The Bikeshed Effect: Why we waste time on the unimportant and what to do about it.
Major, complex issues get the least time under discussion while simple, minor ones get the most.
You’ve probably heard of Parkinson’s Law: tasks expand to fill the time allocated for them.
What you might not have heard about is the Law of Triviality, also coined by Cyril N. Parkinson in the 1950s.
The Law of Triviality states that the time spent discussing an issue in an organization is often inversely correlated to its actual importance in the larger scheme of things.
Major, complex issues get the least time under discussion while simple, minor ones get the most.
This is also called “bike-shedding” based on the story Parkinson used to illustrate it.
Imagine a financial committee meeting to discuss a three-point agenda.
- A proposal for a £10 million nuclear power plant
- A proposal for a £350 bike shed
- A proposal for a £21 coffee budget
What happens is that the committee breezes through the nuclear power plant proposal. Why? Because, it’s too advanced for anyone to really dig into the details. It’s too complex, most members don’t know much about the topic in the first place and the one who does is unsure how to explain it to the others.
And so, the discussion moves to the Bike Shed and the Coffee budget. Here, the committee members feel much more comfortable voicing their opinions. They all know what a bike shed is and almost everyone’s an expert on coffee. An animated debate takes place over the best possible material for the roof and they all have a strong sense of coffee’s cost and value.
Before anyone realizes, they spend longer discussing the coffee budget and bike shed than the Power Plant! Everyone walks away feeling satisfied, having contributed to the conversation.
Why does it happen?
Bike-shedding occurs because people have more opinions on simple topics. If a topic is just within our grasp, we feel compelled to contribute, even if we don’t add value.
But when something is outside of our circle of competence, like a nuclear power plant, we don’t even try to articulate an opinion lest we look stupid.
What can we do about this?
- The number one thing we can do to avoid bike-shedding is to have a clear meeting purpose.
In her book “The Art of Gathering,” Priya Parker says a focused and clear purpose helps decide who to invite and what to discuss. “Specificity,” she says, “is a crucial ingredient.”
- Don’t discuss unrelated topics in the same meeting.
- Avoid inviting contributions from those who are unlikely to have relevant knowledge and experience on the topic at hand. Getting the result you want — a thoughtful, educated discussion about that power plant — depends on having the right people in the room.
- Limit the number of people involved in decision-making, and have a designated decision-maker. They can set time limits and ensure the meeting achieves its purpose.
In short, we can avoid unproductive triviality by setting clear meeting goals and inviting the right people for constructive discussions.
