Bike-Shedding Effect

We tend to focus disproportionate time and energy on trivial or minor details while neglecting more important things. This often manifests in group decision-making processes, where we tend to give more attention to issues that are easy to grasp over complex problems.

But first, let's hear from this week's sponsor...

Now, back to the Bike-Shedding Effect⏬

Why do smart teams waste so much time on trivial details while the big, critical decisions gather dust?

When I first read about the Bike-Shedding Effect—also known as “The Law of Triviality”—I immediately started with the flashbacks.

I’m talking full cinematic PTSD: fluorescent-lit conference rooms, endless teams meetings, someone sharing their screen with a 17-tab spreadsheet, and all of us… arguing about the pettiest things imaginable.

I’ve talked a lot about my experience working on large software teams in the past. And not surprisingly, this effect was something we ran into time and time again. It showed up everywhere.

I think about the hours—no, days—of my life spent locked in debate over tabs vs. spaces when formatting code… whether the “Definition of Ready” should have five bullet points or seven… or the precise wording of our “Definition of Done” as if the fate of the product depended on it.

Meanwhile, the really meaty problems, the ones that actually would determine our success, they just sat there untouched.

What if we had used that time to figure out how 80 engineers spread across seven pods and two continents could actually collaborate and share knowledge and avoid building the same thing twice?

What if we spent our time worrying about how to influence distant, busy executives who saw product delivery in a completely different way than the people actually building it?

I can’t help but think we’d have made way more progress if we’d had the courage—and the structure—to tackle those bigger conversations instead of hiding in the easy ones

But hey, what do I know? 🤷

You’ve probably been there too—stuck in a meeting, watching the clock, realizing the “decision” on the table is barely worth the pixels on the slide deck… while the important stuff quietly collects dust.

Well, I can’t give you all that time back, but now you have a name for it. And maybe I can help you avoid it in the future.

​

Would you rather listen? Follow the Cognition Catalog on Spotify!

Why smart teams argue about... Aug 14 · Beyond UX Design 11:07   ​

---

The phrase “bike-shedding” comes from British author and naval historian C. Northcote Parkinson’s 1957 satire on bureaucratic inefficiency. He imagined a committee approving a nuclear power plant design. Faced with complex reactor specifications, the members stayed silent. But when the conversation shifted to the design of the plant’s bike shed, suddenly everyone had strong opinions. The simpler the topic, the easier it was to contribute—so it got all the attention.

This observation became known as Parkinson’s Law of Triviality: groups tend to spend more time on decisions that are easy to understand rather than those with the highest stakes. The bias thrives in group settings because weighing in on simple issues carries low risk of embarrassment or being wrong, while complex decisions can feel intimidating or politically sensitive.

His insights weren’t based on a single observation but on his own experience with bureaucracies and committees. He noticed this pattern repeatedly in various organizations he was a part of, which led him to formulate the principle.

Interestingly, the Bike-shedding Effect is just one of several observations Parkinson made about organizational behavior. His most famous principle is Parkinson's Law, which states: "Work expands so as to fill the time available for its completion."

Today, bike-shedding shows up in agile ceremonies, design reviews, steering committees, and even executive offsites. It’s not laziness—it’s a very human pull toward clarity and away from discomfort. Unfortunately, that comfort comes at the cost of real progress.

On software teams, the Bike-shedding Effect can have a huge impact on productivity and decision-making.

Bike-shedding can look like a design critique where twenty minutes are spent debating button alignment, leaving no time for a thorny discussion about whether the feature addresses the core user need. Everyone leaves feeling like they “made progress,” but the critical strategic decisions remain untouched.

In engineering, it might be code reviews that spiral into naming debates or fights over tabs or spaces, while architectural risks go unmentioned until they become expensive problems.

In leadership meetings, it’s rehashing the color palette for a marketing campaign because no one wants to tackle the harder, politically fraught question of whether to cut a failing product line.

The danger isn’t just wasted time—it’s a slow cultural drift. If a team repeatedly avoids the hard conversations, people start to believe that avoidance is the norm. Important decisions get deferred until crisis forces them. Talented people disengage because the work feels performative instead of impactful. And over time, the team’s problem-solving muscle weakens, making high-stakes decisions even harder to face.

---

🎯 Here are some key takeaways

1️⃣ Prioritize issues by their impact rather than their simplicity: Develop a system to rank discussion topics or tasks according to their potential influence on the overall goals. This approach helps ensure that the most critical matters are given sufficient attention, regardless of their complexity.

2️⃣ Use agendas that highlight decision impact: It’s easy to get sidetracked, so make a list of important topics before meetings, putting crucial items first. Before meetings, label agenda items with their potential business or project impact. This creates a visual reminder of which topics truly deserve more time and focus. Share this agenda beforehand and use it to guide discussions and time-box discussions. This helps prevent drift to less important issues and makes meetings more productive.

3️⃣x Use time-boxing in meetings: Set a firm limit for discussion on minor topics. Once the time is up, either make a quick decision or delegate the decision to a smaller group so the rest of the meeting can move forward.

4️⃣ Use outside facilitators for important discussions: When you’re deeply involved, it’s easier to miss the forest for the trees. Outside facilitators with a fresh perspective can see conversations going sideways early. They can keep the meeting on track, prevent focus on small details, and encourage thinking about the big picture.

5️⃣ Break down complex issues into approachable parts: One reason teams avoid big topics is that they feel overwhelming. By splitting complex decisions into smaller, digestible components, you make it easier for people to engage and reduce the pull toward trivial matters.

Learn more about the Bike-Shedding Effect!

---

---

---

---

---