Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Collective Value Synergy

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Courcelles 23:50, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Collective Value Synergy (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

promotional article about non-notable academic neologism. No hits for the phrase in G scholar or G books, or even G news. . The refs given for use of the concept do not even include the word. The only Google hit is actually for "collective value (synergy) in the English translation of a Hebrew document [1] DGG ( talk ) 22:49, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Behavioural science-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 16:44, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 16:44, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. a recent addition into the project management vocabulary and is regarded as a contrarian approach to group interaction. In the context of organizational behavior, a Collective Value Synergy follows the view that a cohesive group is more than the sum of its parts, and in furtherance a group sharing a single common value is able to achieve collective success. The inference being that a CVS group is much more likely to succeed than a group exhibiting only one of the two attributes. I hope your coffee is strong. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 05:12, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, more management-speak nonsense; adds nothing not already found in the other MBA goobledygook pages. Hairhorn (talk) 15:31, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.