False Alignment
False Alignment is the gap between what people say they are optimising for and what their dashboards actually reward in practice. Everyone agrees in meetings, but their KPIs and actions pull in different directions.
What we mean by “False Alignment”
False Alignment occurs when a group appears aligned around a goal or North Star, but the metrics they monitor, escalate, and celebrate do not match that goal. On the surface, the language is shared; underneath, the structure is not.
Why this changes how people read a dashboard
When False Alignment is present, dashboards amplify tension. Different teams point to different “proofs” from the same data, each convinced they are serving the agreed goal.
- Product, marketing, and operations each have dashboards that optimise for their own success metrics, not the shared outcome.
- Initiatives that look good on one dashboard quietly damage another, but the conflict is never made explicit.
When you will feel this term in real life
False Alignment shows up as repeated friction, even in teams that “get along”.
- Too many KPIs — dashboards accumulate metrics to keep everyone happy, instead of clarifying trade-offs.
- Meetings with data but no decisions — each function argues from its own KPI set, and no one can say which should win.
Naming False Alignment is not about blaming teams. It is about noticing that your structures are asking people to win different games.
See this term in context
False Alignment sits underneath:
Related terms in this glossary
False Alignment is often a sign that you need to revisit:
A simple diagnostic question: if you removed a KPI from the dashboard, which teams would protest, and why?