Boosting Productivity With Parkinson’s Law

Visualize the last time you were working on a project for your small business. Think about each action you took. Did you stop to Google something that you didn’t really need to? Did you check your email? Did you overhear a news story on the television and find yourself watching a news story for a few minutes?

These are called bubbles and they are small amounts of time that add up to huge losses in productivity. Here is a simple solution to this problem using Parkinson’s Law and a little bit of leverage.

What is Parkinson’s Law?

Parkinson’s Law says “Work expands so as to fill the time available for its completion.” Sound familiar?

You experienced Parkinson’s Law when you planned that trip out of town and had just enough time to get the final details tied up the day before the trip. You organized the trip over time having just enough time to get everything done.

You also experienced Parkinson’s Law in college when you procrastinated on a project for weeks and then completed the entire paper over an eight hour Red Bull binge – and got an A! Weeks worth of work was accomplished in a fraction of the time.

Most tasks in life take nowhere near as long as we think they do to complete. We have been trained to believe that quality and excellence are time consuming. But are they? A good deal of our time spent on tasks in spent with unnecessary preparation – fighting Parkinson’s Law all the while.

Next time you are working on a project ask yourself “Does what I am working on directly relate to the output?”

You will be surprised to find that often the answer is no.

Productivity Exercise

Unfortunately, as naturally inquisitive creatures we have a very hard time stopping ourselves from wasting time. Using Parkinson’s Law as leverage instead of dead weight will help you complete tasks in 80% less time. Here’s how:

Choose a task. Choose a task that is important to complete. It is important that the task is important as this will create some of the leverage.

Choose an Activity. Find activities and commitments within your set time period that you cannot put off or reschedule. Activities might include your job, a class or a group activity.

Schedule. Schedule your chosen task to be started within a limited amount of time before the activity.

Follow Through. Follow through and complete the task before going to the activity.

Observe. Be aware of what you filter out of that time in order to be productive. When faced with the leverage created by an impending deadline what were the core activities you used to complete the task.

This exercise will help you become aware of what actions create results and which actions are fillers. Use this exercise on a regular basis for a few weeks. Measure the amount of time it took you to complete the task before trying the exercise and then measure the amount of time it took you after the exercise when you removed the time barriers.

You will be amazed at how little time many activities really require to get done. Your results will be the same as before but the required time will be significantly less!

Note: Do not use this exercise on critical tasks when first starting as you may find that you run out of time. For more info on building the business of your dreams visit:

California Lemon Law – The Basics of This State’s Lemon Law

California lemon law has been designed for customers buying new vehicles from loads of troubles caused due to the manufacturers. It tries to provide relevant compensation for customers of defective vehicles including automobiles, motorcycles, trucks, boats etc. It also includes other consumer appliances like computers, RV`s etc. As a consumer you need to be well informed and educated about the laws which have been framed for your welfare. It saves you from the corrupt manufacturers wanting to rob you of your money. The California lemon law is one of the best law to deal with lemon vehicles framed in the country and with the help of a proper experienced California lemon law attorney you can truly get what belongs to you. This unique law is also known as California’s Song-Beverly Consumer Act. Let’s look into the California’s Song-Beverly Consumer Act and what are the unique ruling it has in this law

The factors which make your product a lemon under the California lemon law are: Your product in general must have under taken several repairs within the manufacturers warranty period and the manufacturer has also failed in his attempt to repair the product within the warranty period. There are many manufacturers today who are selling defected item in a comparably high price claiming high quality. A lemon product in general does not perform as its manufacturer has claimed it to be performing. Even if you have bought a used vehicle which is defective you can receive a valid replacement or compensation under this law. Defective products which have been bought in lease within the warranty period can also be called a lemon within this consumer act.

There are various firms now days which provides you with lemon law attorneys who can handle your case. An experienced California lemon law attorney can help you get the perfect compensation you deserve for your lemon product. The compensations under this law can include cash compensation, refund or a replacement for your lemon product. On a meritorious claim the California’s Song-Beverly Consumer Act also requires the manufacturer to pay for the attorney fees of the consumer. Thus, this law is truly economically feasible for even those consumers who cannot afford a suitable attorney.

