Communication structure is carried a little bit by the effectiveness of the leader. I've seen teams operate ineffectively simply because leaders were not consistent in conveying messages up and down the chain, or wouldn't let messages go up the chain in some cases. To the same note, I also think group channels are their own channels, and should count. Like, you communicate differently - in style and in technical detail - one on one, than you do with a whole team. In the modern day, these channels can be basically persistent in whichever chat systems your work uses, it's not just about stand-ups and meetings. My boss can jump into whatsapp and have the whole staff up to date on a development immediately, but then grab people individually to follow up on it if theres anything that needs clarifying. Though I should note my experience is not in game dev.
1 to N channels are very effective for certain styles of communication. I can talk about as effectively to 100, 500, 500 people on certain topics. As long as the information is only flowing one way.
Yup, too many unstructured comm channels is a challenge. A lot of people have a sentiment for 20ish teams because without any structure you can have decent communication flow. Problem begins when team grows to increase the bandwidth, but there's nobody that smooths communication flow. It often meams that sweet lack of structure has to go to the bin and its the time to introduce some form of structure. It can be welcomed with resistance. Been there, seen that.
I wish someone like you was at the place I work. I'm on a team now that is devolving to raised voices and frustration. The person in charge of it is ignorant of deeper processes and I feel like it's going to get shelved.
I forgot that TH-cam thought it says "File it A$$..." here' a link: old-game-dev-advice.creator-spring.com/listing/file-it-all?product=2&variation=576
Communication structure is carried a little bit by the effectiveness of the leader. I've seen teams operate ineffectively simply because leaders were not consistent in conveying messages up and down the chain, or wouldn't let messages go up the chain in some cases. To the same note, I also think group channels are their own channels, and should count. Like, you communicate differently - in style and in technical detail - one on one, than you do with a whole team. In the modern day, these channels can be basically persistent in whichever chat systems your work uses, it's not just about stand-ups and meetings. My boss can jump into whatsapp and have the whole staff up to date on a development immediately, but then grab people individually to follow up on it if theres anything that needs clarifying. Though I should note my experience is not in game dev.
1 to N channels are very effective for certain styles of communication.
I can talk about as effectively to 100, 500, 500 people on certain topics.
As long as the information is only flowing one way.
Yup, too many unstructured comm channels is a challenge. A lot of people have a sentiment for 20ish teams because without any structure you can have decent communication flow. Problem begins when team grows to increase the bandwidth, but there's nobody that smooths communication flow. It often meams that sweet lack of structure has to go to the bin and its the time to introduce some form of structure. It can be welcomed with resistance. Been there, seen that.
Yup that’s exactly why I like 20 person teams
I wish someone like you was at the place I work. I'm on a team now that is devolving to raised voices and frustration. The person in charge of it is ignorant of deeper processes and I feel like it's going to get shelved.
These thing can be learned through experience. IF you are listening. Which a lot of people aren't
Another great video. Thank you! Communication and the breakdown of communication is where teams truly come together or fall apart in my experience.
Well said!
My weaknesscas neurodivergent 😂😅😢
Or strength?