But managers, or at least the one that replied when I mentioned the above once, seem to like them, here what everyone's doing all at once ... Without having to read Jira titles themselves I suppose.
Perhaps ideal then would be some kind of Slack bot/app where everyone has to submit a quick video or voice clip once a day, and it queues them all up to play at whatever time the next day/stand-up period the manager wants the report.
OK, we'll just have to agree to disagree on that.
But I'm not a huge fan of standups either, don't get me wrong. They aren't a great use of time, I just think they are better than weekly 1:1s to communicate things like "what I'm working on" or "what's blocking me."
- The staff/personnel manager is there for managing the engineers and getting their time allocated to projects. The 1:1s are for these managers to understand their engineers' skills, weaknesses, goals, and direction for growth/development so they can effectively allocate them.
- The team leads and project managers participate in standups so that the teams can effectively operate, work gets done, and project leadership knows what is happening.
The division makes sense when you have a lot of projects which may only be funded for parts of the year or where development isn't regular. Doubly so in industries which have a legal requirement for strong compartmentalization of knowledge & involvement. In these environments, your team leads, project managers, and standups will change like hats over the course of weeks, months, and years while you likely will only change personnel managers and 1:1s a few times over the course of a decade.
2. Why would 1:1 be a waste of time, but a standup isn't?
3. I am not "regularly interrupting people," this is a regularly scheduled 1:1. Why is that an interruption, but a standup isn't?
But to be fair on the first point, you were replying directly to someone who is (obviously), so it's a reasonable assumption.
However, even at that, long before I was involved in software development I still hated the redundant reporting of status and availability in repeated verbally or specially-prepared status reports. Do you really not have any system to track all of these work requests? To fit them into project plans using transparent and queryable project management tools? Do you wait to make assignments until you've had the week's 1:1 with everyone? How do requesters or other stakeholders know the status of requests--don't you track that?
Even if it's a spreadsheet with statuses and comments it still seems like this should be continuously updated, not once a week; and available to interested parties for transparency (so you don't have to have the meeting with your boss or other stakeholders where you imperfectly regurgitate what has already been said in 1:1s). Having one-on-one verbal conversations to repeat status and assignments at a snail's pace to each other, up and down the chain, is something I find very annoying.
I don't think 1:1s are a "waste of time", I just think it's a waste to do status reporting and work allocation using anything other than an agreed-upon tool. The tool might need to be reinforced by verbal meetings, depending on the employee, because different people need managed in different ways. So yeah, there are people who need to be told what to do and be reminded to use a tool, of course.
Which is why I think a 1:1 is the time do things differently depending on what each employee needs (since your group meetings are not individualized), and they should probably have the most influence in what you do in a 1:1. Some people need to talk about feelings. I like to use it as a brief social connection, to build social trust and rapport at work--for me, that's much more valuable than status updates. Others maybe need to review the work that they're doing.
As a manager it is critically important that I have a sense of what my staff is doing. New assignments come in all the time that require quick turnaround. I need to know who on my staff is available for such projects.