Why Can Coordination Create More Confusion?
Imagine two people approaching a road crossing. One stops to let the other pass, but the other stops too, assuming the first has the right of way. Both wait, each expecting the other to make the next move. A simple act of courtesy has left both people unable to decide what to do.
Now imagine one person finally stepping forward, only for the other to move at the same moment. Both stop again, each trying to accommodate the other’s movement. Neither is being unreasonable, yet each response complicates the situation. This is exactly what happens in organisations when attempts to coordinate actions create further uncertainty instead of resolving it.
When Agreement Multiplies
Coordination is usually treated as the remedy for fragmentation. If teams exchange updates, attend meetings, and check decisions, their actions should become more consistent. Yet each exchange can introduce another version of what was agreed. More contact does not necessarily produce more common understanding.
A team may leave a meeting believing a decision is settled, while another hears it as provisional. A third sees the same words as permission to proceed, but only within its remit. Each coordinates from a different starting point. The organisation can become busier while becoming less coherent.
The Hidden Work of Interpretation
The difficulty lies beneath the exchange of information. People interpret messages through prior decisions, pressures, and expectations. A clarification that reassures one group may signal a change of direction to another, even when the words appear identical. Coordination travels through meanings that are not necessarily shared.
As interpretations circulate, people adjust to the decision and to their assumptions about others’ responses. Those adjustments become new signals for others to interpret. Confusion can grow without anyone intending it. Invisible friction grows from the attempt to anticipate one another.
When Coordination Loses Coherence
The question is what gives coordination a common reference point. Without shared meaning, each conversation can refine one understanding while altering another. Agreement at the centre may become variation at the edges. Coordination cannot create coherence when the meaning being coordinated is unstable.
Confusion is not always evidence of poor communication or unwillingness to collaborate. It may arise when actions are coordinated without recognising the different interpretations shaping them. The effort is sincere, yet divergence grows unnoticed. Sometimes the system creates confusion precisely because everyone is trying to keep in step.