In 1968, Melvin Conway introduced a deceptively simple idea that became a cornerstone principle of system design. What is now known as Conway’s Law describes the phenomenon that the architecture of a system almost always mirrors the organizational chart of the team that built it. What began as an observation about software development has since become a broader organizational truth. When teams are siloed, fragmented, or misaligned, the systems they create will reflect that dysfunction. Understanding Conway’s Law means knowing that internal structure doesn’t just influence outcomes. It becomes the outcome.
Conway’s Law is a principle I have carried with me from the formative years of my software engineering career. However, until only last week, I failed to notice that it potentially also explains the state of Adult recreational tennis under the USTA. While Adult tennis is logically one category, two separate organizations oversee two independent ecosystems within it, USTA League Tennis and Adult Tournament Tennis. Each is managed by its own siloed structure, with different staff, budgets, metrics, and incentives. That internal division has shaped the player experience in ways that are consistent with Conway’s Law.
In the USTA, Leagues and Tournaments operate independently. It is tempting to say they are in direct competition with each other, but it is so lopsided it cannot be characterized as a rivalry. Leagues dominate the Adult tennis ecosystem, leaving tournaments to scramble for what amounts to crumbs. At the organizational level, the League committees can pound their chests and boast of ever-increasing participation metrics, while tournaments are clearly floundering. It’s not because League is a better form of tennis, but rather because it is sucking all the air out of the calendar.
It’s Conway’s Law in action, and it’s not serving the adult tennis community well.
At its core, adult competitive tennis under the USTA is not suffering from a lack of interest but rather from fragmentation. League tennis, with its well-oiled infrastructure and institutional support, becomes the dominant and all-consuming experience. Meanwhile, despite offering a richer competitive environment that is vital for many players, adult tournaments are treated as an archaic footnote.
For the first time last week, I started to contemplate the idea that the current state of USTA tournament tennis isn’t a failure of marketing or messaging, but rather organizational design. The committees that oversee League tennis and those that manage tournament tennis are not just on different teams; they’re in separate silos, with different incentives, goals, and priorities. According to Conway’s Law, it is no surprise that the systems they create don’t align, fail to interconnect, and lack support for one another.
Revitalizing tournament participation and building a thriving ecosystem where leagues and tournaments complement each other, starts by addressing the structural root of the problem. That means rethinking how adult tennis is organized from within the USTA. Until the League and Tournament arms of the organization are unified, or at the very least aligned around shared goals and collaborative planning, the player experience will continue to reflect the disjointed system that produced it.
You can’t duct-tape a unified tennis experience on top of a divided organization. Conway’s Law won’t let you.
I’m afraid Tournaments and Leagues are two disparate beasts.
Players who play tournaments are prepared to travel and spend money doing so with the prospect of a few challenging matches.
In League play, people usually play fairly close to home and the commitment is often limited. Playing in a team with friends is, essentially, more social than playing tournaments.
Tournaments usually require a large facility resource requirement whereas a league match takes just 3-4 hours.