帕金森定律

From the archive 夕拾朝花 Parkinson's Law 帕金森定律 Nov 19th 1955 From The Economist print edition The report of the Royal Commission on the Civil Service was published on Thursday afternoon. Time has not permitted any comment in this week's issue of The Economist on the contents of the Report. But the startling discovery enunciated by a correspondent in the following article is certainly relevant to what should have been in it. 《公务员事务皇家委员会报告》已于本周四（2009年7月30日）下午公布。由于时间不允许，本期《经济学人》未能对于该报告内容进行评论。但是本刊一位记者在下面文章中描述的这个惊人发现显然会和该报告的内容相关。 IT is a commonplace observation that work expands so as to fill the time available for its completion. Thus, an elderly lady of leisure can spend the entire day in writing and despatching a postcard to her niece at Bognor Regis. An hour will be spent in finding the postcard, another in hunting for spectacles, half-an-hour in a search for the address, an hour and a quarter in composition, and twenty minutes in deciding whether or not to take an umbrella when going to the pillar-box in the next street. The total effort which would occupy a busy man for three minutes all told may in this fashion leave another person prostrate after a day of doubt, anxiety and toil. 为了将可支配的时间添满而增加工作量是很司空见惯的作法。比如，一个很有闲的老太太给她在博格诺里吉斯的侄女寄张明信片可能要花一整天时间。一个小时用来找明信片，一个小时找老花镜，半个小时找地址，一个小时15分钟写明信片，20分钟犹豫是否带伞去就在隔街的邮箱。一个忙人3分钟就能全部搞定的事（如此这般）能让另一个人犹豫，焦虑，忙碌一天，最后累得筋疲力尽。 Granted that work (and especially paper work) is thus elastic in its demands on time, it is manifest that there need be little or no relationship between the work to be done and the size of the staff to which it may be assigned. Before the discovery of a new scientific law—herewith presented to the public for the first time, and to be called Parkinson's Law*—there has, however, been insufficient recognition of the implications of this fact in the field of public administration. Politicians and taxpayers have assumed (with occasional phases of doubt) that a rising total in the number of civil servants must reflect a growing volume of work to be done. Cynics, in questioning this belief, have imagined that the multiplication of officials must have left some of them idle or all of them able to work for shorter hours. But this is a matter in which faith and doubt seem equally misplaced. The fact is that the number of the officials and the quantity of the work to be done are not related to each other at all. The rise in the total of those employed is governed by Parkinson's Law, and would be much the same whether the volume of the work were to increase, diminish or even disappear. The importance of Parkinson's Law lies in the fact that it is a law of growth based upon an analysis of the factors by which that growth is controlled. 假使一项工作（尤其是书面工作）所需的时间可以这般机动，工作量和所需工作人员数量之间的关系显然就不会太大，甚至没有关系。然而很少有人会承认这种现象会在公共行政领域出现。（下面将要向您展示的这个名为“帕金森定律”的新定律可能会改变这种固有看法。）政客和纳税人都认为（有时会先经过一段怀疑期）公务员数量的增加一定反映了工作量的加大。而那些愤世的人则会质疑这种说法，他们想象着公务员一多，有些人就要无所事事，或者每个人的工作时间就要缩短。但是他们都错了（无论是相信的人还是质疑的人）。实际情况是，行政官员（公务员）的数量和工作量之间没有丝毫关系。雇佣人员总数的增加是受帕金森定律支配的，并且不受工作量增减（或取消）的影响。帕金森定律的价值在于这个（关于增长的）定律是通过（对那些支配该增长的因素）分析得来的。 The validity of this recently discovered law must rest mainly on statistical proofs, which will follow. Of more interest to the general reader is the explanation of the factors that underlie the general tendency to which this law gives definition. Omitting technicalities (which are numerous) we may distinguish, at the outset, two motive forces. They can be represented for the present purpose by two almost axiomatic statements, thus: 这个新定律是否管用必须要拿统计数据说话，相关数据将会随后附上。而普通读者对（该定律诠释的）这种趋势背后的各种因素会更感兴趣。我们把相关术语（有很多）先放一放，先来区分两个（人的）原始动机。如下： Factor I.—An official wants to multiply subordinates, not rivals; and 因素I.一个官员要的是更多的下属，而不是更多的对手 Factor II.—Officials make work for each other. 因素II.官员之间总喜欢给对方添活儿。 