It is your duty to know more about the laws that have framed your welfare. With the complete knowledge of the California lemon law you can now buy any product of your choice without any doubts running in the back of your mind because you can almost guarantee a replacement or compensation if the product does not perform as it claims.

Product Liability History

When we purchase a product and it falls short of our expectations, it can be very disappointing, especially if a large sum of money were used to purchase the product. But what if the product caused a traumatic injury or death to a member of our family or anyone else it came in contact with? We would be devastated. What if we found out that the manufacturer or any one involved in the making or distribution of this product knew it to be un-safe but continued to make it available to the public? We would want anyone involved in getting this product in the hands of the consumer to be held responsible Products liability is an area of law whereby a consumer of a product may seek compensation for injury or property damage allegedly caused by that product. Responsible parties may include the manufacturer, contractor, assembler, distributer or store owner. There are five theories in which a products liability claim can be made. These are express warranties, implied warranties, negligence, fraud, and strict liability.

An express warranty is a promise from the seller to the buyer that the product meets industry standards and is fit for use. Statements such as,” Satisfaction guaranteed” or “This tie is 100% silk ” are express warranties.

An implied warranty arises from the sale itself without a promise from the seller. The product is of average quality and appropriate for the purpose it was intended. In the theory of negligence, one must prove that the seller did not exercise reasonable care in the manufacture or distribution of the product or give adequate instructions for safe use. Fraud is an intentional misrepresentation of the product by the seller. Strict liability holds the manufacturer responsible regardless of whether they were at fault.

The product was defective when it left the manufacturer. Laws regulating product liability can be found in article 2 of the Uniform Commercial Code.

The development of product liability laws can be traced back centuries. Product liability laws originate from English common law and tort law. A tort is a wrong committed against a person or their property. Common law refers to the standards that communities followed to govern themselves. Each court case became part of the common law, and consecutive court cases were decided using the decisions of prior court cases. All states use common law except for Louisiana, which uses France’s Napoleonic code. There are no federal laws governing product liability. The earliest common law view involved the English case of Winterbottom v. Wright in 1842 (Win 42). At this time the common law asserted the “privity limitation”. Privity refers to those in direct contact with each other. Mr.Winterbottom was employed by the Postmaster General to operate the mail coach. The mail coach fell apart and Mr. Winterbottom was injured. Mr. Wright had previously repaired the mail coach for the Postmaster General. Mr. Winterbottom sued Mr.Wright but lost. Mr. Winterbottom had no direct contact (privity) with Mr. Wright, only with the Postmaster General. Mr. Wright was however responsible for the failure of the mail coach. The court ruled against Mr. Winterbottom.

10 years later there came the case of Thomas v. Winchester (Tho 52). Mr. Winchester, a druggist, mistakenly prepared a deadly medication called belladonna and sold it to Mr. Thomas as extract of dandelion. It had been mislabeled. Mr. Thomas was not harmed, but his wife was. The court set aside the privity rule and ruled in favor of Mr. Thomas. The court held that a dangerous substance, (ingesting mislabeled poison), was very different from a defective wheel as in the Winterbottom case.

More than 70 years later came the case of MacPherson v. Buick (Mac 1916). This was the first case decision that rejected the privity rule. MacPherson alleged he was driving a Buick at 8 miles per hour when the wooden wheel broke and he was injured. Buick manufactured the automobile but another manufacturer supplied the tire. The court ruled in favor of Mr. MacPherson. The court ruled that there should be a standard for negligence cases and that whether the injury is from a defective part, as in the Winterbottom case or a deadly poison, in the Thomas case, they should be treated the same.

These are only a few of the thousands of cases that have shaped modern day product liability law. The people, their family members, and others who came in contact with unsafe products paved the way for us to have safer laws.