帕金森琐碎定理

此词条暂由彩云小译翻译，翻译字数共1043，未经人工整理和审校，带来阅读不便，请见谅。

Law of triviality is C. Northcote Parkinson's 1957 argument that people within an organization commonly or typically give disproportionate weight to trivial issues. Parkinson provides the example of a fictional committee whose job was to approve the plans for a nuclear power plant spending the majority of its time on discussions about relatively minor but easy-to-grasp issues, such as what materials to use for the staff bicycle shed, while neglecting the proposed design of the plant itself, which is far more important and a far more difficult and complex task.

Law of triviality is C. Northcote Parkinson's 1957 argument that people within an organization commonly or typically give disproportionate weight to trivial issues. Parkinson provides the example of a fictional committee whose job was to approve the plans for a nuclear power plant spending the majority of its time on discussions about relatively minor but easy-to-grasp issues, such as what materials to use for the staff bicycle shed, while neglecting the proposed design of the plant itself, which is far more important and a far more difficult and complex task.

平凡法则是西里尔·诺斯古德·帕金森在1957年提出的论点，即组织内部的人们通常或典型地对琐碎的问题给予不成比例的重视。帕金森举了一个虚构的委员会的例子，该委员会的工作是批准核电站的计划，其大部分时间都花在讨论相对较小但容易理解的问题上，比如员工自行车棚使用什么材料，而忽略了核电站本身的设计方案，这个方案要重要得多，也要困难得多，也复杂得多。

The law has been applied to software development and other activities. The terms bicycle-shed effect, bike-shed effect, and bike-shedding were coined based on Parkinson's example; it was popularised in the Berkeley Software Distribution community by the Danish software developer Poul-Henning Kamp in 1999 and, due to that, has since become popular within the field of software development generally.

The law has been applied to software development and other activities. The terms bicycle-shed effect, bike-shed effect, and bike-shedding were coined based on Parkinson's example; it was popularised in the Berkeley Software Distribution community by the Danish software developer Poul-Henning Kamp in 1999 and, due to that, has since become popular within the field of software development generally.

该法律已经应用于软件开发和其他活动。自行车棚效应、自行车棚效应和自行车脱落这些术语是根据帕金森氏症的例子而创造出来的; 它在1999年由丹麦软件开发商 BSD 保罗-恒宁·坎瀑在自行车社区流行开来，由于这个原因，自那以后在软件开发领域普遍流行起来。

Argument

文件:Bike shed 15d06.jpg

A bicycle shed

The concept was first presented as a corollary of his broader "Parkinson's law" spoof of management. He dramatizes this "law of triviality" with the example of a committee's deliberations on an atomic reactor, contrasting it to deliberations on a bicycle shed. As he put it: "The time spent on any item of the agenda will be in inverse proportion to the sum [of money] involved." A reactor is so vastly expensive and complicated that an average person cannot understand it (see ambiguity aversion), so one assumes that those who work on it understand it. However, everyone can visualize a cheap, simple bicycle shed, so planning one can result in endless discussions because everyone involved wants to implement their own proposal and demonstrate personal contribution.

thumb|A bicycle shed The concept was first presented as a corollary of his broader "Parkinson's law" spoof of management. He dramatizes this "law of triviality" with the example of a committee's deliberations on an atomic reactor, contrasting it to deliberations on a bicycle shed. As he put it: "The time spent on any item of the agenda will be in inverse proportion to the sum [of money] involved." A reactor is so vastly expensive and complicated that an average person cannot understand it (see ambiguity aversion), so one assumes that those who work on it understand it. However, everyone can visualize a cheap, simple bicycle shed, so planning one can result in endless discussions because everyone involved wants to implement their own proposal and demonstrate personal contribution.

