undefined | Better HN

0 pointskj4211cash1mo ago0 comments

We have a bunch of Amazon transplants who newly arrived at my company and have started doing this. I thought I would love it, because I'm a good writer, a great reader, not great at PowerPoint or meeting gamesmanship, etc. Turns out I kind of hate it. The silent reading time is annoying, especially when you've already read the doc or when most people are on zoom, etc. The intellectual bloodbath doesn't happen at my company. The most senior people are given the floor and they usually spout nonsense because they haven't had time to read the doc, are miles away from the intellectual details, are too busy playing office politics, etc. And then there's just as much meeting gamesmanship as before. I was hoping decision would be more scientific but that just hasn't happened. Maybe we're doing it wrong. Maybe we've hired the Amazon rejects. I don't know. Hoping it improves.

0 comments

6 comments · 2 top-level

nh21mo ago· 2 in thread

Asking the grandparent:

The what is the idea behind the "ideally have already read the paper, but given 10-20 minutes in silence" part?

The fact that people that have already read it have nothing to do and waste time sitting around bored sounds like an obvious flaw, are we missing something?

otterley1mo ago

I take issue with the “ideally have already read the paper” part. That’s actually not true for most of the attendees. There will be some who have, though, and those will be your co-authors or others who have helped you prepare it before the meeting. And they don’t mind waiting in silence during the reading period, because they have a stake in the outcome.

Also, 20 minutes of respite isn’t necessarily “waste.” Having 20 minutes of time to think deeply on something is often a gift!

kj4211cashOP1mo ago

Can you really think deeply in 20 min, while on zoom or in a meeting room?

I think this gets to the heart of my complaint. I thought this would increase the water level on our technical discussions. It hasn't. Like I say, could be the documents or people are poor. In any event, I'm one person that believed in this right up until my org implemented it.

1 more reply

getnormality1mo ago· 2 in thread

Wait, so, there's silent reading time that you hate, AND somehow seniors still manage to claim that they didn't read the thing?

kj4211cashOP1mo ago

Well they don't say they didn't read the thing. But 10-20 minutes often isn't enough time to truly digest the arguments. And even it were, I'm not sure it would matter. What I've seen is 10-20 minutes of awkward silent time followed by a level of discussion that isn't notably better than meetings before we adopted Amazon ways. Probably we are doing it wrong and/or have the wrong people in the room.

otterley1mo ago

10-20 minutes seems short. Most doc reads I’ve been in at Amazon have a 30-40 minute reading phase. 10-20 minute reads would only be for very short or simple documents.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

6 comments · 2 top-level

nh21mo ago· 2 in thread

Asking the grandparent:

The what is the idea behind the "ideally have already read the paper, but given 10-20 minutes in silence" part?

The fact that people that have already read it have nothing to do and waste time sitting around bored sounds like an obvious flaw, are we missing something?

otterley1mo ago

Also, 20 minutes of respite isn’t necessarily “waste.” Having 20 minutes of time to think deeply on something is often a gift!

kj4211cashOP1mo ago

Can you really think deeply in 20 min, while on zoom or in a meeting room?

1 more reply

getnormality1mo ago· 2 in thread

Wait, so, there's silent reading time that you hate, AND somehow seniors still manage to claim that they didn't read the thing?

kj4211cashOP1mo ago

otterley1mo ago

10-20 minutes seems short. Most doc reads I’ve been in at Amazon have a 30-40 minute reading phase. 10-20 minute reads would only be for very short or simple documents.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse