Sometimes an article title so easily fits into my blog format that it is irresistible. In 1998, the Harvard Business Review published Desperately Seeking Synergy to question what seemed at the time the pinnacle of success for corporations. As the article opens the authors state:

The pursuit of synergy pervades the management of most large companies….In our years of research into corporate synergy, we have found that synergy initiatives often fall short of management expectations.

So what is synergy anyways and why was (is?) so much energy put in to achieving it in the workplace? As defined in the article:

The word synergy is derived from the Greek word synergos, which means “working together.” In business usage, synergy refers to the ability of two or more units or companies to generate greater value working together than they could working apart. We’ve found that most business synergies take one of six forms:

1. Shared Know-How
2. Shared Tangible Resources
3. Pooled Negotiating Power
4. Coordinated Strategies
5. Vertical Integration (Coordinating the flow of products or services from one unit to another)
6. Combined Business Creation

Sounds like a laudable goal but do we sometimes need our silos? Do we have to achieve synergy nirvana to have a successful project or workplace?

I’d like to think that I’ve managed to ‘click’ in every project I’ve been involved with. But once you’ve experienced the true magic of synergy, you realize it is rare and can only be achieved with a select few – you know who you are. That is not to say that good work hasn’t been accomplished in those more common situations.

Synergy should be facilitated in the appropriate circumstances but perhaps not forced. The article lays the blame of the failure of achieving synergy at the feet of corporate executives due to four biases that distort their thinking:

1. Synergy Bias: overestimating the benefits and underestimating the costs of synergy.
2. Parenting Bias: the belief that synergy will only be captured by cajoling or compelling the business units to cooperate.
3. Skills Bias: the assumption that whatever know-how is required to achieve synergy will be available within the organization.
4. Upside Bias: concentrating so hard on the potential benefits of synergy that they overlook the downsides.

In combination, these four biases make synergy seem more attractive and more easily achievable that it truly is.

As you can see, a lot of time and energy was expended on reviewing the benefits of synergy and why synergy programs failed. Is synergy still relevant 25 years later?

I’ll admit that I haven’t used the word or focused on it as a concept in a very long time. I was shocked and somewhat taken aback to hear it used by a colleague at a recent meeting. So much so that I did a little research and this is my favourite Google search result thanks to Quora:

Does the word “synergy” have any real world meaning or do people just use it because they think it sounds cool?

And my favourite answer:

When used in a business or workplace context it is bullshit 95% of the time and is usually spewed by management blow ins who have no bloody idea of how the actual work is done.

More cynical than my view on synergy but I believe might be the more common modern view. I’ll continue to strive toward it and look for those magical collaborations, but understand that my good work will continue whether or not nirvana is achieved.