Allergic to Sludge? Finding and Removing it from Your Organisation
A GAABS Conversation with Harvard Professor Cass Sunstein
When behavioural scientists talk about sludge—those bureaucratic frictions that prevent people from accessing benefits or opportunities—we often discuss it abstractly. But the real power emerges when organisations examine their own processes and ask: what are we unintentionally making harder than it needs to be?
This is what Harvard Professor Cass Sunstein explored during his recent GAABS webinar, drawing from decades at the intersection of government, international development, and private sector transformation. Hosted by GAABS Executive Board Chair Torben Emmerling, their conversation revealed a practical roadmap for spotting and eliminating it.
“I’m allergic to shrimp, lobster, and sludge. Those four things make me kind of sick.”
Where Does Sludge Come From?
The people who impose sludge, Sunstein explained, are so familiar with their processes that they don't see how hard it is for outsiders.
“Typically, it’s people in good faith not seeing that an activity that for them would be child’s play, is for others a nightmare.”
This distinction matters profoundly. Sludge audits aren't about blame—they're about building empathy. At the Department of Homeland Security, initial resistance dissolved once leadership saw the data. Within months, they had eliminated 20 million hours of paperwork burdens annually.
Measuring What Matters
Hours saved matters, but Sunstein cautioned it can distract from what actually counts: outcomes.
He gave as his example the Direct Certification process for free school meals. Rather than requiring forms, the system was directed to automatically enroll eligible children. This prevented cognitive scarcity (see below) and stigma from intervening, much less the time and energy to submit individualized forms for this service.
“Millions of children over the years have had access to free, nutritious lunch or breakfast at school just by virtue of the sludge reduction.”
Sunstein focused on two things:
The time saved was real.
But the metric that mattered most was children fed.
When measuring sludge reduction impact, his recommendation was to focus on outcomes: people screened, trained, supported.
Cognitive Scarcity: Why Sludge Hits Hardest Here
Research shows that poverty depletes cognitive resources the same way sleep deprivation does. When people face economic hardship, their fluid intelligence plummets. This creates cruel mathematics: those who most need support are often least able to navigate the sludge blocking access to it.
“Being poor reduces fluid intelligence…your capacity for self-control is reduced….That’s a double whammy.”
For practitioners, this means prioritising populations most affected by cognitive scarcity when designing audits. An 87-year-old facing a 17-page form faces a different burden than a 40-year-old. A person juggling three jobs experiences forms differently than someone with more bandwidth.
How to Actually Run a Sludge Audit
Sunstein offered a tiered approach for different resource levels with examples that you can take back to your organization right now:
Low-Tech Start:
Ask employees to track time spent on forms, phone waits, and system navigation over two weeks. "It's at least a first cut at the magnitude of the problem," he noted.
Disciplined Approach:
If you have data access, conduct rigorous audit: pick a representative month, extrapolate annually, identify which requirements drive highest costs.
Leverage Existing Tools:
The OECD and New South Wales offer sludge audit templates online.
“Sometimes getting a quick result is better than getting a perfect result. A quick result might be extremely diagnostic about what needs to change.”
Moving Leaders from Awareness to Buy-In
Perhaps the most candid insight came from Sunstein's White House experience:
“People like ideas better if they think the ideas are their own.”
Rather than pitching sludge reduction as something leadership should do, position it as a means to what they already care about. For the World Bank: achieving development goals. For FEMA: saving lives. For companies: productivity and retention.
“If leadership sees that what leadership cares about is promoted by sludge audits and sludge reduction, there will be buy-in.”
When Is Sludge Justified?
Not all sludge should be eliminated. Environmental protection, worker safety, and preventing harmful impulses offer legitimate justifications for administrative friction.
But the amount matters. The U.S. National Environmental Policy Act, for example, now contributes to housing shortages despite its honourable goal. Sludge audits shouldn't aim for zero sludge—they should aim for defensible sludge proportionate to genuine risk.
For Practitioners Moving Forward
What emerges is a clear framework: Recognise the blind spot that designers can't see their own friction. Measure outcomes, not just hours. Start small with quick diagnostics. Link reduction to leadership goals. Attend to equity—sludge hits hardest on those with least cognitive bandwidth. Iterate with regular meetings and visible progress.
For GAABS members in government, corporate, or nonprofit settings, this offers something rare: intellectual rigour paired with practical urgency, grounded in the principle that human dignity means giving people their time back.
A Next Step Worth Taking
Members of GAABS attend webinars like this one to keep up with Behavioural Science.
Our members receive early notification and offers to register for live events like this one with Professor Sunstein. To receive your early notifications, JOIN US.