How come we’re more productive when we have a full schedule? Why does it take us practically the whole day to complete one tiny task if we have loads of free time?

Two words: Parkinson’s Law.

Parkinson’s Law suggests that work expands to fill the time available for its completion.

We often assume that if only we had more time, we’d be able to do more things, and do them better. Parkinson’s Law suggests that’s not often the case.

If we have an hour to write an email, best believe we’ll use up that whole hour. We’ll spend it writing the email, and rewriting the email, and getting distracted by shiny objects, and suddenly feeling very, very hungry.

If we have only ten minutes to send off that email, we’ll probably finish in 5.

Deadlines and hard stops focus our efforts and attention on the task at hand. Plus, we’re faster and better at doing tedious things if we know in advance when they’re going to end.

Parkinson’s Law explains why my house gets so clean, so quickly when an impromptu guest is coming by.

It also explains why companies stick with an outdated 5-day workweek when plenty of experts agree a 4-day work week would be plenty sufficient. Nothing expands to fill the time allotted like a routine meeting.

I try to hack Parkinson’s Law by scheduling nagging tasks into the nooks and crannies of an already full day, knowing that the momentum of productivity and the time crunch of my next obligation will keep me efficient. If I do need to accomplish a nagging task on an otherwise leisurely day, I’ll set a timer or listen to a short podcast to prevent it from seeping into my whole afternoon.

Parkinson’s Law is another reason I highly discourage setting “get organized” as a New Year’s resolution. If we give ourselves a calendar year to “get organized” we can be sure it’s going to take us that entire year and then some.

If we dedicate a weekend to tackling our organization projects once and for all, we’ll head into Monday with a tidy home.