Are There Really Too Many Cooks in the Kitchen?

We've all heard it; we've all said it: "There are too many cooks in the kitchen." The phrase is widely understood as meaning too many people working on a project or decision is counterproductive and inefficient—too many voices or opinions slow down the process and an inferior product results. For the most part, we accept this proverb to be true; however, my work with a recent client caused me to reflect on whether we've been thinking about this illustration accurately.

Appetizer: Origins and Contexts

Before offering another perspective, consider the origins of the popular phrase. Although its inception is unknown definitively, we know the phrase likely dates prior to the 16th century because it was referenced in a 1575 written work as a "proverb." At the time, the phrase read "the more cooks, the worse potage" (potage is a thick soup or stew), later the phrase became "too many cooks spoil the broth/soup," and now the phrase has evolved into what we know and use today.

Recently, I was working with a client who needed help with a specific process improvement, and one of the managers remarked that there were too many cooks in the kitchen (and, to be fair, there were certainly a lot of voices in this particular process). As we examined the issue closely together, we observed that all of the "cooks" involved were actually making meaningful contributions. The root issue, we discovered, was a failure of leadership.

The employees involved in the process would make suggestions or ask questions about a particular project, and the project would linger until the manager would answer the questions or approve the suggestions. The employees were timely and helpful in their specific contributions. Ironically, the manager was stalling the process with a lack of decision-making.

Entrée: A New Perspective on an Old Cliché

The more I thought about the cooks in the kitchen cliché, the more I realized how misleading it is. Although the analogy accurately characterizes the inefficiencies that can result from too much input, it incorrectly identifies and/or implies the people at fault. And that is, perhaps, the danger with this particular proverb.

In most cases, cooks are just doing their jobs. To run an efficient kitchen, you actually need many skilled cooks. In fact, from a People First Leadership perspective, we want more cooks in the kitchen because our ideas, strategies, and decisions are ultimately enhanced when more people contribute.

But the key to success is a chef, for it is the chef who is responsible for how the cooks function. A more apt diagnosis, then, might be: “There’s no chef in the kitchen.” What most of these too-many-cooks circumstances really call for is leadership, ownership, and decision-making. If there are only cooks in the proverbial kitchen, then yes, failure is a likely outcome; however, when there are cooks and a capable chef, the outcome is much more likely to be successful.

Dessert: Cooks in the Kitchen or Where's the Chef?

Yes, too many cooks in the kitchen is still an apt analogy, but it's important that we remember how and why the cooks got there in the first place. The issue is almost always that there is not a capable chef in the kitchen to lead the cooks. Perhaps instead of observing that there are too many cooks, we should start asking: "Where's the chef?"

At People Are First Consulting, our goal is to create capable chefs, leaders who put their people first and are skilled at fundamental management practices such as decision-making, delegation, and accountability. Let us help your cooks by helping your chefs!