Imagine you’ve been given a task at work—a report to complete. Your boss tells you it’s not due for two weeks. You think, “That’s plenty of time!” But instead of tackling it immediately, you find yourself spending the first week casually researching, the next few days procrastinating, and only the last couple of days scrambling to finish it. Somehow, the report takes up the entire two weeks, even though you probably could’ve finished it in a day or two. Sound familiar?
This is Parkinson’s Law in action: the idea that “work expands to fill the time available for its completion.” But this concept, first introduced by British historian and writer C. Northcote Parkinson in 1958, goes beyond individual procrastination. Parkinson’s Law also explains why bureaucracies grow larger and less efficient over time, even when there’s no real increase in workload. It’s a powerful insight into human behavior, organizational inefficiency, and time management.
Let’s explore Parkinson’s Law in depth, its origins, how it applies to modern life, and strategies to overcome it.
What is Parkinson’s Law?
At its core, Parkinson’s Law describes how tasks or work expand to fit the time or resources allocated to them. This means that if you give someone two weeks to complete a task, they’ll take the full two weeks—even if the task could realistically be done in a much shorter period.
However, Parkinson’s observations go deeper than just personal productivity. Through his experience in the British civil service and his detailed studies of organizations, Parkinson noticed a peculiar phenomenon: bureaucracies grow larger and more complex over time, even when there’s no corresponding increase in work.
In his book Parkinson’s Law: The Pursuit of Progress, he proposed two laws that explain this inefficiency:
- The Law of Multiplication of Subordinates
- The Law of Multiplication of Work
The Law of Multiplication of Subordinates
This law stems from the natural tendency of managers to seek growth in their teams. Parkinson observed that, rather than taking on additional responsibilities themselves, managers prefer to hire subordinates. Not only does this lighten their workload, but it also enhances their perceived importance within the organization—after all, the more people you manage, the more critical your role seems.
Here’s how it works in practice
- A manager hires two new subordinates to help with their workload.
- Each subordinate, eager to justify their position, also takes on additional work and requests assistants of their own.
- The cycle repeats, and soon the organization is filled with layers of hierarchy and excessive staff, even though the original workload hasn’t grown significantly.
For example, Parkinson famously noted that between 1914 and 1928, the number of ships in the British Navy decreased by 67%, but the number of dockyard officials increased by 78%. Despite having fewer ships to manage, the bureaucracy grew exponentially. Why? Because the people within the system were more focused on expanding their teams and influence than addressing the actual workload.
The Law of Multiplication of Work
The second law explains how, as organizations grow, they generate more work—not because there’s a real need, but because the expanded bureaucracy creates additional tasks. Parkinson identified several mechanisms behind this:
Increased Reporting Requirements
As the number of subordinates grows, so does the need for reporting. Managers now require regular updates, memos, and meetings to keep track of what their team is doing. This creates a cascade of busywork.Task Fragmentation
When a task is divided among multiple people or teams, it often requires extra coordination to piece everything back together. What could’ve been a straightforward job now involves layers of communication, review, and approval.Job Justification
Subordinates, eager to prove their worth, often create new tasks or projects—even if they’re unnecessary. This results in a self-perpetuating cycle of “work for the sake of work.”Time Allocation in Bureaucratic Work
.png)
Here's a pie chart illustrating how time is typically allocated in a bureaucratic environment:
- Core Tasks (30%): The actual work that directly contributes to the organization’s goals.
- Reporting (25%): Time spent on creating updates, memos, and documentation.
- Meetings (20%): Scheduled discussions that often consume significant chunks of time.
- Task Coordination (15%): Efforts to manage fragmented tasks and ensure communication between teams.
- Other Bureaucratic Activities (10%): Miscellaneous administrative processes that add little direct value.
Parkinson’s Law and Bureaucracy
One of Parkinson’s most important contributions was his critique of bureaucratic inefficiency. He argued that large organizations often prioritize internal growth over actual productivity, which leads to bloated systems with layers of management and redundant processes.
This is particularly evident in government institutions, where staffing decisions and processes can become detached from the actual workload. For example, a government agency might add staff even when its primary functions are shrinking, simply because the system incentivizes growth over efficiency.
Modern Applications of Parkinson’s Law
Although Parkinson first wrote about these principles in the mid-20th century, they’re just as relevant today—if not more so. Let’s look at some modern examples:
1. Corporate Workplaces
In many companies, especially large ones, employees often spend more time documenting, reporting, and attending meetings than doing actual work. Parkinson’s Law explains why some tasks—like preparing a presentation or submitting a report—can balloon into massive undertakings, even when the core task is relatively simple.
2. Personal Productivity
On an individual level, Parkinson’s Law explains why we often procrastinate or overcomplicate tasks. If you have a whole weekend to clean your apartment, you’ll probably stretch the task out over two days. But if you only have an hour before guests arrive, you’ll likely clean just as effectively in that shorter timeframe.
3. Technology and Efficiency
Ironically, tools designed to make us more efficient often contribute to the problem. Email, project management software, and collaboration platforms like Slack can flood us with notifications, creating extra work to manage communication rather than focusing on the actual tasks.
4. Startups vs. Large Corporations
Startups often operate with lean teams and minimal bureaucracy, making them more agile and efficient. In contrast, larger corporations tend to develop complex hierarchies and processes that slow decision-making and create unnecessary work.
How to Combat Parkinson’s Law
Understanding Parkinson’s Law is the first step to overcoming it. Whether you’re an individual looking to improve your time management or a leader trying to streamline your organization, here are some strategies to consider:
1. Set Clear, Short Deadlines
Parkinson’s Law thrives on open-ended timelines. By setting firm, realistic deadlines, you can limit the amount of time a task takes. For instance, instead of giving yourself two weeks to complete a report, aim to finish it in three days.
2. Reduce Bureaucracy
Simplify decision-making processes and cut down on unnecessary layers of management. Empower employees to make decisions within their roles to avoid bottlenecks and excessive reporting.
3. Focus on Results, Not Activity
Shift the focus from how much time or effort is spent on a task to the outcomes achieved. This discourages busywork and ensures that employees prioritize meaningful contributions.
4. Limit Meetings and Approvals
Meetings are a notorious source of inefficiency. Keep them short, focused, and only invite people who absolutely need to be there. Similarly, reduce the number of approvals required for routine tasks.
5. Keep Teams Lean
Avoid hiring unless it’s absolutely necessary. Smaller teams tend to be more efficient and focused, whereas larger teams often create more work through coordination and communication requirements.
Why Parkinson’s Law Still Matters
Parkinson’s Law isn’t just a quirky observation about bureaucracy—it’s a profound commentary on how we approach work, time, and organizational growth. In a world where businesses are constantly looking for ways to improve efficiency, understanding this principle is more important than ever.
By recognizing the patterns of inefficiency described by Parkinson, we can make better decisions—both as individuals and within organizations. Whether it’s setting tighter deadlines, streamlining processes, or resisting the urge to expand unnecessarily, there are concrete steps we can take to break free from the cycle of inefficiency.
Fun Fact to Remember
Parkinson once joked about developing a formula for bureaucratic growth:
Where
- : The number of employees required
- : The desire to multiply subordinates
- : The urgency to complete the task
- : The actual amount of work to be done
While the formula isn’t meant to be taken literally, it’s a humorous reminder of how irrational bureaucratic expansion can be.
Key Takeaway
Next time you find yourself procrastinating or wondering why your company’s processes feel overly complicated, remember Parkinson’s Law. By managing your time and resources wisely, you can avoid falling into the trap of unnecessary complexity and inefficiency.
.png)