Too many cooks spoil the broth. Everything has a saturation point.

Too many cooks in the kitchen

The former

Too many. The person's voice gets muddied. But at the same time, different opinions can be helpful sometimes. We can have blindspots.

So that's my answer then, not enough people. Even though it's nobody else's business.

I think "too many" causes issues more commonly than too few. If people communicated better, though, or generally just had a better sense of solidarity, I'd probably be more inclined to say too few.

Always too many. Less is more 😌 unless we’re talking about food, then more is more

Too many is more complicated.

For complications it's always going to be too many people, but not enough people just makes things take longer as well, things will take longer either way, so there's not really a practical difference when it comes to results...you have to find a sweet spot in between

3.4
A manager went to the Master Programmer and showed him the requirements document for a new application. The manager asked the Master: "How long will it take to design this system if I assign five programmers to it?"

"It will take one year," said the Master promptly.

"But we need this system immediately or even sooner! How long will it take if I assign ten programmers to it?"

The Master Programmer frowned. "In that case, it will take two years."

"And what if I assign a hundred programmers to it?"

The Master Programmer shrugged. "Then the design will never be completed," he said.

Too many