Pareto Principle

Success Archives

Home / The archive / Pareto Principle

07 / Priorities · Guide & worksheet

The 80/20
Principle

Find the concentration. Check the numbers.

Some causes contribute much more than others. Use a small ranked table to find where effort might matter most—without assuming your situation must follow an exact 80/20 split.

Try a focus audit   ↓

Free to use and print. No account needed.

The idea behind the shorthand

Joseph Juran applied the name Pareto Principle to the pattern of a relatively small number of contributors accounting for much of an effect. His 1974 account distinguishes Pareto’s work on wealth distribution from Juran’s broader application. [1]

The practical question is where contributions are concentrated. The slogan “80/20” is a starting hypothesis, not a rule to impose on every dataset.

Choose one outcome you can count

Pick a specific question: which support topics create the most tickets, which repeated problems consume time, or which activities produce a defined result? Keep the measurement period and unit consistent.

A count of complaints is not the same as hours spent resolving them. Revenue is not profit. Choose the measure that fits the decision and write down its limits before sorting the rows.

The Juran Institute describes Pareto analysis as ranking contributors and examining their cumulative impact. [2] Our worksheet adds a small test and review step so the ranking leads to a decision.

A worked example: fifty repeated questions

A fictional community workshop records fifty questions over a month. Each is assigned one primary topic, so a single question is not counted twice.

Original illustrative data: 50 questions
TopicCountShare
Finding the room2244%
What to bring1326%
Registration816%
Accessibility48%
Other36%

The top two categories account for 35 of 50 questions: 70%. That is two of five categories, or 40% of the categories—not 20%. The concentration is still useful.

The team tests clearer directions and a short “what to bring” message for the next workshop. It keeps accessibility information prominent even though it represents fewer questions. Frequency is not the only measure of importance.

From a ranking to a test

  1. State the outcome, time window, and unit.
  2. Collect a small set of observations with consistent categories.
  3. Sort the totals from largest to smallest.
  4. Calculate each share: category total divided by the overall total.
  5. Select one improvement to test and keep the comparison conditions in view.

In the example, fewer questions next month could reflect clearer information, fewer attendees, or a different audience. Record those changes before claiming that the edit caused an improvement.

The useful many still matter

  • Do not erase essential work. A rare safety, accessibility, or legal issue may deserve attention regardless of frequency.
  • Do not force a breakpoint. If contributions are evenly spread, the data may not support a “vital few” story.
  • Watch category choices. One very broad category can look important simply because it combines many different causes.
  • Repeat the check. A historical ranking can change after an intervention or a shift in demand.

Put it to work

80/20 focus audit

Print this sheet or copy the prompts into a notebook. Nothing needs to be entered into this website.

Opens your browser’s print dialog. Choose Save as PDF if available.

80/20 focus audit

Success Archives · successarchives.com/pareto-principle/

1. Question, measure, and period

What result am I counting? What dates and units am I using?

2. Contributors and totals

List up to five categories with comparable counts or amounts.

3. Rank and calculate

Sort largest first. Find the top contributors’ share of the total.

4. Responsibilities and blind spots

Which low-frequency items still matter? What might the categories hide?

5. One test and a review

What will change, what will stay comparable, and when will I check?

What if my results are nowhere near 80/20?

Keep the actual result. You are checking for useful concentration, not trying to prove the slogan. A 60/30 pattern, a broad spread, or an unclear result can all change where you put your attention.

Sources & editorial notes

  1. Juran: The Non-Pareto Principle (1974) — Juran’s own retrospective account of the naming and application.
  2. Juran Institute: Pareto principle and analysis guide — Ranked contributions, cumulative impact, and useful-many terminology.

The dataset and focus-audit worksheet are original illustrations. An observed concentration is not proof of causation.

Sources reviewed September 16, 2026. All worksheets and worked examples are original Success Archives material. Source links are ordinary references; no affiliate links are enabled.

Scroll to Top