend 8 hours a day with on a human level. I’ve made lasting friendships through the workplace. I have drinks a few times a year with my old team (most of whom have moved on) and it’s always a blast catching up, reminiscing and discussing the industry in a way I wouldn’t in the workplace. I go fishing a few times a year with an old colleague too and don’t really see how either of these things could be dressed up in a negative way.
Edit - I’ve also seen a few engineers you might describe as socially awkward/anxious come out of their shells in such environments. I’ve found introverts who wouldn’t usually contribute much to meetings contribute far more once they feel the team likes them personally.
Wow, you sound pleasant to work with.. Humans are social creatures and civilization is built on interpersonal relationships. Working remotely, I relish the brief bit of casual water cooler talk as people one-by-one join a meeting. What are we going to do, stare at each other blankly through the webcam? Not only does that touch of human connection ground me and give energy for the day, I've learned all sorts of interesting and valuable things from older colleagues! Going through a new and significant stage of your life like buying a house or having a kid? Here's some people you already know and trust who've already done that, who are happy to share their experiences! Do you have to take their advice? No! They're not family, there's no expectation of commitment. I find especially that because coworkers aren't who you'd normally be friends with, their knowledge and experiences are outside of my personal filter bubble. Do I go hunting? Nope! But hearing about my coworker taking his son and the son getting his first buck was great. That's a view of parenting I'd never see normally.
I've found that all of the major new opportunities for my team have come suddenly and involved collaboration with people that I've spent time with even though I wasn't working very actively with them. Suddenly a problem shows up and one of these other people says "hey, I think UncleMeat's team is well suited to help with this" and boom we are off to the races. Those monthly meetings that were half work and half shooting the shit were critical network-building opportunities that eventually paid off.
This was written in 2010. There was a sea change that took place around the time that Trump was elected after which it became far more fraught to discuss political topics. But the way it is now is not how it's always been. Things really did feel different ten years ago. Discussing politics with strangers was much more doable. For example, I remember watching the 2012 presidential debate between Obama and Romney with my neighbors who I didn't know very well at all. I felt completely comfortable doing this. And the outcome of the debate didn't feel like some sort of life or death moment for the country.
Also, it seems possible to me that the author might have been referring to company politics.
This is a good point. Pre-Trump I remember having robust conversations at work about politics that were educational for all involved. Now I have family members who haven't spoken to each other for years because one asked the other why they voted for (Trump|Biden). It is now an impossible topic to navigate at work.
Where else am I to share my feelings on personal or political topics? Work dominates my schedule. I can't reasonably isolate strong feelings to a peripheral milieu.
I agree that it is, by the explicit standards of corporate management, "completely inappropriate," but I think in the interest of a stable society, this is a standard we're obligated to violate.
It’s “completely inappropriate” not because of corporate management but because your coworkers won’t share your views on all of your emotional outbursts.
I wasn't aware that only universally held views were appropriate to share but even if that were so, how can one even know what is or isn't shared unless one or the other speaks first?
It's funny, because if were is a ban on sharing unshared views, we could never hold any views at all!
> but because your coworkers won’t share your views on all of your emotional outbursts
in a democratic society that's to be expected and a good thing, I'm not exactly sure why anyone would have a discussion if they already share their views.
Here in Germany politics is generally present in workplaces and nobody finds that odd because it's not like the place where you spend half of your day ought to be a civil society free zone. Covid workplace mandates and rules were highly contentious, where else is a better place to discuss them than at work, where they matter?
You are assuming that people are willing to discuss issues in good faith. That is certainly not always the case - being on the wrong side of the line means getting publicly shamed, insulted, and your career path ended. This happened to a friend of mine who merely suggested that discussions on abortion happen in a chat channel other than the main engineering one.
Unlike religion or race, there are no legal protections for political views. If you disagree with your boss, you're risking yourself. If you agree with your boss, you might be alienating a future boss. There's no winning.
Get a social life? If you have none outside of your work, you are doing yourself a serious disservice. Employers come and go, and an unexpected layoff is a big enough burden to bear without a support network outside of your colleagues.
With what time? Or, rather, with what brain/blood glucose? Working 40 hour weeks leaves me with limited faculties during my comparatively brief evenings.
Maybe start with a doctor or therapist? People have been doing this for a long time, and 40 hours a week really is not a long enough work week to justify having zero social interactions outside of work.
If you're struggling, perhaps it is a sign of chronic fatigue or poor sleep.
