What strikes me is that then I've always been in good organisations, never in a bad one, and the article author seems to not realise that good organisations exist, or have any notion of what makes them good.
I've been in one where the daily standup lasted anything from five to thirty minutes, unpredictably, with the blockers being the chief source of variation. Another that stuck fairly closely to… let's say 12 minutes. But none where people didn't learn from experience. None where people would tolerate shit like standups long enough to zone out, or calling such a thing scrum.
I've been in one where the daily standup lasted anything from five to thirty minutes, unpredictably, with the blockers being the chief source of variation. Another that stuck fairly closely to… let's say 12 minutes. But none where people didn't learn from experience. None where people would tolerate shit like standups long enough to zone out, or calling such a thing scrum.