We must now examine these motive forces in turn. 这两条因素，我们现在一条一条来看。 The Law of Multiplication of Subordinates “增加下属”定律 To comprehend Factor I, we must picture a civil servant called A who finds himself overworked. Whether this overwork is real or imaginary is immaterial; but we should observe, in passing, that A's sensation (or illusion) might easily result from his own decreasing energy—a normal symptom of middle-age. For this real or imagined overwork there are, broadly speaking, three possible remedies 为了理解第一条因素，我们首先假定一个公务员A，此人感觉自己工作量超负荷。至于他是真的超负荷还只是幻觉，和本文无关；但是顺便提一句，我们应当看到A的感觉（或者幻觉）很可能是由于自身渐衰的精力所致，这也是人到中年常见的现象。对于这种亦真亦幻的超荷感，大体来说，有三种可能的解决办法： (1) He may resign. (1) 辞职 (2) He may ask to halve the work with a colleague called B. (2) 分一半工作（量）给同事B (3) He may demand the assistance of two subordinates, to be called C and D. (3) 增加两名副手C和D There is probably no instance in civil service history of A choosing any but the third alternative. By resignation he would lose his pension rights. By having B appointed, on his own level in the hierarchy, he would merely bring in a rival for promotion to W's vacancy when W (at long last) retires. So A would rather have C and D, junior men, below him. They will add to his consequence; and, by dividing the work into two categories, as between C and D, he will have the merit of being the only man who comprehends them both. 公务员历史上大概不会有这样的A，专选1或2而不选3。因为，如果辞职，养老金就没了。如果找个B分担工作，只会增加一位（和A平级）对手，和自己争夺W（最后终于）退休后的缺位。所以A宁愿选择两个位置低于自己的下属C和D。C和D的到来会增加他位置的分量；并且，将工作分成两块儿分交C和D，他就成了唯一一个把握全局（C和D）的人。 It is essential to realise, at this point, that C and D are, as it were, inseparable. To appoint C alone would have been impossible. Why? Because C, if by himself, would divide the work with A and so assume almost the equal status which has been refused in the first instance to B; a status the more emphasised if C is A's only possible successor. Subordinates must thus number two or more, each being kept in order by fear of the other's promotion. When C complains in turn of being overworked (as he certainly will) A will, with the concurrence of C, advise the appointment of two assistants to help C. But he can then avert internal friction only by advising the appointment of two more assistants to help D, whose position is much the same. With this recruitment of E, F, G and H, the promotion of A is now practically certain. 我们有必要意识到到目前（描述的）这个阶段，C和D是不可分割的，只找一个C作副手是绝对行不通的。为什么？因为假如只有一个副手C，C就会和A分担工作量，这样C就会拥有和第二个办法中的B差不多的地位了（而A是不会选择这个办法的）；如果C是A唯一的继任人，C的地位还会提升。所以，A就会安排两个或者更多的副手；这么安排，每个下属还会表现得规规矩矩，以防其他人得到提升。当C也抱怨（简直是一定的）工作量超负荷时，A会在征得C的同意后，要求给C安排两个副手协助他。但是还得再给（和C地位相当的）D安排两个副手，否则会产生内部摩擦。E，F，G，H的到来使A的升迁几乎变得板上钉钉。 The Law of Multiplication of Work “增加工作量”定律 Seven officials are now doing what one did before. This is where Factor II comes into operation. For these seven make so much work for each other that all are fully occupied and A is actually working harder than ever. An incoming document may well come before each of them in turn. Official E decides that it falls within the province of F, who places a draft reply before C, who amends it drastically before consulting D, who asks G to deal with it. But G goes on leave at this point, handing the file over to H, who drafts a minute, which is signed by D and returned to C, who revises his draft accordingly and lays the new version before A. 以前一个人做的事，现在要由7个人来做。第二个因素由此起了作用。由于七个人相互之间制造任务，结果是每个人都很忙，而且A要比以前更忙了。一份新到的文件可能要依次在每个人那儿都走一遍。E认为这份文件应属F的管辖范围，于是F草拟了文件回复，然后交到C那儿，C将草拟稿大幅修改之后转给D来征求意见，D把这个任务派给G，但是G请了假要离开，于是交给H，H做了备忘录后由D签字，然后又转给C，C按照备忘录做了相应的修改后将新版本递交到A那里。 