Hollnagel, E. (2021), Synesis – The Unification of Productivitiy, Quality, Safety and Reliability, Abingdon/New York: Routledge.

Organizations face challenges in dealing with a rapidly changing environment where internal and external factors affect organizational performance. Effective management must integrate safety, quality, productivity, and reliability rather than addressing these concerns separately. The fragmented approach emerged because issues such as quality and safety became important at different times and people tend to solve problems reactively rather than proactively.

Sociologist Robert K. Merton’s law of unforeseen consequences states that goal-directed actions often produce unforeseen results. Therefore, we should focus on dynamic functions rather than static structures. The emphasis is on processes rather than outcomes so that we can manage the complexity of our socio-technical (human-machine) systems. This perspective encourages looking at interconnected functions to maintain system coherence.

The drive to improve productivity has been central to organizational goals. Principles such as Adam Smith’s division of labor and Taylor’s scientific management have played a role in this. The shift from manual to cognitive work has made it necessary to align productivity with safety and well-being. Quality management began with task standardization, with Shewhart's statistical process control aimed at reducing variability. Modern systems challenge these static assumptions.

Safety thinking has evolved from Heinrich's linear root cause analysis to a broader view encompassing Safety-1 and Safety-2. Safety-1 seeks to minimize errors, while Safety-2 emphasizes maximizing successful outcomes to prevent accidents. Similarly, reliability, initially associated with military and technical equipment, has expanded to include human and organizational factors, as evidenced by the lessons of the Three Mile Island nuclear incident.

Human limitations, including limited attention spans, call for pragmatic decision-making approaches such as Simon's "satisficing" and Lindblom's "muddling through." These methods recognize cognitive limitations and emphasize rules of thumb over ideal rationality, reflecting the trade-off between efficiency and thoroughness in real-world tasks.

Fragmentation in change management is a recurring problem. An isolated focus on productivity, quality, safety or reliability can undermine systemic solutions. Models such as the Shewhart cycle, action research and the OODA loop are different approaches to managing change. However, effective change management must recognize the dynamic nature of socio-technical systems and adapt to changing circumstances.

The challenge of dealing with interconnected problems lies in overcoming the human tendency towards binary thinking and fragmented problem solving. Solutions must take into account the socio-technical nature of organizations and account for the interdependencies between people, processes and technology. This calls for functional models, such as the Functional Resonance Analysis Method (FRAM), that map dynamic interactions and guide interventions for sustainable improvements.

Managing change requires recognizing the broader system dynamics, including noise and variability, rather than suppressing them. By working with natural forces and breaking down long-term goals into adaptive short-term steps, organizations can deal with complex, unpredictable environments. Moreover, understanding emergent properties and transcending traditional cause-effect reasoning is essential for effectively managing socio-technical systems.