Toolkit — Anti-Pattern Playbook¶

This playbook is a set of field countermeasures for common system failures. Each entry is structured for fast use:

What you’ll see (symptoms)
What’s really happening (mechanism)
Fast test (how to confirm)
Countermove (artifact / constraint / authority / cadence)
Default (what to do if people avoid the fix)

Use it in reviews, retro-style sessions, and whenever “process” starts feeling heavy but outcomes don’t improve.

Anti-Pattern 1 — “Alignment” as a Goal¶

What you’ll see¶

“We need alignment” becomes the problem statement.
Meetings increase; decisions don’t.
People leave with different interpretations.

What’s really happening¶

A failing decision type is being disguised to avoid conflict.

Fast test¶

Ask: “Alignment about which decision?” If nobody can answer in one sentence, it’s not alignment—it’s avoidance.

Countermove¶

Decision: force a decision type (priority/scope/ownership/…)
Artifact: create a decision log entry with “Decision changed” field
Constraint: timebox the decision + default outcome

Default¶

If the decision isn’t named in 10 minutes, stop the meeting and assign an owner to produce an Observable Failure Statement.

Anti-Pattern 2 — Ritual Without Artifact¶

What you’ll see¶

Recurring meetings exist “because we always do them.”
Outcomes are verbal; nothing persists.
The same topics reappear weekly.

What’s really happening¶

Cadence is substituting for a decision machine.

Fast test¶

Ask: “Show me the last 3 artifacts this meeting produced.” If there are none, it’s a ritual.

Countermove¶

Artifact: define a single required output (one page / one table)
Constraint: “No artifact, no meeting”
Cadence: shorten or remove until artifact exists

Default¶

If artifact isn’t produced, automatically cancel the next occurrence and run async.

Anti-Pattern 3 — Artifact Without Decision¶

What you’ll see¶

Dashboards/slides/docs are produced regularly.
People feel “informed,” but actions don’t change.
Artifacts are optimized for polish.

What’s really happening¶

Reporting is replacing decision-making.

Fast test¶

Ask: “Which decision changed because of this artifact?” If there’s no answer, it’s theater.

Countermove¶

Artifact change: add mandatory fields:
“Decision changed”
“Owner”
“Next action + date”
Constraint: artifact must contain a decision or it’s invalid

Default¶

If no decision is recorded, the system defaults to the previous decision (explicitly) and escalates the missing decision to the decider.

Anti-Pattern 4 — Constraintless “Guidelines”¶

What you’ll see¶

“It’s just guidance.”
Exceptions are constant.
Under stress, the system vanishes.

What’s really happening¶

There is no enforcement mechanism; the system is optional.

Fast test¶

Ask: “What happens when someone ignores this?” If the answer is “nothing,” it’s not a system.

Countermove¶

Constraint: add one enforceable rule
Default: define automatic behavior when ignored
Authority: name who enforces it

Default¶

If enforcement authority can’t be named, redesign the system to a smaller unit of analysis where authority exists.

Anti-Pattern 5 — Framework Stacking¶

What you’ll see¶

New systems are added; none are removed.
Multiple sources of truth exist for the same decision.
Teams spend time translating between systems.

What’s really happening¶

Systems collide or duplicate decision ownership.

Fast test¶

Ask: “Which artifact is the source of truth for priority/scope/etc.?” If there are two, you have a collision.

Countermove¶

Precedence rule: declare which system wins for that decision domain
Removal/subordination: retire or subordinate one system
Landscape matrix: map collisions explicitly

Default¶

No new system may launch until it names what it replaces/subordinates and where the single source artifact will live.

Anti-Pattern 6 — Consensus Veto Everywhere¶

What you’ll see¶

Decisions take too long.
“We need more buy-in” repeats.
The most risk-averse actor controls outcomes.

What’s really happening¶

Consensus creates distributed veto power and rewards avoidance.

Fast test¶

Ask: “Who decides if we disagree?” If unclear, you don’t have decision rights.

Countermove¶

Authority boundary: name the decider
Participation rule: consult vs inform
Constraint: timeboxed decision window + default outcome
Artifact: decision log with dissent recorded

Default¶

If the group can’t agree on a decider, escalate that as the decision to leadership immediately (ownership is the blocker).

Anti-Pattern 7 — Metric Capture¶

What you’ll see¶

Metrics improve; reality worsens.
People hide work to protect numbers.
Metrics become performance weapons.

What’s really happening¶

Measurement became an incentive system.