这个概念最初是作为他更广泛的“帕金森定律”恶搞管理的推论提出来的。他以一个委员会审议原子反应堆为例，戏剧化地阐述了这一“琐碎法则”，并将其与自行车棚上的审议进行了对比。正如他所说: “花在议程上任何一个项目上的时间将与所涉及的(金钱)总额成反比。”一个反应堆是如此的昂贵和复杂，以至于一个普通人无法理解它(见模煳厌恶) ，所以我们假设那些在它上面工作的人能够理解它。然而，每个人都可以想象一个便宜的，简单的自行车棚，所以计划一个可以导致无休止的讨论，因为每个参与者都想实现他们自己的提议，并展示个人的贡献。

After a suggestion of building something new for the community, like a bike shed, problems arise when everyone involved argues about the details. This is a metaphor indicating that it is not necessary to argue about every little feature based simply on having the knowledge to do so. Some people have commented that the amount of noise generated by a change is inversely proportional to the complexity of the change.

After a suggestion of building something new for the community, like a bike shed, problems arise when everyone involved argues about the details. This is a metaphor indicating that it is not necessary to argue about every little feature based simply on having the knowledge to do so. Some people have commented that the amount of noise generated by a change is inversely proportional to the complexity of the change.

有人建议为社区建造一些新的东西，比如一个自行车棚，但当所有参与的人都对细节争论不休时，问题就出现了。这是一个隐喻，它表明没有必要仅仅基于知识来争论每一个小特征。有些人评论说，一个变化所产生的噪音量与变化的复杂程度成反比。

The law of triviality is supported by behavioural research. People tend to spend more time on small decisions than they should, and less time on big decisions than they should. A simple explanation is that during the process of making a decision, one has to assess whether enough information has been collected to make the decision. If people make mistakes about whether they have enough information, they will tend to stop too early for big decisions. The reason is that big decisions require collecting information for a long time. It leaves more time to make a mistake (and stop) before getting enough information. Conversely, for small decisions, where people should stop early, they may continue to ponder for too long by mistake.

The law of triviality is supported by behavioural research. People tend to spend more time on small decisions than they should, and less time on big decisions than they should. A simple explanation is that during the process of making a decision, one has to assess whether enough information has been collected to make the decision. If people make mistakes about whether they have enough information, they will tend to stop too early for big decisions. The reason is that big decisions require collecting information for a long time. It leaves more time to make a mistake (and stop) before getting enough information. Conversely, for small decisions, where people should stop early, they may continue to ponder for too long by mistake..

琐事法则得到行为研究的支持。人们倾向于在小的决策上花费比他们应该花费的更多的时间，在大的决策上花费比他们应该花费的更少的时间。一个简单的解释是，在做决定的过程中，人们必须评估是否收集了足够的信息来做决定。如果人们在是否拥有足够的信息方面犯了错误，他们就会倾向于过早地停止做重大决定。原因是重大决策需要长时间收集信息。在获得足够的信息之前，它留下了更多的时间来犯错误(并停止)。相反，对于那些人们应该早点停止的小决定，他们可能会因为错误而继续沉思太久。

Related principles and formulations

There are several other principles, well-known in specific problem domains, which express a similar sentiment.

There are several other principles, well-known in specific problem domains, which express a similar sentiment.

在特定的问题领域中，还有一些众所周知的原则表达了类似的观点。

Wadler's law, named for computer scientist Philip Wadler, is a principle which asserts that the bulk of discussion on programming-language design centers on syntax (which, for purposes of the argument, is considered a solved problem), as opposed to semantics.

Wadler's law, named for computer scientist Philip Wadler, is a principle which asserts that the bulk of discussion on programming-language design centers on syntax (which, for purposes of the argument, is considered a solved problem), as opposed to semantics.

韦德勒定律是以计算机科学家菲利普 · 韦德勒的名字命名的，它是一条原则，它断言大部分关于编程语言设计的讨论都集中在语法上(为了论证的目的，这被认为是一个已经解决的问题) ，而不是语义上。

Sayre's law is a more general principle, which holds (among other formulations) that "In any dispute, the intensity of feeling is inversely proportional to the value of the issues at stake"; many formulations of the principle focus on academia.

