# Daily Stand-Up Meetings Are a Good Tool for a Bad Manager
Source: https://www.yegor256.com/2015/01/08/morning-standup-meetings.html
A stand-up meeting (or simply "stand-up") is
"a daily team-meeting held to provide a status update
to the team members," according to [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stand-up_meeting).
In the next few paragraphs, I attempt to explain why these meetings,
despite being so popular in software development teams, are _pure evil_
and should never be used by good
[managers]({% pst 2015/sep/2015-09-22-micromanagement %}).
I'm not saying they can be done right or wrong;
there are plenty of articles about that. I'm not
trying to give advice about how to do them properly so they
work, either. I'm saying that a good manager should _never_ have daily stand-ups.
Because they not only "don't work" but also do very bad, sometimes catastrophic,
things to your management process, whether it's
[agile]({% pst 2015/nov/2015-11-21-ringelmann-effect-vs-agile %}) or not. On the other hand,
a [bad manager]({% pst 2015/sep/2015-09-22-micromanagement %})
will always use daily stand-ups as his or her
key management instrument.
{% jb_picture_body %}
To explain what I mean, let's look at management from a few different
angles and compare how good and bad managers would organize their
work.
## Information
**A Bad Manager Asks How Things Are Going**.
Strolling around the [office]({% pst 2015/oct/2015-10-06-how-to-be-good-office-slave %})
asking how things are going is a great habit
of a terrible manager. He doesn't know what his team is doing because
he is not smart enough to organize the process and information flow correctly.
However, he needs to know what's going on because his boss is also asking him from time to time.
So the only way to collect the required information
is to ask the team, "What are you working on right now?"
Morning stand-up is a perfect place to ask this annoying question officially
without being marked as a manager who doesn't know what he is doing.
{% youtube ibT5oKToMoQ %}
**A Good Manager Is Being Told When Necessary**.
Managing a project involves management of communications. When information
flows are organized correctly, every team member knows when and how
he or she has to report to the manager. When something goes wrong, everybody
knows how such a situation has to be reported: immediately and directly.
When a backlog task is completed, everybody understands how to inform
a project manager if he needs this information. A
[perfect project manager]({% pst 2016/may/2016-05-24-who-is-project-manager %})
never asks his people. Instead, they tell him when necessary. And when
someone does stop to tell him something, a good project manager fixes such a broken communication channel.
But he never uses daily meetings to collect information.
{% youtube dE0_j4Kk6jo %}
As a [good manager]({% pst 2015/sep/2015-09-22-micromanagement %}),
inform your team what your goals are and what's important
to you as a project manager (or Scrum master). They should know what's
important for you to know about their progress, risks, impediments,
and failures. They should understand what trouble you will get into
if they let you down. It is your job, as a good manager, to inform
them about the most important issues the project and the team are working through.
It's their job, as a good team, to inform you immediately when they
have some important information. This is what perfect management is about.
If you manage to organize teamwork like that, you won't need to wait
until the next morning to ask your developers what they were doing yesterday
and what problems they experienced. You would have seen this information earlier, exactly
when you needed it. You would stay informed about your project affairs
even outside of the office. Actually, you would not need an office at all,
but that's a subject for
[another discussion]({% pst 2015/jul/2015-07-21-hourly-pay-modern-slavery %}).
{% quote These morning meetings give the impression that the manager is working hard and well deserves his overblown salary %}
Someone may say that daily stand-ups are a perfect place and time to
exchange information among programmers, not just to inform the Scrum master and
get his feedback. Again, we have the same argument here---why can't they
exchange information when it's required, during the day? Why do we need to
put 10 people together every morning to discuss something that concerns
only five of them? I can answer.
[Bad managers]({% pst 2015/sep/2015-09-22-micromanagement %}),
who don't know how else to
organize the exchange of information between team members, use morning stand-ups
as a replacement for a correct communication model. These morning meetings
give the impression that the manager is working hard and well deserves his
overblown salary. To the contrary, a good manager would never have any
regular status update meetings, because he knows how to use effective
[communication instruments]({% pst 2016/aug/2016-08-23-communication-maturity %}),
like issue tracking tools,
[emails]({% pst 2017/apr/2017-04-18-no-help-via-email %}), code reviews,
[decision-making meetings]({% pst 2023/aug/2023-08-15-decision-making-process %}),
pair programming, etc.
## Responsibility
**A Bad Manager Micro-Manages**.
This guy knows very little about project management, and that's why
he feels very insecure. He is afraid of losing control of the team; he
doesn't [trust]({% pst 2017/nov/2017-11-21-trust-pay-lose %})
his own people; and he always feels under-informed and shakes
when his own boss asks him, "What's going on?" Because of all this, he
uses his people as anti-depressant pills---when they are doing what
he says, he feels more secure and stable. A daily stand-up meeting is a great
place where he can ask each of us what we're doing and then tell us
what we should do instead. This manager forces us to disclose our personal goals and plans
in order to correct them when he feels necessary. How many times have you heard
something like this: "_I'm planning to test X. ... No, next week; today you work with Y_"
This is
[micro-management]({% pst 2015/sep/2015-09-22-micromanagement %}).
Daily stand-ups are the perfect tool for a micro-manager.
{% youtube ues5Dks37zI %}
**A Good Manager Delegates Responsibility**.
Ideal management involves four steps:
1) Breaking a complex task into smaller sub-tasks;
2) Delegating them to subordinates;
3) Declaring awards, penalties, and rules; and
4) Making sure that awards are generous, penalties are inevitable, and rules are strictly followed.
A perfect manager never tells his people what to do every day and how to
organize their work time. He trusts and controls. He never
humiliates his people by telling them how to do their work.
