Parkinson's Law in Project Management
Parkinson's Law states that work expands to fill the time available for its completion.[1] It was formulated by British historian and author Cyril Northcote Parkinson in an essay for The Economist in 1955.[2]
Originally, Parkinson's Law described how a bureaucracy can grow unrelated to its actual workload because people make work for each other by complicating work. The growth of bureaucracy depends on two factors: (1) The Law of Multiplication of Subordinates and (2) The Law of Multiplication of Work. From statistical analyses, Parkinson determined the increase in staff per year to be around 5-7% independent of its workload. Based on this, he formulated a mathematical formula to determine the annual increase in staff in any public administrative department.[1]
The tendency in work behaviour Parkinson's Law describes, is one of the reasons why projects are delayed. Parkinson’s Law explains the behavioural aspect of scheduling. According to Parkinson's Law, a person will spent all the available time to complete a task regardless of the tasks size. This results in inefficient use of time and effort. Project managers can use this to understand employees motivation for completing tasks. In project schedule management, this is valuable knowledge when estimating activity duration. The project manager should account for this tendency when scheduling to enhance productivity. [3]
This article highlights areas in project management where techniques and tools are affected by Parkinson's Law. Tools to minimise the implications of Parkinson's Law are suggested and reflected upon.
Contents |
Theory
In Parkinson’s essay from 1955, the law refers to the relationship between the bureaucracy and its workload. The law describes how people make work for each other by complicating the work. Therefore, a bureaucracy can grow unrelated to its actual workload. The growth depends on two factors: (1) The Law of Multiplication of Subordinates and (2) The Law of Multiplication of Work. The Law of Multiplication of Subordinates states an overworked person, seeking promotion, in an organisation has incentives to multiply subordinates instead of creating rivals by sharing their work. The Law of Multiplication of Work states that people will make work for each other by complicating it so everyone is occupied. This gives the impression that the staff is overworked and missing resources. Therefore, more staff is hired.
Parkinson uses the bureaucracy of the British Civil Service as an example of Parkinson’s Law. He supports his statements with statistical analyses showing that the number of ships and men in the royal navy fell between 1914 and 1928, while the number of employees in administration rose. With these analyses, he determined the rate of staff per year to be around 5-7% independent of the amount of work. He formulated the following mathematical formula to determine the annual increase in staff in any public administrative department:[1]
x = (2k^m+p)/n
- k = number of staff with incentives multiply subordinates
- p = the difference between the ages of appointment and retirement
- m = number of hours devoted to answering minutes within the department
- n = number of effective units being administered
- x = number of new staff each year[1]
The definition of Parkinson’s Law as known today is the first sentence of the essay (Parkinson, 1955), "It is a commonplace observation that work expands so as to fill the time available for its completion." Parkinson describes how work is elastic in its demands on time. Work becomes more complex as to fill the time before completion. Parkinson uses the example of an elderly lady spending a whole day writing and sending a postcard. A busy man could do it in three minutes, yet the lady spends the day worrying and stressing over sending the postcard.
In project management, this is the definition applied. Parkinson’s Law describes the tendency that people will spent all of the allocated time to complete a task regardless of the time it actually takes to complete it. Likewise, a person will not complete a task before a deadline, resulting in inefficient use of resources and time (ref). For instance, a person has one week to complete a task that takes 8 hours, but instead of completing it on the first day using all of their effort, the person will use less effort and spent a week.
Affected Areas
The behaviour associated with Parkinson’s Law has a big influence on project performance. [4] Along with student syndrome, it is one of the main reasons why deadlines are not met.
Within project scheduling, it is important a project manager is aware of it. According to Parkinson's Law, it is assumed that a task either is completed on time or is delayed. The task is not completed before time. To achieve the most efficient use of resources and time, the time allocated for each task needs to correspond with the time it actually takes to complete it. If the allocated time is too short the task is delayed and if the allocated time is too long unnecessary time is spent on the task. However, it is difficult to accurately estimate the time needed as it depends on a number of factors, such as the estimators knowledge about task, the competencies of the person allocated to the task, and available resources.
Besides scheduling, risk management and decision-making are also affected by Parkinson's Law.