Sayre's law is a more general principle, which holds (among other formulations) that "In any dispute, the intensity of feeling is inversely proportional to the value of the issues at stake"; many formulations of the principle focus on academia.

塞尔定律是一项更为普遍的原则，它认为(除其他表述外)”在任何争议中，感情的强烈程度与所涉问题的价值成反比”; 关于这一原则的许多表述侧重于学术界。

See also

• Analysis paralysis
• Busy work
• Dunning–Kruger effect
• Fredkin's paradox
• Hofstadter's law
• Jevons paradox
• List of eponymous laws
• Moral panic
• Omission bias
• Peter principle
• Procrastination
• Narcissism of small differences
• Snackwell effect
• Student syndrome
• Time management
• Time to completion
• Tyranny of small decisions
• Zero-risk bias

• Analysis paralysis
• Busy work
• Dunning–Kruger effect
• Fredkin's paradox
• Hofstadter's law
• Jevons paradox
• List of eponymous laws
• Moral panic
• Omission bias
• Peter principle
• Procrastination
• Narcissism of small differences
• Snackwell effect
• Student syndrome
• Time management
• Time to completion
• Tyranny of small decisions
• Zero-risk bias

= = = 分析瘫痪

• 忙碌的工作
• 邓宁-克鲁格效应
• 弗雷德金的悖论
• 霍夫斯塔德的杰文斯悖论
• 同名法则
• 道德恐慌
• 疏忽偏见
• 彼得原理
• 拖延症
• 小差异的自恋
• 斯纳克威尔效应
• 学生综合症
• 时间管理
• 小决定的专制
• 零风险偏见

Further reading

• Karl Fogel, Producing Open Source Software: How to Run a Successful Free Software Project, O'Reilly, 2005, , "Bikeshed Effect" pp. 135, 261–268 (also online)
• Grace Budrys, Planning for the nation's health: a study of twentieth-century developments in the United States, Greenwood Press, 1986, , p. 81 (see extract at Internet Archive)
• Bob Burton et al., Nuclear Power, Pollution and Politics, Routledge, 1990, , p. ix (see extract at Google Books)
• Darren Chamberlain et al., Perl Template Toolkit, O'Reilly, 2004, , p. 412 (see extract at Google Books)
• Donelson R. Forsyth, Group Dynamics, Brooks/Cole, 1990, , p. 289 (see extract at Internet Archive)
• Henry Bosch, The Director at Risk: Accountability in the Boardroom, Allen & Unwin, 1995, , p. 92 (see extract at Google Books)
• Brian Clegg, Crash Course in Personal Development, Kogan Page, 2002, , p. 3 (see extract at Google Books)
• Richard M. Hodgetts, Management: Theory, Process, and Practice, Saunders, 1979, , p. 115 (see extract at Google Books)
• Journal, v. 37–38 1975–1980, Chartered Institute of Transport, p. 187 (see extract at Google Books)
• Russell D. Archibald, Managing High-Technology Programs and Projects, John Wiley and Sons, 2003, , p. 37 (see extract at Google Books)
• Kishor Bhagwati, Managing Safety: A Guide for Executives, Wiley-VCH, 2007, , p. 54 (see extract at Google Books)
• Jan Pen, Harmony and Conflict in Modern Society, (Trans. Trevor S. Preston) McGraw–Hill, 1966 p. 195 (see extract at Internet Archive)
• Derek Salman Pugh et al., Great Writers on Organizations, Dartmouth, 1993, , p. 116 (see extract at Google Books)
• The Federal Accountant v. 13 (September 1963 – June 1964), Association of Government Accountants, Federal Government Accountants Association, Cornell University Graduate School of Business and Public Administration, p. 16 (see extract at Google Books)
• Al Kelly, How to Make Your Life Easier at Work, McGraw–Hill, 1988, , p. 127 (see extract at Google Books)
• Henry Mintzberg, Power in and Around Organizations: Dynamic Techniques of Winning, Prentice–Hall, 1983, , p. 75 (see extract at Google Books)
• The Building Services Engineer v.40 1972–1973, Institution of Heating and Ventilating Engineers (Great Britain), Chartered Institution of Building Services (see extract at Google Books)
• Charles Hampden-Turner, Gentlemen and Tradesmen: The Values of Economic Catastrophe, Routledge, 1983, , p. 151 (see extract at Google Books)