Fast test¶

Ask: “Who gets punished or rewarded by this metric?” If the answer is “individuals/teams,” gaming is predictable.

Countermove¶

Separate:
learning metrics (diagnosis)
evaluation metrics (performance)
Add “decision link”:
metrics must map to an action decision log entry

Default¶

If a metric is used for evaluation, it must have an explicit anti-gaming review and be paired with at least one qualitative truth check (incidents, audits, samples).

Anti-Pattern 8 — Legibility Over Truth¶

What you’ll see¶

Status looks green until failure is unavoidable.
Bad news travels slowly.
Artifacts are sanitized.

What’s really happening¶

Artifacts optimize safety/politics over reality.

Fast test¶

Ask: “What does this artifact make harder to say?” If uncertainty and risk aren’t representable, truth is being filtered.

Countermove¶

Artifact: require fields for:
uncertainty
risks with owners
assumptions
“what would change our mind”
Constraint: red/yellow flags require next action + date

Default¶

If uncertainty can’t be written, the artifact is invalid and must be replaced by a simpler decision-focused artifact.

Anti-Pattern 9 — “Everything Is Urgent”¶

What you’ll see¶

Priorities shift constantly.
Work starts but doesn’t finish.
Teams are always “busy,” outcomes lag.

What’s really happening¶

No enforced prioritization and uncontrolled WIP.

Fast test¶

Ask: “What are the top 3 priorities and what are we not doing?” If “not doing” is empty, priority is fake.

Countermove¶

Constraint: WIP limit or initiative cap
Default: new work displaces lowest-priority in-progress work
Artifact: ranked stack with capacity allocation

Default¶

If leadership introduces urgent work, they must name what it displaces (explicit tradeoff rule).

Anti-Pattern 10 — Ownership Fog (“Not My Problem”)¶

What you’ll see¶

Work gets blocked on dependencies.
Escalations replace collaboration.
Interfaces and responsibilities are disputed.

What’s really happening¶

Ownership and interfaces are the real object of control, but the system is trying to control “communication.”

Fast test¶

Ask: “Who owns this interface/domain and what authority do they have?” If unclear, you have boundary failure.

Countermove¶

Artifact: ownership map + interface contract
Constraint: every interface has an owner; changes require owner approval
Authority: escalation path defined

Default¶

If ownership is disputed, default ownership goes to the team operating it in production until reassigned by a named authority.

Anti-Pattern 11 — Hero-Dependent Systems¶

What you’ll see¶

One person makes the system “work.”
Everyone says “ask Alex.”
Progress stalls when the hero is absent.

What’s really happening¶

Interpretation and enforcement live in a person, not in artifacts and defaults.

Fast test¶

Ask: “Could a new hire run this system from artifacts alone?” If not, it’s hero-dependent.

Countermove¶

Move rules into:
decision logs
explicit constraints and defaults
ownership map
Reduce reliance on tacit knowledge

Default¶

If a step requires a person’s memory, treat it as a missing artifact and stop the workflow until it’s captured.

Anti-Pattern 12 — Fossilized Systems (Can’t Die)¶

What you’ll see¶

Nobody remembers why the system exists.
Removing it feels dangerous.
The system survives via identity.

What’s really happening¶

No review cadence and no retirement mechanism.

Fast test¶

Ask: “What failure was this designed to prevent?” If unclear or obsolete, it’s fossilized.

Countermove¶

Add:
sunset clause
review cadence
kill criteria (evidence-based)
Run the System Fitness Checklist

Default¶

If the system can’t justify itself within one review cycle, schedule retirement and protect a replacement only if a proven gap remains.

Fast “What Should We Change First?” Rule¶

When a system is failing, change in this order:

Constraint + default (teeth)
Artifact (inspectability)
Authority boundary (enforcement)
Cadence/trigger (operational fit)
Unit of analysis (scale validity)

If you start with cadence or templates, you usually get theater.

Mini Index (Anti-Pattern → Countermove)¶

Alignment talk → force decision type + timebox + default
Too many meetings → “no artifact, no meeting”
Pretty reports → add “decision changed” + next action
Optional guidelines → add enforceable constraint + default
Too many frameworks → precedence + remove/subordinate
Consensus slow → decider + consult/inform + default
Metrics gamed → split learning vs evaluation + decision link
Green status lies → uncertainty/risk fields + red requires action
Everything urgent → WIP/initiative cap + displacement default
Blocked dependencies → ownership map + interface contract + escalation
Hero hub → externalize into artifacts + defaults
Fossilization → sunset clause + kill criteria