Honestly, i think the main reason a lot of managers love meetings is that they are extroverts and mainly exert influence through their social skills which gives them a huge leg up in face to face encounters (whether virtual or in person). Meanwhile most of the "workers" are introverted or less socially skilled so much less able to or likely to argue against whatever dumb proposition is on the table. Managers repeatedly experience this as "when I talk directly with people I get what I want more easily" and conclude that meetings are very productive. Meanwhile technical people repeatedly experience utterly moronic outcomes happening in meetings (usually which they end up committed to and having to clean up) and learn to despise them.
There is also plausible deniability. Speech on meeting is not recorded, is vague, can be misinterpreted etc... Easy to spot, if there are no meeting minutes, transcript or any other document as result from meeting.
Doing this sort of manipulation over email or slack is way more difficult.
This is a positive if you're doing meetings correctly. You can have open discussions without people worrying every dumb thing they say will be written, and then at the end you write down your action items and takeaways and everyone takes ownership.
As someone with the privilege to be at a company where no one expects I will ever be at a meeting under almost any circumstance, I will note that most engineers--including myself!! (though I've managed to negotiate everyone down to one meeting per QUARTER, which maybe honestly does feel like an acceptable balance? I still have to attend meetings once in a while, and have a big one scheduled tomorrow)--aren't in a position to simply NOT attend meetings without being seen as an uncommunicative obstacle who needs to be replaced/fired.
I disagree with this simplification, and I m a ticket churner who hates meetings. Usually the requests presented at meetings come from a need to solve for a paying customer. What we re all struggling with, and I did a lot of work on myself to embrace it, is that there s no beautiful elegant scalable flexible solution to 20 client variations of the same problem which change every year.
There simply is not. So we get sent "completely ridiculous" requests or change in design, but what s the alternative ? Only do the right thing and disappear in uselessness ?
I find we like _our_ own meetings. The ones we initiate or run, but we but dislike _others_ meetings. Schedules fill with meetings because each meeting-initiator doesn’t want to let go of their meeting - and more deeply the status or control it represents.
So you can easily get a lot of meetings on your calendar and the inertia is not to burst the bubble of other folks status/whatever by questioning the need for their meeting.
Moreover the people who have the most authority to reduce meetings - managers - don’t really directly feel the pain as they’re already in a bunch of meetings. Losing this one meeting would just mean a time slot with another meeting. It’s the heads-down ICs who experiences the downside from a random meeting that interrupts their flow. And sadly they have the least amount of formal authority to challenge the number of meetings.
One of these articles pops up every now and then talking about all these supposed social benefits of meetings, but that fundamentally has not been my experience with meetings.
As many people have pointed out, a good many meetings could simply be replaced by a decent email. In my experience, the only people who seem to "get" something more than the pure nominal reasons that the meetings were called for are managers who really like talking about themselves.
I worked for a distributed team for a large company [1] in the past, where about 10% of the team was in NYC (where I was located), about 70% of the team was in California, and the remainder were in Singapore. The team leader had the astonishingly brilliant idea to hold meetings at 8:30pm NYC time, because that was the time that "worked best for everyone".
This was bad, but one could argue it was necessary if the meetings were necessary. However, this genius thought it would be a good idea to routinely spend the first fifteen minutes blathering on about his opinions on various tech non-work-related things, or his kids, or some other such nonsense in most other meetings, and the rest of the meeting could be, you guessed it, summarized in an email.
You know what I would "love" a lot more than having intimate conversations with my coworkers? Spending time with my wife, or my friends, or doing nearly anything else.
[1] No doubt that you can find out which large company I'm talking about given my work history, but I politely ask that you don't post it here directly.
I've read books about "Agile development" and I've read many, many articles about it, and I've read many conversations here on Hacker News on the subject, and I've engaged in many conversations with co-workers about "How to do Agile right" and yet out of all of that, the only rule I've found that easily transfers to every company, large or small, and which automatically improves team dynamics, is simply:
"Prefer small meetings over large meetings and prefer one-on-one meetings most of all."
Large meetings will inevitably include some people who don't need to be there, and who are therefore bored and disengaged.
By contrast, if you have meeting of just two people, both people are automatically essential to the meeting -- automatic because the meeting would not happen unless one of those people needed to say or ask something of the other person.
Let me tell you about SAFe (Scaled Agile Framework). If your company adapts this monstrosity you'll have two day long PI-planning meetings with many many people (90+ in my case) every quarter.
Similarly, one of my rules is "never set up a recurring meeting". The effort of recreating it every week forces you to consider whether you need it every week.
This really depends on how busy the participants' schedules are.