What does A do? He would have every excuse for signing the thing unread, for he has many other matters on his mind. Knowing now that he is to succeed W next year, he has to decide whether C or D should succeed to his own office. He had to agree to G going on leave, although not yet strictly entitled to it. He is worried whether H should not have gone instead, for reasons of health. He has looked pale recently—partly but not solely because of his domestic troubles. Then there is the business of F's special increment of salary for the period of the conference, and E's application for transfer to the Ministry of Pensions. A has heard that D is in love with a married typist and that G and F are no longer on speaking terms—no one seems to know why. So A might be tempted to sign C's draft and have done with it. A会做什么？他会有充足的借口不读文件而直接签字，因为他还有许多其它事要想。他要决定由C还是D来接替自己，因为他明年将要接任W的位子。G向他来要假，他不得不准假，尽管严格来说G的请假理由并不充分。他同时纠缠于是否本该把这个放假的名额给H，因为H近来脸色很差——部分是（但不是唯一）因为家庭矛盾。接着是关于F的特别加薪，因为他在会议期间有（额外的）付出。还有E要转岗到养老金部的申请。A还听说D正和一个已婚的打字员恋爱，还有G和F关系僵得已经不说话了，而且两人似乎都找不到症结所在。所以，A可能很想直接给C的草稿签字，就此一劳永逸。 But A is a conscientious man. Beset as he is with problems created by his colleagues for themselves and for him—created by the mere fact of these officials' existence—he is not the man to shirk his duty. He reads through the draft with care, deletes the fussy paragraphs added by C and H and restores the thing back to the form preferred in the first instance by the able (if quarrelsome) F. He corrects the English—none of these young men can write grammatically—and finally produces the same reply he would have written if officials C to H had never been born. Far more people have taken far longer to produce the same result. No one has been idle. All have done their best. And it is late in the evening before A finally quits his office and begins the return journey to Ealing. The last of the office lights are being turned off in the gathering dusk which marks the end of another day's administrative toil. Among the last to leave, A reflects, with bowed shoulders and a wry smile, that late hours, like grey hairs, are among the penalties of success. 但A对待工作的态度是很认真的。尽管同事给自己（也给其他同事）找了活——没有这些职位，没有这些同事，就没有这些活儿——他不是那种逃避任务的人。他细心通读了草稿，删去C和H添加的蹩脚的段落，恢复到更能干的（但是爱争吵）F提供的最初版本。他改了语病——这些年轻人的语法都不严谨——终稿好像完全是由A本人原创，C到H好像任何人都未参与其中。同样的结果，人越多，完成的时间却越长，而且无人偷懒，每个人都尽了全力。当A终于离开办公室准备回在伊令的家时，天色已晚。苍茫的暮色中，办公楼最后一盏灯的灭掉意味着又一天行政工作的辛劳结束了。走在最后一批离开的人中间，A弯着背，面露苦涩，心里反思，加班和白发是事业有成带来的惩罚。 The Scientific Proofs 科学证据 From this description of the factors at work the student of political science will recognise that administrators are more or less bound to multiply. Nothing has yet been said, however, about the period of time likely to elapse between the date of A's appointment and the date from which we can calculate the pensionable service of H. Vast masses of statistical evidence have been collected and it is from a study of this data that Parkinson's Law has been deduced. Space will not allow of detailed analysis, but research began in the British Navy Estimates. These were chosen because the Admiralty's responsibilities are more easily measurable than those of (say) the Board of Trade. 从上面这个对相关因素的描述中，学政治的同学会悟到行政官员增加的趋势多少不可避免。但是我们还没提到从A上任到H入职（据此可以推算出H退休领取养老金的时间）的时间间隔。（不用着急），研究者收集了大量的研究数据，并由此推论出了帕金森定律（可以解决这个问题）。由于篇幅所限，不可能做细致分析，但还是要以细致的剖析作为开场，我们的目标是英国海军。之所以选择海军是因为海军部的权责要比那些——比方说商务部——更为明晰。 The accompanying table is derived from Admiralty statistics for 1914 and 1928. The criticism voiced at the time centred on the comparison between the sharp fall in numbers of those available for fighting and the sharp rise in those available only for administration, the creation, it was said, of “a magnificent Navy on land.” But that comparison is not to the present purpose. What we have to note is that the 2,000 Admiralty officials of 1914 had become the 3,569 of 1928; and that this growth was unrelated to any possible increase in their work. The Navy during that period had diminished, in point of fact, by a third in men and two-thirds in ships. Nor, from 1922 onwards, was its strength even expected to increase, for its total of ships (unlike its total of officials) was limited by the Washington Naval Agreement of that year. Yet in these circumstances we had a 78.45 per cent increase in Admiralty officials over a period of fourteen years; an average increase of 5.6 per cent a year on the earlier total. In fact, as we shall see, the rate of increase was not as regular as that. All we have to consider, at this stage, is the percentage rise over a given period. 