Scheduling
In project scheduling, the concern is whether time and resources are used efficiently and tasks are timely completed. In the following sections, scheduling techniques and tools from PMIs standard to project management, 'Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide)' (2017), are discussed in relation to Parkinson's Law. Project schedule management consists of six processes to properly manage the completion of a project. The processes are: (1) Plan Schedule Management, (2) Define Activities, (3) Sequence Activities, (4) Estimate Activity Durations, (5) Develop Schedule, and (6) Control Schedule.[3]
Three-point estimating and reserve analysis
Three-point estimating is used to determine the duration of an activity in the fourth process, estimate activity durations. Unlike techniques with the same purpose, three-point estimating considers estimation uncertainty and risk and estimates three durations: The most likely, the optimistic, and the pessimistic. While the three-point estimate clarifies the range of uncertainty, suggesting three durations allows for Parkinson’s Law. If the pessimistic estimate is the longest allowed time while meeting the project completion, people will assume they have more time.[3]
Likewise, reserve analysis also allows for Parkinson’s Law. Contingency reserves are necessary to have when dealing with uncertainty, but following Parkinson’s Law, people will assume they have more time without delaying the project. When dealing with Parkinson’s Law, it is important to set realistic, but tight deadlines. If too much contingency reserve is allowed, people will consume it.[3]
Critical path method
Critical path method (CPM) is one of the techniques used to schedule in the fifth process, develop schedule. This process consists of creating a schedule model based on the estimated durations and resources. The critical path method is used to identify the shortest time to complete a project. The schedule network analysis technique calculates the early start, early finish, late start, and late finish dates for all activities without regard for any resource limitations. CPM helps the project manager determine if a schedule is on the critical path. However, if not properly managed according to Parkinson’s Law, people will start an activity on its late start date, consuming all float and turning all paths critical.[3][5][6]
Crashing
Parallels can be drawn between the observations Parkinson describes in his essay and ‘The Mythical Man-Month’ (1975) by Frederick Brooks. Brooks' Law states that ‘adding people to a late software project makes it later’. This statement is based on Brook’s own experiences at IBM. When a project is behind schedule, the project is crashed. More resources are added to shorten the schedule duration. However, by adding more people, bureaucracy and training increased. Instead of being more effective, the project is delayed further.[7][3]
This law corresponds well with Parkinson’s, people make work for each other. Regardless of the number of people, the workload stays the same. People will make work for each other so everyone is occupied. Work is overcomplicated as to occupy everyone, as Parkinson describes with the law of multiplication of work.
Crashing can be subject to Parkinson’s Law. People will make work for each other while the workload stays the same. By overcomplicating the work, time and resources are wasted.
Risk Management
The use of buffers to account for risk and uncertainties.
Decision-making
Studies have shown that the size of a cabinet is negatively correlated with government effectiveness. In large groups, smaller groups begin to form and block each other, which is why decision-making is difficult to manage in large groups.[8]
Cost Management
Suggestions to minimise the implications of Parkinson’s Law
Critical Chain Project Management
Critical chain project management (CCPM) is an alternative approach to scheduling that actively seeks to eliminate the implications of Parkinson’s Law. This method assumes people purposely overestimate activity durations to ensure timely completion. This results in a false sense of security as people will use all the allocated time and safety time according to Parkinson’s Law. In CCPM, the safety time of each individual activity is allocated into one central buffer, a project buffer, at the end of the schedule. The activity durations are based on a 50% confidence level, instead of the commonly used 80-90% in project management. By aiming for durations that are too tight, attention is not diverted from the task and multitasking is avoided. Furthermore, if activities are delayed, it will not cause the entire schedule to slip. With a 50% confidence level, the activity will not be complete within the estimated duration all the time. Therefore, deadlines cannot be set. This also eliminates the possibility of Student Syndrome.[9][10][5]
Disadvantage: Simplifies scheduling, buffer can be unnecessary long
Incencitives to Encourage Early Finish
Annotated bibliography
References
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 Parkinson, C. Northcote (November 19, 1955) "Parkinson’s Law", The Economist. Retrieved 13 February 2021.
- ↑ Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica "C. Northcote Parkinson", Britannica. Retrieved 13 February 2021.
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 Project Management Institute, Inc. (September 22, 2017). "Chapter 6: Project Schedule Management". Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) (6th ed.). Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI). pp. 173–230. ISBN 978-1-5231-1232-6.
- ↑ Chen, B.; Hall, N. G. (June 12, 2020). "Incentive schemes for resolving Parkinson’s Law in project management". European Journal of Operational Research 288. pp. 666–682.
- ↑ 5.0 5.1 Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI) (July 8, 2019). "Chapter 2: Schedule model principles and concepts". Practice Standard for Scheduling (3rd ed.). Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI). pp. 9–43. ISBN 978-1-5231-2398-8.
- ↑ Kinser, J. (2008). "The top 10 laws of project management". Paper presented at PMI® Global Congress 2008—North America, Denver, CO. Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute. Retrieved 21 February 2021.
- ↑ Roth, D. (December 12, 2009). "QUOTED OFTEN, FOLLOWED RARELY", CNN. Retrieved 21 February 2021.
- ↑ Wen, T. (May 22, 2020). "The ‘law’ that explains why you can't get anything done", BBC. Retrieved 21 February 2021.
- ↑ Cooper, J. (2013). Improving focus and predictability with critical chain project management. Paper presented at PMI® Global Congress 2013—North America, New Orleans, LA. Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute.
- ↑ Herroelen, W. & Leus, R. (2000). On the merits and pitfalls of critical chain scheduling. Paper presented at PMI® Research Conference 2000: Project Management Research at the Turn of the Millennium, Paris, France. Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute.
