We tried it for a while but switched back to actual stand ups. There were several reasons:

1. Stand ups aren’t status updates, they’re replaning meetings, conversation matters.

2. People stopped answering the bot. It feels like an impersonal management tool.

3. There’s no need to persist the standup output.

4. Remote workers feel more like they’re part of the team. The whole team can chit chat for a few minutes before to start the day.

5. We worked on streamlining our meetings. They are always between 8-12 minutes. Making it async. Means it might be a couple hours before you get everyone’s info, that slows down the replaning process a lot.

This just indicate that it's just a pointless managerial social status and/or micromanagement practice. If you don't need to persist it, or people stop answering the bot, maybe it's because people feel it's meaningless? One can't suggest that as easily in-person to a manager.

Surely healthy communication isn't forced in-person standups every days. Other professions would probably feel insulted by the practice.

1. If you are replaning (?) every day, maybe your project is in chaos and needs some real planning so people can make consistent progress without changing direction every day?

4. Everyone is forced to kill time or disrut schedule so that they can start the day at one privileged time.

5. Aren't you slowing down by waiting for a meeting to get the info? Everyone has to prepare for the meeting in advance, so waiting for the meeting is delay.

I assume he is not talking about changing direction so much as:

- "This implementation of the API was trickier than expected, so it will take a couple of days more I think".

- "Ok, maybe I can help you with it instead of starting with the front end then?"

I thought the software world had generally agreed that adding extra people to something that’s running late is rarely the right answer.

That is when you are running late on a project and adding new people. Someone that is already up to speed in the project does not have that limitation.

Adding new person to project and team member knowledgeable about project helping somebody else with a task are two very different things.

If the only way to do this sort of communication is to force it out through a stand-up surely something is very wrong?

we use a stand-up bot, and currently we are all in the office. We don't have the same work schedule, but it does overlap I probably 6 hours. Having a bot manage stand-up is great because it means that stand up reports are persisted for easy review later, and there is no debate or controversy over the proper time to do a stand-up.

There are disadvantages of course, such as the fact that any sort of communication regarding the stand-up report must be done asynchronously when people get around to reading it. It also puts some onus on members to actually read each other is reports and respond to questions comments and concerns.

This was a big thing around 2011 - 2013 when HipChat was catching traction, then obviously Slack in 2013-2014.

It worked/works well for remote teams and slowly fell out with a lot of big corporations using (Enterprise) Slack.