How Do Committees Fail to Invent?

Technical leaders often assume committees move forward on consensus, but a small group of veto-players can freeze progress and shape standards to mirror their hidden agendas. The article calls this the "fifth column problem" and explains how it emerges when participants silently block proposals, turning the communication structure of the organization into a design constraint that harms the broader ecosystem.

The piece traces the issue to standards development organisations like the W3C, where open membership lets firms send delegates who hide their true intentions. These delegates exploit rules that reward veto power, creating a toxic feedback loop: browsers lose features, developers turn to proprietary solutions, and the open web's value erodes. Real-world examples include Apple's iOS policies that limit feature implementation, and budget-driven decisions that keep important work hidden from engineers.

The analysis also shows how corporate competition fuels the problem. Companies that control both browsers and proprietary platforms have incentives to delay or water down standards that would level the playing field. Because budget details are secret, engineers often receive no warning that their work is being deprioritized, leading to silent disengagement and missed deadlines.

Leaders can counter this by recognizing the signs of fifth-column behavior: repeated deferrals, opaque vetoes, and a lack of clear problem statements. They should push for transparent decision-making, enforce clear scopes for working groups, and protect the open ecosystem by surfacing hidden agendas early. Understanding these dynamics helps technical leaders keep standards healthy, ensure feature parity, and avoid costly workarounds.

The article ultimately argues that without active vigilance, the very structures meant to enable collaboration become the source of stagnation, and technical leaders must treat standards governance as a critical component of product strategy.