Bike-shedding is a form of hiding

Cyril Northcote Parkinson was the Dilbert of his day. In 1957, he defined the Law of Triviality, which says the amount of discussion surrounding a change is inversely proportional to the complexity of that change. He gives the example of a committee discussing a £10M nuclear reactor, a £350 bike shed, and a £21 coffee fund. The committee is unable to grasp the enormity of the nuclear reactor, and passes it quickly. In contrast, everyone can visualize a bike shed, so they spend hours on that topic. (After lengthy debate, the committee defers the coffee fund decision to the next meeting.)

Bike-shedding makes it easy to display competence … over something trivial.

Bike-shedding feels good, because you can point to your input … that added little value.

Bike-shedding is an ego-boost, because others listen to you … when you should be listening.

Bike-shedding is appealing, because you can claim momentum … for an unimportant change.

Bike-shedding avoids investing time, energy, thought, or resources into important work. It allows you to hide from the hard discussions and the hard decisions that people need from you.

Refrain from rearranging the deck chairs if the ship is sinking.