Before you shake your head at the thought of nonsensical sound of those two words, hear me out. The other day, I was with a group working on a mission statement when I jokingly threw the term out to the group. Somebody at a table beside me turned and looked disgusted, thinking it sounded a lot like snake oil.
But the more I hear the term, the more I like it. What does it mean? Well, let’s take a look at my favourite definition of synthetic:
synthetic [sin-thet-ik]
–adjective
not real or genuine; artificial; feigned: a synthetic chuckle at a poor joke.
So, synthetic empowerment implies a level of artificial empowerment. In my opinion, it’s a great phrase to describe those instances where managers speak about empowering the staff below them, but when push comes to shove the empowerment doesn’t happen.
Synthetic empowerment does nothing to foster the growth sought from employees. It’s not until managers enter the realm of legitimate empowerment that employees begin to function at higher levels.
Despite your favourite definition of synthetic, I would note that common uses of the word imply that the object in question is still created and fit for purpose, albeit “created”, not naturally occurring. This would mean that the empowerment still occurs, but wasn’t there naturally.
However, ignoring that for the purposes of this argument, it does make a good point.
Thank you for your comment Simon. I has initially thought the same thing, but after a few weeks distilling, I came to the conclusion I’ve put above.