• Karl Fogel，Producing Open Source Software: How to Run a Successful Free Software Project，o’reilly，2005，“ Bikeshed Effect”pp。135,261-268(也在线)
• 格蕾丝 · 布德里斯，《国家健康规划: 美国20世纪发展研究》 ，格林伍德出版社，1986年,1990，p. ix (see extract at Google Books)
• Darren Chamberlain et al. ，Perl Template Toolkit，o’reilly，2004，,412页(见 Google Books 的摘录)
• Donelson r. Forsyth，Group Dynamics，Brooks/Cole，1990，，p. 289(见互联网档案馆的摘录)
• Henry Bosch，The Director at Risk: Accountability in The board，Allen & Unwin，1995，p. 92(见 Google Books 摘录)
• Brian Clegg，Crash Course in Personal Development，Kogan Page，2002,p. 3(见 Google Books 摘录)
• Richard m. Hodgetts，Management: Theory，Process，and Practice，Saunders，1979，p. 115(见 Google Books 摘录)
• Journal，v. 37-381975-1980，Chartered Institute of Transport，p. 187(见 Google Books 摘录)
• Russell d. Archibald,管理高科技项目和计划，John Wiley and Sons，2003，第37页(见 Google Books 摘录)
• kishore Bhagwati，Managing Safety: a Guide for executive，Wiley-VCH，2007，第54页(见 Google Books 摘录)
• Jan Pen，Harmony and Conflict in Modern Society，(译者注:。1966 p. 195(see extract at 互联网档案馆)
• Derek Salman Pugh et al. ，Great Writers on Organizations，Dartmouth，1993，p. 116(see extract at Google Books)
• The Federal accounting v. 13(September 1963-June 1964) ,政府会计师协会，联邦政府会计师协会，康奈尔大学工商管理研究生院，第16页(见谷歌图书节选)
• Al Kelly，How to Make Your Life Easier at Work，McGraw-Hill，1988，第127页(见谷歌图书节选)
• Henry Mintzberg，Power in and Around Organizations: Dynamic Techniques of Winning，Prentice-Hall，1983,第75页(见 Google Books 节选)
• The Building Services Engineer v. 401972-1973，Institution of Heating and ventriating Engineers (Great Britain) ，Chartered Institution of Building Services (see extract at Google Books)
• 汉普顿-特纳，绅士和商人: The Values of Economic Catastrophe，Routledge，1983，p. 151(see extract at Google Books)

External links

• "Why Should I Care What Color the Bikeshed Is?" (FreeBSD FAQ)
• Kamp, Poul-Henning (2 October 1999). "Why Should I Care What Color the Bikeshed Is?". Frequently Asked Questions for FreeBSD 7.X, 8.X, and 9.X. FreeBSD. Retrieved 31 July 2012.

• "Why Should I Care What Color the Bikeshed Is?" (FreeBSD FAQ)

= 外部链接 =

• “为什么我要关心自行车是什么颜色?”(FreeBSD FAQ)

Category:Adages Category:1950s neologisms Triviality Category:Organizational behavior

类别: 格言类别: 20世纪50年代的新词 Triviality 类别: 组织行为学

This page was moved from wikipedia:en:Law of triviality. Its edit history can be viewed at 帕金森琐碎定理/edithistory