Parkinson’s Law in Action: Two Worked Examples
Let’s move from theory to reality. Here’s how two different professionals could apply these principles to solve common productivity challenges.
Scenario 1: The Busy Manager
The Problem: Sarah is a marketing manager whose calendar is a solid wall of back-to-back meetings. She feels like she spends her entire day talking about work but never has time to actually do her own work. Her strategic projects get pushed to nights and weekends, and she feels constantly behind.
The Parkinson’s Law Solution: Sarah’s problem is that her meetings have expanded to fill her entire day. She needs to shrink the containers. First, she institutes a new rule for any meeting she controls: meetings are now scheduled for 25 minutes or 50 minutes, instead of the default 30 or 60. This simple change forces agendas to be tighter and conversations to be more focused. The “work” of the meeting shrinks to fit the new, smaller container.
This immediately creates small 5- and 10-minute buffer zones between her meetings. Instead of using this time to randomly check email, she practices task batching. Batching is the practice of grouping similar tasks together. She uses one 10-minute gap to approve three pending expense reports. She uses another to fire off quick, decisive replies to two urgent Slack messages. For her one-on-ones, she batches them all into Tuesday afternoon, creating a larger, 3-hour block of deep work time on Thursday morning. By shrinking the meeting containers and batching her small tasks, she reclaims control of her schedule and carves out the focus time she desperately needs.
Scenario 2: The Solo Creator/Maker
The Problem: David is a freelance web developer. He has no boss and a flexible schedule, but this freedom is a double-edged sword. A project that should take two weeks often drags on for a month. With no external deadlines, the work expands infinitely. He finds himself procrastinating, getting lost in minor details, and feeling unproductive despite working long hours.
The Parkinson’s Law Solution: David’s problem is a lack of external constraints. He needs to create his own. He starts by aggressively using timeboxing for his entire day. His calendar goes from empty to a structured plan: 9:00-10:30 AM: “Code new checkout feature.” 10:30-10:45 AM: “Walk/Break.” 10:45 AM-12:00 PM: “Debug mobile responsiveness issue.”
For each work block, he sets a physical timer on his desk. The ticking clock provides the sense of urgency that was missing. He also creates artificial, high-stakes deadlines. He tells his client he will deliver a specific feature for review by “Wednesday at 5 PM,” even if the final project isn’t due for weeks. This self-imposed deadline forces him to focus on completion over perfection. He promises himself that if he meets his 3 PM deadline for finishing a specific module, he will quit for the day and go for a bike ride. This reward makes the artificial deadline feel real and consequential. By creating his own structure of containers, timers, and deadlines, he tames the chaos and delivers work more consistently and with less stress.
