zlacker

I worked for a guy whose boss was trying to throw him under the bus constantly. In one scenario after being reminded of something, he said "I don't recall that conversation, you need to put this kind of stuff into email". So in a following scenario where he did send an email, boss man said "I get lots of email, you can't send an email and assume I read it."

This is why I find if you don't already have good relations with management and trust each others judgement, it really doesn't matter.

They will do as they wish, and throw you under the bus as needed.

>>steveB+(OP)
Talk verbally, and then send an email afterwards with notes. This means that they definitely were informed, because you talked to them, and you have something to point them to if they don't remember, because you send notes.

This is protection in adversarial scenarios, but is also just a great habit In general. Verbal discussion is really good for getting people on the same page, but without notes it's very easy for details and decisions to get lost.

>>jefftk+B1
Yes, but..

If you are in the kind of adversarial management relationship where this is necessary, you have already lost.

Do you think this kind of guy, when you point to "hey remember the conversation, here's the follow-up mail with the meeting notes" he's gonna be like "oh yeah, I was wrong, you are right." ?

It's good to have meeting agendas and follow up minutes, I just rarely find that they are going to help you litigate anything. More to remind you how a decision came to be.

>>jefftk+B1
Another good way is to take notes live in the meeting — and have the doc shared on screen (for remote) or projected on the wall (for in-person).

That way, it's unavoidably in front of everyone's face, and you get the perk of ironclad timestamps in the document-editing history.