A situation: a subcomponent of a larger plan doesn't fit the expected measurement.

Which do you do?

Update the larger plan to fit the new measurement.

Modify the way you interpret the measurement to fit within the plan.

Obviously the former is the correct answer in a fundamental sense.

But what if the plan is very very large and has tons of momentum, and if the plan had to change it would require massive amounts of re-coordination work to update the plan?

In that case, "fudging" the measurement a bit doesn't seem quite so bad.

Maybe the measurement was wrong anyway!

Especially if you, the owner of the subcomponent, will have more to answer for if your measurement is wrong.

It's easier to "go with the flow".

This logic is partly where greenshifting comes from, and is one of the reasons that kayfabe arises in large organizations.

A plan that each subcomponent realizes is invalid but which reality (or our measurement of it) has to conform to.