Tuesday 10 December 2019

The Optimisation Compulsion

The need for optimisation or continuous improvement originates from production management. There is even a production management method called OPT, which stands for optimisation. We have a general belief in society that optimisation is the foundation for success. Is that really true? Could our exaggerated optimisation rage also be the foundation of failure? Our optimisation tendency has turned into an optimisation compulsion. We tend to optimise just about anything, continuously, from the location where we produce our goods to the partner we share our life with. As a result, nothing is stable and we lose ourselves in endless transformation efforts.

Optimisation works well in a stable environment, where the parameters remain the same for a longer period of time. This is rarely the case, especially if everyone is already optimising everything. All optimisation efforts will prove to be pointless because the environment changes too rapidly, and you will need to change direction before you can complete your optimisation process, which is by definition also a transformation process. Our self-inflicted optimisation compulsion is based on  intellectual blackmailing: “If you don’t optimise, you will not reach the top; you will not make it. It is all or nothing. Therefore, if you don’t make it, it will be your own fault.” This is the typical reasoning in a society based on meritocracy.

I refer to my blogs: “Beschleunigung”, and in Dutch: “Hyperactiviteit” and “Vloeibare Waarden”.

3 comments:

BRS said...

Isn't it a little oversimplified to blame optimization per se? If people were socially aligned on their thinking their different optimizations could be mutually beneficial. The probable reason for the frustrating optimizations that triggered the topic post must have been selfish optimizations by different parties.
The answer to that is the proper educating of those involved, so that their optimizations may be coherent and mutually beneficial.
And, if it's done that way, one could have a useful meritocracy, rather than the contrived ones that we so often see in modern business and politics. Examples of the contrived merits: They have merit, because they are put in charge (in business) or were elected (in politics).

Dyanmisers Solutions said...

I would like more information about this, because it is very nice. Thanks for sharing.

Wim Lahaye said...

I'm afraid this will be hard to do, as your comment is quasi-anonymous and doesn't contain an e-mail link behind the blogger identity.