
workplace psychopath asked: Meetings, “reviews”, etc., could only assist if they were properly structured.
The thinking seems to be “previously, meetings and reviews were held and seemed to ensure success, therefore, if we hold meetings and reviews, we will be successful”.
But the argument is false, if key ingredients are missing.
Essential key ingredients would include knowledgeable personnel.
Without the proper people and motivation, meetings and reviews would be much worse than simply a waste of time.
They might rubber-stamp poor decisions.
Why is the meeting being held, unless the intention is to bypass the correct procedures, and somehow rubber-stamp such bypassing ?
Won’t the meeting be effectively rubber-stamping the minutiae of what happened during the development. If good work was done, this will be rubber-stamped. If nonsense was done, this too will be rubber-stamped as good.
It’s not holding meetings that ensures quality, it’s whether the minutiae is done correctly, or …
..if it’s not done correctly, this fact is picked up, and the work is redone until it is correct. Rubber-stamping will never ensure this.
Caffeinated Content for WordPress