E pluribus unum (out of many, one) For years, the unofficial motto of the United States[1].
…Our differences are our glory, and we need to examine what it would look like to really celebrate them—to face them boldly, and respond with the trusting inquiry that leads to love. – April Lawson
Our differences are our glory? Celebrate them? Use them as a starting point for synergizing, building unity? Getting to love? Surely all that’s a little over the top?
But here’s some of what Stephen Covey had to say back thirteen years ago. Worth a slow, thoughtful read:
“To put it simply, synergy means “two heads are better than one.” Synergize is the habit of creative cooperation. It is teamwork, open-mindedness, and the adventure of finding new solutions to old problems. But it doesn’t just happen on its own. It’s a process, and through that process, people bring all their personal experience and expertise to the table. Together, they can produce far better results that they could individually. Synergy lets us discover jointly things we are much less likely to discover by ourselves. It is the idea that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. One plus one equals three, or six, or sixty–you name it.
When people begin to interact together genuinely, and they’re open to each other’s influence, they begin to gain new insight. The capability of inventing new approaches is increased exponentially because of differences.
Valuing differences is what really drives synergy. Do you truly value the mental, emotional, and psychological differences among people? Or do you wish everyone would just agree with you so you could all get along? Many people mistake uniformity for unity; sameness for oneness. One word–boring! Differences should be seen as strengths, not weaknesses. They add zest to life”.
A small, entirely personal example: When my wife and I moved from Colorado to DC in 1987, we had been married for eleven years. We could only afford one car, so we drove to work from home and back together (45 minutes or so, each way). For the first time in our married lives, we started listening to Morning Edition and All Things Considered on the radio. As a result, we found ourselves talking about a wide variety of subjects we had never discussed before. We came to see vast areas of unexplored disagreement. At the same time, the stress of living and working in DC had the side effect of teaching us the hard way that our differences, which we had previously seen as weaknesses to overcome, were really strengths to build on. We came to realize that most of the bad decisions and mistakes we’d been making as a couple came when we started out in agreement – with the same blind spot. By contrast, when we would disagree initially on some matter, we had a better chance of coming to a single good approach.
As a result, during this period our good marriage transitioned to a great one. As a couple, we had synergy.
Back to Stephen Covey. Read from his 1989 book and you’ll find that he, like Lawson, wasn’t referring to slight differences. Both focused their attention on seemingly irreconcilable differences, of massive scale, pervading large swaths of society. He, as she, saw the search for synergy in the face of such great divides as high-risk but also high reward.
Perhaps through a 2025 lens this task looks far more daunting, and chances for success seem far less likely. We face a choice: give up? Or double down?
Which brings us to E pluribus unum. In today’s perspective, the Latin E pluribus discidium (separation, division, divorce, discord, disagreement, tearing) or E pluribus dividia (dissension, discord, care, vexation, trouble) might seem more realistic. The differences we face here in the United States do seem on their face to be irreconcilable.
But remember: the thirteen original colonies were themselves by no means homogeneous. Their interests and cultures varied radically. Nor were they virtuous or of one mind. Their morals and values were seriously flawed. Some practiced slavery. Others saw that as an abomination. Democracy was thought to be the province of men, not women, and to be confined to landholding men at that. Even within each colony there was polarization; revolutionaries and Tory loyalists lived (and argued) side by side. Disagreement and discord were the order of the day. But they ultimately found unity – synergy – in their desire to break away from British rule. Years later, the stain of slavery, still festering, would reach a flashpoint. The resulting Civil War threatened to rip the country asunder. Again (though only at the cost of many lives), the United States would make a critical choice in favor of synergy. Later, more quietly, women would achieve the vote. Time and again, throughout our history, Americans have done the arduous synergizing needed to deal with social fault lines, to achieve or maintain unity.
In building and articulating his first three habits – be proactive, begin with the end in mind, and put first things first – Stephen Covey is encouraging and equipping each of us individually to be effective and responsible by nature. Only then, he says, will we be able to work with others effectively to build a better world. Provided, as we enter such collaborations, that we bring to the table additional social skills, practiced to the point of habit: that we think win-win; that we seek first to understand, then be understood; and that we synergize. Without the first three habits, attempts at collaboration will lack a proper foundation and be compromised; without the last three habits, the first three will be sterile[2].
Whew! No pressure!
But isn’t there a seventh habit? What about the seventh habit? More on that next time.
[1] Since 1956, the official motto of the United States is “One Nation, under God” (but that is a subject for another day).
[2]There’s an analogy with team sports here. It’s the individual athlete’s responsibility to show up for practice physically and mentally fit. The coaches and the practice sessions will concentrate on teamwork.