Humans tend to devote the most time to that which requires the least. The unimportant details easily attract our attention, and the crucial matters go all but ignored. This principle about this lack of assiduity was formulated by Cyril Northcote Parkinson, a British Naval historian and author, and it is often referred to as “bikeshedding”.

Parkinson imagined a committee convened to approve plans for a nuclear power plant. In their 2 hour meeting 90 minutes of it is spent on deciding the aesthetic of the bicycle storage shed. 30 minutes of that is on deciding what colour they should paint it. As everyone leaves the meeting, contented that they each shared an opinion, there is no agreement on whether the plans for the plant are adequate.

An advanced topic requiring genuine skill and expertise could only ever receive less of the unknowledgeable appointees’ time. The problem is with the committee, not human nature. Such gatherings should be organised with the purpose in mind. The desired outcome should be used as a lens with which to select the appropriate people to join the discussions.

As important as this competency and prerequisite knowledge is a figurehead who has the final say and can weigh the merits of each argument. Not only does this remove the all too likely possibility that no consensus is reached, but it also creates a person who must take responsibility for the result. This added skin in the game is crucial.