Work will Expand, Regardless of Necessity: Unveiling the Mystery of Parkinson’s Paradox

In the early 20th century, British naval historian and author C. Northcote Parkinson observed an odd phenomenon while studying the British Civil Service. Despite the shrinking size of the British Empire, the number of bureaucrats in the Colonial Office kept increasing. This paradoxical trend ultimately led Parkinson to formulate what is now known as Parkinson’s Law: “Work expands to fill the time available for its completion.”

After World War I, the British Empire began declining, with many colonies moving toward independence. Logically, one would expect the number of government administrators overseeing colonial affairs to shrink accordingly. However, the exact opposite happened—the number of officials in the Colonial Office continued to grow.

Parkinson discovered that bureaucracies have a tendency to create work for themselves. As responsibilities declined, instead of reducing staff, administrators found ways to justify new positions, departments, and reports. Senior officials, rather than becoming redundant, hired more subordinates to maintain their influence. These subordinates, in turn, created additional paperwork, meetings, and reports that filled their time and gave the illusion of necessity.

For example, in one case, a department tasked with handling colonial reports found itself with fewer reports to process as colonies gained independence. Instead of disbanding, the department expanded, hiring more clerks to revise and summarize reports that no longer held much relevance. The result was an endless loop—more bureaucrats meant more work, which meant more bureaucrats.

The British Civil Service’s unchecked growth demonstrated the folly of Parkinson’s Paradox: when efficiency improves or responsibilities diminish, work does not necessarily decrease. Instead, bureaucracies often generate unnecessary complexity to sustain themselves, leading to inefficiencies and wasted resources.

Parkinson’s observations remain relevant today, seen in governments, corporations, project teams, and even personal productivity. The lesson is clear—without conscious effort to counteract it, work will continue to expand, regardless of necessity.

Often, a project management philosophy will prescribe a never-ending list of documents to create and meetings that may not contribute to the overall objective. It is essential that the responsible parties understand what needs to be done, and just as important, what should be left out. What steps are you taking to ensure your project team is engaged in only the important value added work that will deliver results?