A great manager would say: "_You're planning to test X today?
It's your decision, and I fully respect it. Just remember that if Y
isn't ready by the end of the week, you lose the project, as we agreed._"
Why would such a manager need daily stand-ups? Why would he need to
ask his people what they are doing? He is not meddling in their plans.
Instead, he trusts them and controls their results only.
{% quote Only a good manager is capable of defining awards, penalties, and rules so explicitly and strictly %}
Let me reiterate: I strongly believe that responsibility must be
delegated, and this delegation consists of three components:
_awards, penalties, and rules_. In a modern Western culture, it may
be rather difficult to define them---we have long-term contracts and
monthly salaries. But a good manager has to find a way. Each task has to
be delegated and isolated. This means that the programmer working on the
task has to be personally responsible for its success or failure. And
he or she has to know the consequences.
A good manager understands that any team member inevitably tries to
avoid personal responsibility. Everybody is trying to put a
[responsibility monkey](http://hbr.org/1999/11/management-time-whos-got-the-monkey/ar/1)
back on the shoulders of the manager. It is natural and inevitable. And
daily stand-up meetings only help everybody do this trick.
When you ask me in the morning how things are going, I'll say that there are
some problems and I'm not sure that I will be able to finish the
task by the end of the week. That's it! I'm not responsible for the task
anymore. It's not my fault if I fail. I told you that I may fail, remember?
From now, the responsibility is yours.
A good manager knows about this trick and prevents it by explicitly
defining awards, penalties, and rules. When I tell you that I may fail,
you remind me that I'm going to lose my awards and will get penalties instead:
```text
- I'm not sure I can meet the deadline ...
- Sorry to hear that you're going to lose your
$200 weekend bonus because of that :(
```
Have you seen many project managers or Scrum masters saying such a thing?
Not so many, I believe. Yes, a good manager is a rare creature. But only
a good manager is capable of defining awards, penalties, and rules
so explicitly and strictly.
When this triangle is defined, nobody needs status update meetings every morning.
Everything is clear as it is. We all know our goals and our objectives. We know
what will happen if we fail, and we also understand how much we're going to
get if we succeed. We don't need a manager to remind us about that every morning.
And we don't need a manager to check our progress. He already gave us
a very clear definition of our objectives. Why would we talk about them again
every morning?
A bad manager isn't capable of
[defining objectives]({% pst 2015/jan/2015-01-26-happy-boss-false-objective %});
that's why he
wants to
[micro-manage]({% pst 2015/sep/2015-09-22-micromanagement %})
us every morning. Actually, a bad manager is doing
it during the day too. He is afraid that without well-known goals and rules,
the team will do something wrong or won't do anything at all. That's why
he has "to keep his hand on the pulse." In reality, he keeps his hand
on the neck of the team.
## Motivation
**A Bad Manager De-Motivates by Public Embarrassment**.
He doesn't know how to organize a proper motivational system within the team;
that's why he relies on a natural fear of public embarrassment. It's only
logical that no one would feel comfortable saying, "_I forgot it_"
in front of everybody. So the daily stand-up meeting is where he puts
everybody in a line and asks, "_What did you do yesterday?_" This
fearful moment is a great motivator for the team, isn't it? I don't think so.
**A Good Manager Motivates by Objectives**.
Ideal management defines objectives and lets people achieve
them using their skills, resources, knowledge, and passion. A properly
defined objective always has three components: awards, penalties, and rules.
A great manager knows how to translate corporate objectives into personal
ones: "_If we deliver this feature before the weekend, the company will
generate extra profit. You, Sally, will personally get $500. If you fail, you will be moved to
another, less interesting project._" This is a perfectly defined objective.
Do we need to ask Sally every morning, in front of everybody, if she forgot
to implement the feature? If she is working hard? Will this questioning help
her? Absolutely not! She already knows what she is working for, and she is motivated enough.
When she finishes on time, organize a meeting and
give her a $500 check in front of everybody. This is what a good manager
uses meetings for.
{% youtube pt9uHp35fwM %}
There's more to this, too, as daily status updates in front of everybody motivate
the best team players to backslide and become the same as the worst ones. Well, this is mostly
because they don't want to offend anyone by their super performance.
It is in our nature to try to look similar to everybody else while being
in a group. When everybody reports, "_I still have nothing to show_," it would
be strange to expect a good programmer to say, "_I finished all my tasks and
want to get more_." Well, this may happen once, but after a few times, this
A player will either stop working hard or will change the team. He will
see that his performance is standing out and that this can't be appreciated by the group,
no matter what the manager says.
A good manager understands that each programmer has his or her own speed,
quality, and salary. A good manager gives different tasks to different
people and expects different results from them. Obviously, lining everybody
up in the morning and expecting similar reports from them is a huge mistake.
The mistake will have a catastrophic effect on A players, who are interested
in achieving super results and expect to be super-appreciated and compensated.
A bad manager can't manage different people differently, just because
he doesn't know how. That's why he needs daily stand-ups, where everybody
reports almost the same, and it's easy to compare their results to each other.
Also, it's easier to blame or to cheer up those who don't report similar to
others. In other words, a bad manager uses daily stand-ups as an instrument
of equality, which in this case only ruins the entire team's
[motivation]({% pst 2017/sep/2017-09-19-what-motivates-me %}).
Daily stand-ups, as well as any status update meetings,
are a great instrument to hide and protect a lazy and stupid manager. To hide
his inability to manage people. To hide his lack of competence. To hide
his fear of problems, challenges, and risks. If you're a good manager,
don't embarrass yourself with daily stand-ups.