It is not possible to determine whether the 80:20 rule applies to the ratio of, 'the number of people who are familiar with this economic law to the number of people who aren't.' Nevertherless, Pareto's law is just as intriguing and absorbing as Adam Smith's free market economics when confronted with in the first instance, and probably as contrary to free market dynamics.
And it is even inspiring that one UK company has established itself as Pareto Law: "Pareto Law takes its name from Vilfredo Pareto’s 80:20 principle. This economic law stated that 80% of Italy’s wealth was owned by a mere 20%. Putting this theory into business practice, Pareto Law believe that 80% of a company’s business will be generated by 20% of the sales team."
In business terms, the theory is precise if taken from a relative perspective, and not so much absolute. Say - for example - if you were look at the proportion of power (by that, I refer to control) in a company, you might find that 20% are top-level management who have 80% control, whilst 80% company labourers (including mid-management) may possibly have a 20% influence over that respective company. The amusing thing is that disproportion could not have been more optimal and even more of a paradox in the case of Pareto. While the numerator may have more influence than the denominator, it changes under a totally different scenario. Now take tangible output in a company; the workers will be responsible for 80% of tangible output, while the top-level will constituate for the other 20%. It can be refined over and over and that's the beauty of 80:20...
Still, 80:20 is not confined to business. Look around you, when you see disproportion or inequality, you might think of Pareto.
No comments:
Post a Comment