附表是海军部在1914~1928年期间的统计数据。在这段时间内，海军部面对的批评声音主要集中在对作战人员和行政人员编制数量增减的比较——前者急降，后者骤升；海军部当时被人们称作“一支庞大的路上海军”。但是这种比较和本文主题无关。但是我们必须注意到1914年海军部只有2000名官员，到了1928年，官员总数增至3569人，并且这个增加并不意味着工作量的增加。而实际情况是，那段时间的海军人数已经减少了1/3，船只数量减少了2/3，并且从1922年开始，海军力量不再有可能增长，因为那年出台的《华盛顿海军》限制了海军船只总数（海军官员却没有这种“待遇”）。但是在这种情况下，海军部官员却在14年间增长了78.45%，平均一年增长5.6%，而每年的实际增长量却并不这样平均（一会儿我们就会看到）。但是（不要紧），眼下我们只要考虑在在选定时间范围内的增长。 Can this rise in the total number of civil servants be accounted for except on the assumption that such a total must always rise by a law governing its growth? It might be urged, at this point, that the period under discussion was one of rapid development in naval technique. The use of the flying machine was no longer confined to the eccentric. Submarines were tolerated if not approved. Engineer officers were beginning to be regarded as almost human. In so revolutionary an age we might expect that storekeepers would have more elaborate inventories to compile. We might not wonder to see more draughtsmen on the pay-roll, more designers, more technicians and scientists. But these, the dockyard officials, increased only by 40 per cent in number, while the men of Whitehall increased by nearly 80 per cent. For every new foreman or electrical engineer at Portsmouth there had to be two more clerks at Charing Cross. From this we might be tempted to conclude, provisionally, that the rate of increase in administrative staff is likely to be double that of the technical staff at a time when the actually useful strength (in this case, of seamen) is being reduced by 31.5 per cent. It has been proved, however, statistically, that this last percentage is irrelevant. The officials would have multiplied at the same rate had there been no actual seamen at all. 公务员人数的增加还可以有其它的解释吗（除了我们这种认为其增长受某种法则支配的假定）？在这里，大家一定要知道的是我们讨论的这个时期是海军技术飞速发展的时期。飞行器已经不再是科学怪人手里的玩意了；潜水艇的使用虽然还未得到批准，但是大家已经都接受了；人们开始对轮机员这个职业变得尊重了。在这样一个变革的时代，我们可以想见零售商的货存单上应该有五花八门，精细划分的商品。我们对于工资名单上数量渐多的制图员，设计员，技术人员和科学家也应该见怪不怪了。这些造船厂的技术官员每增长40%，相对应的白厅（英国政府）官员数就要增长将近80%。朴茨茅斯（英国海军基地）每增加一个工头或者电工，查令十字街（英国政府所在地）就要增加两个或者更多的职员。我们很想据此就得出一个暂时性的结论：当实际实力（如此例中的海军士兵）减少31.5%时，行政人员的增加速率可能是技术人员的两倍。但是，统计数据表明，前面这个百分比（31.5%）是一个无关量。即使一个海军士兵都没有，增加速度也会这么快。 It would be interesting to follow the further progress by which the 8,118 Admiralty staff of 1935 came to number 33,788 by 1954. But the staff of the Colonial Office affords a better field of study during a period of Imperial decline. The relevant statistics are set down below. Before showing what the rate of increase is, we must observe that the extent of this department's responsibilities was far from constant during these twenty years. The colonial territories were not much altered in area or population between 1935 and 1939. They were considerably diminished by 1943, certain areas being in enemy hands. They were increased again in 1947, but have since then shrunk steadily from year to year as successive colonies achieve self-government. 继续沿着时间轴调查下去会很有趣（1935年海军部有官员8118人，而到了1954年时，则涨到了33788人），但是殖民帝国衰落时期的殖民部官员更适合我们的研究，相关的统计数据见下表。在大家看（关于增长率的）统计数据之前，我们必须注意到该部门的职责范围在这20年间并非一成不变。1935到1939年期间，殖民地的面积和人口虽未有很大的改变，但到了1943年却减少了许多。这是因为该帝国丢掉了其控制的部分地区。而1947年又有所增多，但是从那时起随着各殖民地陆续获得独立，殖民地面积和人口一年一年的稳步减少。 