According to Scrum, the manager should not even be present during the daily stand-up.
(More precisely, in Scrum there is actually no such thing as a manager. But often the manager is a replacement for product owner. However, the product owner should not be present during the daily stand-up. It should only be developers talking to developers, with scrum master acting as a moderator, essentially reminding everyone to keep it short.)
> I've felt the most comfortable where we sat down once a week for an hour, went over the last week, and thought about the next.
In Scrum, this is called retrospective, and is considered the only non-optional part. Ironically, in most companies this is the only part of Scrum that gets removed as a "waste of time".
> One thing I have never enjoyed was the "the big boss wants this project done ASAP, have standups every day to make sure it gets done as fast as possible".
This is what Scrum is explicitly against. The big boss should not even be involved; the developers should be talking to the customer directly. The customer decides what is the highest priority, but the developers decide how long it will take. The entire purpose of planning is to negotiate this; like the customer says "I want X and Y", the developers say "we can't do both in one month, but either of them is doable alone, which one is more urgent for you", the customer says "in that case, I want X", and the developers say "okay, let's meet in a month, you will have X, and we will show you a demo".
(More precisely, in Scrum there is actually no such thing as a manager. But often the manager is a replacement for product owner. However, the product owner should not be present during the daily stand-up. It should only be developers talking to developers, with scrum master acting as a moderator, essentially reminding everyone to keep it short.)
> I've felt the most comfortable where we sat down once a week for an hour, went over the last week, and thought about the next.
In Scrum, this is called retrospective, and is considered the only non-optional part. Ironically, in most companies this is the only part of Scrum that gets removed as a "waste of time".
> One thing I have never enjoyed was the "the big boss wants this project done ASAP, have standups every day to make sure it gets done as fast as possible".
This is what Scrum is explicitly against. The big boss should not even be involved; the developers should be talking to the customer directly. The customer decides what is the highest priority, but the developers decide how long it will take. The entire purpose of planning is to negotiate this; like the customer says "I want X and Y", the developers say "we can't do both in one month, but either of them is doable alone, which one is more urgent for you", the customer says "in that case, I want X", and the developers say "okay, let's meet in a month, you will have X, and we will show you a demo".