Institutions preferred causes they could name.
When outcomes shifted without visible conflict, they searched for explanations that preserved their models. It was safer to believe in coincidence than in coordination. Safer still to assign credit to something already legible.
He noticed the shift in language first.
Meetings ended with phrases like "better alignment" and "improved collaboration." Facilitators praised tone instead of results. Reports cited culture, not structure.
The system was attributing success upward.
Good.
At a midweek briefing, a senior coordinator received unexpected recognition. Applause followed—measured, polite. The coordinator smiled, surprised, then quickly adjusted into gratitude.
Leadership loved moments like this. They stabilized narratives.
No one mentioned timing.
No one mentioned routing.
No one mentioned who had been in the room first.
He sat near the back, hands folded, posture neutral.
Invisible again.
Afterward, the coordinator approached him with a nod that lingered half a second longer than before. Not suspicion. Courtesy.
"Good work lately," the coordinator said.
"For what?" he asked.
The coordinator hesitated, then laughed softly. "Exactly."
Attribution without clarity. The safest kind.
The system updated.
[Performance drivers: reassigned.]
[Influence source: externalized.]
Externalization reduced internal scrutiny. It moved attention away from nodes that did not fit the model.
He adjusted accordingly—less movement through the maintenance corridor, more time in official spaces. The path had done its work. Overuse now would invite mapping.
Blind spots only mattered while they were assumed empty.
She found him in the courtyard that evening, standing where shadows from the upper levels broke the light into irregular patterns.
"They think it's management," she said quietly. "That the improvements came from restructuring."
"They would," he replied.
"They're preparing a report."
"Reports crystallize mistakes," he said. "Once written, they defend themselves."
She watched students pass, their conversations forming temporary constellations. "That protects you."
"For now."
"And after?"
He considered. The answer mattered less than the cadence.
"After," he said, "they'll look for inefficiencies to correct."
"And they'll look in the wrong place."
"Yes."
The system confirmed it later that night.
[Optimization focus: leadership layer.]
[Operational nodes: stable.]
Misattribution had become policy.
He leaned back in his chair, lights off, listening to the quiet recalibration of a structure convinced it had learned the lesson.
It hadn't.
False attribution was not an error to systems. It was a feature—a way to preserve coherence when reality drifted.
And coherence, once defended, resisted correction.
He adjusted his own behavior to match the new narrative. Less initiative. More compliance. He let praise flow past him without catching on any surface.
Noise reclaimed him.
Exactly as planned.
Because when institutions corrected the wrong causes, they entrenched the real ones.
And the longer a misclassification held, the harder it became to undo.