A spectre is haunting the modern world: Social Procrastination Effectively Controlling Thought and Reducing Efficiency. The traditional name is bureaucracy. What is novel is that it fills a void left by the abandonment of manufacturing as the basis of economy. It is an expanding form of white-collar work. Management has always been a stable part of productivity, which until recently has meant making industrial goods. Since most of our tangibles are now made overseas, managing the affairs of others has become the basis of our domestic economy. While jobs are necessary to justify one’s slice of the economic pie, such jobs do not necessarily produce actual wealth.

Literally, bureaucracy is rule by the office worker rather than by elected representatives. It is a form of governance committed to sustain itself in a cozy indoor environment. It feeds its own sense of authority; it likes to expand and flex its muscles. Government is the art of regulating society, and bureaucracy has been an essential arm of it. But the tail now wags the dog. With the collapse of “real” productivity, paperwork and procedure become ends in themselves, proliferating make-work projects. Regulation requires “feasibility studies” and “consultant reports”—more white-collar employment—driving up costs and leading to more regulation and more reports in a recursive cycle. But, above all, a bureaucratic mentality spills over into society at large to become a paralyzing attitude of can’t do. Ironically, it gives lip service to participation and inclusiveness, while overemphasizing protocol. It is more about talk than action. The new slogan could be: “Process is our most important product!”

The result is endless rounds of committee meetings, discussion and contention, blathering about procedure, deferring tangible results. Projects with budgets that seemed feasible at one stage suffer from inflated costs that send them back for more rounds of study and consultation, adding further to the costs. Quests for additional financing require yet more “strategizing” before they can proceed. Sadly, this mentality takes root even in small communities with a proud tradition of volunteer action. Now we have “volunteers” who hope to be paid to talk rather than do Expectations have changed, and a whole new politically correct vapid lingo has evolved accordingly.

It can be no surprise, in that ethos, that some people are reluctant to serve on committees and boards. Compare the typical committee meeting to the experience of musicians jamming together, of dancing a choreography, or singing in a choir. While nothing tangible is produced in these activities, they are rewarding experiences. Perhaps committee meetings could be conducted as impromptu opera or stand-up comedy?

It is essential to regulate the rapid expanse of technology and the effects of social change in a world reeling under its own complexity and densification. But, to do what is needed, bureaucracy must be a streamlined and efficient tool, oriented toward precise goals, not merely a secure form of employment, a tedious substitute for entertainment, a power grab, or an impediment to accomplishing anything at all. Getting there begins with the will to get to the real point in meetings. When there is a common intent to focus on substance, there is less temptation to settle for procedure or be derailed by dissenting opinions. Transitioning to non-material forms of human activity is necessary to save the planet. Can it at least be fun?