"Committee - a group of men who individually can do nothing but as a group decide that nothing can be done"

The witticism from Fred Allen highlights the often-parodied inefficiency of committee decision-making. Committees, in theory, are formed from groups of individuals pooling their expertise and perspectives to reach better solutions than one person alone. However, Allen’s observation captures a reversal of that ideal. He suggests committees become forums not for collective action, but for collective inaction , a chorus of voices agreeing, through some paradoxical process, that action is impossible.

This sentiment springs from widespread experiences with bureaucracy. When faced with a challenge, an individual may be limited by their skills or authority, yet is nimble enough to attempt a solution or fail in the process. In contrast, committees can serve as both a diffusion of responsibility and a multiplication of objections. Each member, aware of their limited agency, often defers decisions or proposes further study. Rather than the synergy of collaboration, the result may be a stalemate, each person’s caution reinforced by others’ hesitancy.

Allen’s humor exposes a common human dynamic: collective gatherings, designed to promote action, can stifle it. Decisions are analyzed and delayed; motivations become diluted. When the responsibility is shared, accountability becomes unclear, leading to a tendency toward conservative, risk-averse choices. This is often masked by procedural formalities, where debate and subcommittees substitute for action, leaving problems unresolved.

Shrewdly, Allen’s joke also draws attention to how organizations sometimes create committees more to give the appearance of activity than to facilitate meaningful outcomes. The mere existence of a committee implies effort, regardless of results. The line satirizes this culture of “busy nothingness,” where time and resources are spent on meetings and discussions rather than decisive progress.

Ultimately, Allen’s quip serves as a critique of structure over substance, cautioning that the formation of groups does not guarantee effectiveness, and may, if not managed carefully, reinforce inertia rather than innovation.