Skip to main content

Local Optimization Trap

A Derived Failure Pattern of Fragmented Metrics and Systemic Blindness

Summary​

Local Optimization Trap is a Failure Pattern in which, while local improvements and optimizations accumulate, the behavior and purpose of the system as a whole are lost.

What this Pattern describes is not the error of choosing local optimization itself. It depicts a structure in which, in an environment where measurement and responsibility are fragmented, rational decisions continue to be made in various places, and as a result, the system converges toward failure as a whole.

Context​

In large-scale software and organizations, different goals and indicators are set for each function, team, and component.

Each unit does its best within the given scope, and tries to produce locally clear results such as performance improvement, quality enhancement, and cost reduction.

However, how those optimizations connect to the purpose of the system as a whole is not necessarily shared.

Forces​

The main dynamics that generate this Pattern are as follows:

  • Fragmentation of indicators
    Each team and function is evaluated by different indicators, and common indicators showing overall optimization do not exist.

  • Fixation of responsibility boundaries
    Impact outside one's own area of responsibility is not considered, and the field of view for optimization naturally narrows.

  • Local visibility of success
    Partial results are easy to measure and evaluate, and impact on the whole is hard to see.

  • High coordination cost
    Coordination to discuss overall optimization is heavy, and making decisions independently in various places looks more rational.

Failure Mode​

When local optimizations chain together, the behavior of the system as a whole becomes hard to explain.

As a result, the following forms of breaking proceed simultaneously:

  • Improvements cancel each other out
    One optimization increases the burden on another location, and effects do not appear as a whole.

  • Bottlenecks continue to move
    Improving one location causes another location to congest, falling into a constant unstable state.

  • The overall picture cannot be explained
    Why this configuration exists cannot be explained as specific decisions.

Consequences​

Countermeasures​

The following are not a list of solutions, but counter-patterns for reconnecting the field of view for decisions against Failure Mode.

  • Make explicit the correspondence between local indicators and overall purpose
    Share to which purpose hypothesis each optimization connects.

  • Observe results at two granularities
    Separate and handle improvements locally and impact on the whole.

  • Treat coordination as a design decision
    Accept coordination cost not as failure, but as a structural choice.

Resulting Context​

Local improvements continue to be made, but they are tied to overall purpose.

As a result, local optimization is treated as a hypothesis toward overall optimization, and reconstructed as learnable improvement activity.

See also​

  • Metric-less Improvement
    The foundational pattern in which, in situations where the whole cannot be measured, optimization by local indicators continues to be rationalized.

  • Decision-less Agility
    A structure in which, because decisions regarding overall purpose are postponed, local optimizations accumulate without being corrected.

Appendix: Conceptual References​

Appendix: References​

  • Donella H. Meadows, Thinking in Systems: A Primer, 2008.
  • Eliyahu M. Goldratt, Jeff Cox, The Goal: A Process of Ongoing Improvement, 1984.
  • Russell L. Ackoff, Redesigning the Future: A Systems Approach to Societal Problems, 1974.
  • W. Edwards Deming, Out of the Crisis, 1982.
Last updated on by Hiroshi Kurabayashi