Braess' paradox sounds like the idea of sub-optimization that came out of systems theory. Demming too, emphasized this idea in focusing on how the system worked together and not on highliting the individulal components. For example, he was against employee of the month type awards that awarded individual over group achievement. Does the poisson distribution have any bearing on the waiting room.
In understanding any organization it's important to get at the underlying philosophy that governs it. In most cases, that would be the Newtoninan/Cartesian model...of classical science which has so dominated our thought for these past three centuries. To focus on the part as the solution or the problem is a remnant of the seventeenth century which came to see the part the most real aspect of a thing.
I would think that Braess' paradox would not apply in a simple system, in equilibrium. But where can you find one of those anymore. Any organization is a dynamic, interactive system....that needs to be functioning at a state far from equlibrium-as do all living systems. You will find systems in equilibrium,or the assuption that they should be or can be in equllibrium, in a dysfunctional (Newtonian) organization that stifles innovation and self-organization....which are the keys to survival and success in these turbulent times of exponenetial growth and increasing uncertainty.
Jon Bennett