It would be rational, prior to the discovery of Parkinson's Law, to suppose that these changes in the scope of Empire would be reflected in the size of its central administration. But a glance at the figures shows that the staff totals represent automatic stages in an inevitable increase. And this increase, while related to that observed in other departments, has nothing to do with the size—or even the existence—of the Empire. What are the percentages of increase? We must ignore, for this purpose, the rapid increase in staff which accompanied the diminution of responsibility during World War II. We should note rather the peacetime rates of increase; over 5.24 per cent between 1935 and 1939, and 6.55 per cent between 1947 and 1954. This gives an average increase of 5.89 per cent each year, a percentage markedly similar to that already found in the Admiralty staff increase between 1914 and 1928. 在发现帕金森定律之前，如果有人认为殖民帝国其行政部门的规模会反映该帝国的势力范围，这个想法是合乎于理的。但是统计数字却表明行政人员总数阶段性自动增长，没有例外（不受其势力范围变化的影响）。这种增长虽然与其它部门人员的增长关系紧密，却和这个殖民帝国的大小没有任何关系，甚至没有殖民地都可以。那么增长的百分比是多少？考虑到数据的普遍性，我们有必要放弃这个在二战期间伴随着事务减少（指殖民地的减少）的人员急增。我们要关注的是和平时期的增长率，比如1935年到1939年间的5.24%和1947年到1954年间的6.55%。两者平均起来为每年5.89%，这个百分比和1914到1928年期间海军局人员增长的百分比极为接近。 Further and detailed statistical analysis of departmental staffs would be inappropriate in such an article as this. It is hoped, however, to reach a tentative conclusion regarding the time likely to elapse between a given official's first appointment and the later appointment of his two or more assistants. Dealing with the problem of pure staff accumulation, all the researches so far completed point to an average increase of about 5¾ per cent per year. This fact established, it now becomes possible to state Parkinson's Law in mathematical form, thus: 如果再进一步对各部门人员数量进行数据分析，对于本文这种类型的文章是不合适的。但是，读者肯定想知道一位官员上任到他任命两到三名助手大概需要多长的时间间隔。对于这个纯增长（只有增长，没有下降）问题，到目前为止完成的所有研究都指向每年5¾这个平均增长率。这个事实即已确定，现在就有可能用数学形式描述帕金森定律了。如下： In any public administrative department not actually at war the staff increase may be expected to follow this formula: 和平时期任何公共行政部门其员工的增长可能都会遵循下面的公式： Where k is the number of staff seeking promotion through the appointment of subordinates; p represents the difference between the ages of appointment and retirement; m is the number of man-hours devoted to answering minutes within the department; and n is the number of effective units being administered. Then x will be the number of new staff required each year. 这里的k是希望通过任命下属来谋求升职的官员数；p代表入职年龄与退休年龄之差；m是部门内部回复备忘录所需的工时；n是其实际管辖的单位数。于是x将是每年需要的新员工数。 Mathematicians will, of course, realise that to find the percentage increase they must multiply x by 100 and divide by the total of the previous year, thus: 当然，数学家们知道将x乘100再除以前一年的人员总数，可以得到人员增加的百分比。如下： where y represents the total original staff. And this figure will invariably prove to be between 5.17 per cent and 6.56 per cent, irrespective of any variation in the amount of work (if any) to be done. 这里y代表原有人员总数。得到的（x的）结果总是在5.17到6.56之间浮动，和工作量的变化（如果有的话）无关。 The discovery of this formula and of the general principles upon which it is based has, of course, no emotive value. No attempt has been made to inquire whether departments ought to grow in size. Those who hold that this growth is essential to gain full employment are fully entitled to their opinion. Those who doubt the stability of an economy based upon reading each other's minutes are equally entitled to theirs. Parkinson's Law is a purely scientific discovery, inapplicable except in theory to the politics of the day. It is not the business of the botanist to eradicate the weeds. Enough for him if he can tell us just how fast they grow. 当然，这个（新发现的）公式和其背后的那些普遍规律并不包含研究者的政治态度。我们没要质疑各部门是否应该增员。那些认为公务员队伍的壮大可以（促进经济）扩大就业的人有他们的道理，而那些认为经济稳定并不取决于官场行政（阅读彼此的备忘录）的人也有他们的道理。帕金森定律只是纯粹的科学发现，除了在理论上说得通，其实并不适用于如今存在的政治问题。（就像）除杂草不是植物学家要干的事。植物学家只要告诉我们杂草长得多快就可以了。