I've had to explicitly set up a recurring weekly meeting 4 weeks in advance to meet a higher-up at least once per week, because otherwise finding 30 minutes of their free time would take ~3 weeks.
I can't imagine my manager would find it very amusing if I had to tell them that I had to delay a bugfix or feature by 3 weeks because I did not schedule my meetings with enough foresight.
I can't tell you that - but I can tell you that I personally cancel calls 2 days in advance if there is nothing to discuss, or cut the call short 10 minutes in once it becomes clear there is nothing more to talk about.
(I want to emphasize that I'm talking about this higher-up following a Manager's schedule, not a Maker's schedule [0]. At this point in my career, I was the [suffering] adapter between the two.)
Do people not have discussions and build consensus in any of the meetings you attend?
I can see a 3-paragraph email easily summarizing meetings but it’s not like people knew the summary going in or else they wouldn’t have had the meeting.
what's interesting to me is that, for example, the LKML is able to "build consensus", or at least make decisions, all over text discussion -- email. And yet all teams I've worked on in corporate software development have relied on in-person collaboration or discussion to do that, in one form or another.
Although I have admit it depends on the industry and position a lot. When working as a programmer, I see meetings as an obstacle to getting my work done, period. If you really want something from me, write to me, and when I finish what I'm doing, I'll get back to you.
However, when I'm working in consulting and other fields, meetings are the key. Sometimes it doesn't even matter what you talk about. Sometimes you can spend a lot of time not talking about business at all. Having a lunch together is also good. Having established this kind of relationship makes it easier to do business later. Everything run more smoothly.
I think if something that you hate has been happening to you for 27 years and you haven't refused to participate any more, or fixed the problem, then (just as the article suggests) you secretly like it.
Also the fact that all those meetings could have been a single email implies that you had no input or raised any objection. That makes me wonder why people are still inviting you to meetings.
This is a good observation and it took too many years to extract myself from organizations that were addicted to meetings.
13 years ago I started working from home and 11 years ago started my own business. We rarely have meetings or phone calls. We discuss and communicate async via chat and email.
We try to get together for face-to-face time yearly for relationship-sake.
I have met people who were able to structure their jobs so that all they did was jump from meeting to meeting throughout the day, without ever contributing anything.
If a difficult topic came up and they were asked for their opinion on something, they would conveniently have to drop for another meeting.
I suspect corporate America is riddled with such people and everyone here has met at least one. If you think you haven't, you're probably not paying close enough attention.
I've worked in a fully remote company that by policy had a single 10 minute meeting a week. This meeting was essentially an all-hands style update on the business.
This was certainly a fairly different approach.
1. Forming relationships with your colleagues becomes rather tricky. You don't really get to know how your colleagues work/think over text based communication.
2. Work does feel a bit more lonely.
3. I missed talking through problems. Writing about stuff is a different, more filtered way of processing information. I like to do both as part of my problem solving toolkit.
4. It's so efficient - you have all this time to actually do whatever you want...
> You don't really get to know how your colleagues work/think over text based communication.
I've found the opposite: You don't really know how your colleagues work/think until you read something they commit to paper.
> Work does feel a bit more lonely.
Haven't felt that, but it depends on the person I think.
> I missed talking through problems. Writing about stuff is a different, more filtered way of processing information. I like to do both as part of my problem solving toolkit.
I prefer thinking through problems, and bouncing carefully crafted questions at times over email or slack. Maybe over zoom on occasion if it's a particularly messy problem.
At the end of the day, different people have different ways to solve the same problems, which is why I love the remote work revolution so much - it gives more choice, and allows people to seek out companies that better match their work style.
I don't mind meetings. For me it's worktime. If I spent the entire days in meetings, I won't spend my free time coding features (I don't think anyone would expect that), and in the next morning standup I say "I spent the day in meetings X, Y and Z discussing A, B and C. We agreed on T."
I openly love meetings. With a good, well-planned and thoughtful meeting, I can save myself and my team weeks of engineering work.
Just last week, by asking a simple question to the right person, we canned a heavy, ~2dev*sprint story for something a developer was able to achieve after the meeting with no code changes. The customer was thrilled.
I think the person who wrote it really believes it - and it probably works in their world. It has nothing to do with developers, though, just usual office politics.
Holy cow! Are people really sharing personal or political topics in work meetings?! I’ve worked with people for more than a decade whom I meet with nearly every day in stand ups and other meetings and I know nothing about their political, religious, personal beliefs and life. I would never share that kind of stuff in a business setting. It is completely inappropriate.
Separately, we have a company rule of no meeting Fridays. By far and away this is my favorite day of the week.