Standups don't scale though. The company I was with got to the point where morning standup took nearly an hour as each person talked about what they did yesterday, what they had planned for today, and any blockers. Worse, the only person who really needed to hear all of this was the manager. Sometimes you had interest in what another person was doing because it might impact your work, but for 90% of the standup you were just standing there, bored, waiting for your turn or waiting for it to end. Terribly unproductive.
On my previous team, even with 8 people, too much yakking made standups too slow, and indeed you had many people bored just waiting. No one thought eliminating standups was a good idea, though.
So one guy pulled out a timer. You've got one minute. After one minute, if it's so worth saying that you'll keep talking through the "bzzt bzzt bzzt bzzt" of the annoying alarm, you go ahead. But now you're getting direct feedback against talking without need.
Of course, I make no claim this would work for any other group, much less any particular group. But it helped that team get standups done faster and more productively.
Forgive me for quoting/paraphrasing myself, but...
"You shouldn't do [standups] because [agile consultants] [tell you to]. You should figure out a communication medium, cadence, and agenda/template, which works for you and your team."
The bigger problem with standups is when you are in a role such as operations, where you are often involved (extremely peripherally) with many development teams, each of which wants you at their "20 minute" standup.
I regularly spend a full hour a day in standups, and the useful content to me in them could be communicated in 5 minutes or in 2 emails.
