Photo courtesy: Ilkka Kakko. “My six-basket tribute to coincidensity. Filed under: Networking, Not Working. Njet working.”
This the final PART 3 in my “20 Years of Defending Serendipity” – blog series. Enjoy.
I published a blog post titled “Are we reducing the magic of serendipity to the logic of coincidence?” already twelve years ago. Back in 2013, I posed two questions that, in hindsight, feel even more urgent today:
Does that overwhelming unexpectedness actually increase your ability to harness serendipity?
Is the everlasting drive for new connections, endless events, and weak ties pushing your Dunbar’s number to its limits?
And more critically:
Are these unexpectedly found weak ties really helping you gain insight or create value—for yourself or for your community?
These questions weren’t rhetorical then—and they certainly aren’t now. With the blog I introduced Matt Biddulph’s brilliant concept of coincidensity—the idea that by increasing the density of connections (in cities, coworking spaces, or communities), we also increase the likelihood of seemingly meaningful encounters. It was a concept worth celebrating, and it still is! But I added a critical warning, which today feels even more urgent:
“We must not confuse the conditions for meaningful encounters with the phenomenon of serendipity itself.”
Fast forward more than a decade, and it’s clear that this confusion hasn’t just persisted—it has intensified. And in many cases, it has been aggressively commercialized. The word serendipity is now everywhere—from productivity books and motivational talks to dating apps and airport bookstores. But in the process, its meaning has been diluted, stripped down, stretched thin, and sold out.
Coincidensity ≠ Serendipity
Let’s be clear: coincidensity is not serendipity. It’s a powerful enabler, but not the phenomenon itself.
Coincidensity sets the stage. Serendipity requires the actor’s mind—prepared, sagacious, and open to value in the unexpected. As Biddulph originally put it, and as I echoed in 2013, coincidensity is about engineering environments where connections are more likely. But serendipity is a quality of mind—not a byproduct of density, but a pattern of insight.
That distinction is not just academic—it’s essential.
The Oxymoron of “Daily Serendipitous Encounters”
One of the most revealing signs of conceptual dilution is when people start promoting spaces or events as places for daily serendipitous encounters. Let’s be clear: that phrase is an oxymoron.
Serendipity is not a daily special. It is, by definition, rare, unpredictable, and—most importantly—valuable. If you claim to experience “serendipitous” encounters every day, here’s the real question:
When do you have time—or cognitive capacity—to actually implement the value that these chance encounters supposedly generate?
Let’s say you have 14 of these in two weeks. Will you follow up on all of them? Develop them into ventures? Integrate them into your thinking? Of course not. Most will remain just that—chance encounters. Unprocessed. Undeveloped. Unproductive.
And that’s exactly why we must highlight coincidensity as the proper term for such phenomena. Dense, well-designed environments increase the likelihood of valuable encounters, but they don’t create serendipity by default. The encounter only becomes serendipitous if—and only if—value is created.
Without action, implementation and insight, it’s just noise in a crowded room.
In the past decade, a new breed has emerged: I call them Conceptual Dilutionists. They are TEDx darlings, LinkedIn influencers, consultants, and pop-science peddlers who’ve hijacked serendipity—polished it into a hedonistic lifestyle fantasy, then repackaged it as a shortcut to success.
They confuse crowded cafés, vibrant meetups, and random retweets with true discovery. They retrofit happy accidents as if they were inevitable—then monetize the myth. In their stories, everything becomes serendipity… which ultimately means nothing is.
The Word That Changes Everything: “Frequently”
Let’s return to the original definition of serendipity, as clarified by Robert K. Merton:
“Serendipity is a quality of mind which, through awareness, sagacity, and good fortune, frequently allows one to discover better things than originally sought.”
That one word—frequently—changes everything.
It’s precisely the word that Conceptual Dilutionists want to forget—and for good reason. Their narrative depends on spotlighting stories where survivorship bias takes the lead. It thrives on rare, miraculous exceptions—just as we explored in Part 2. Conceptual Dilutionists love those: the one big lucky break, the fairytale coincidence that launched a career or found a soulmate.
But serendipity isn’t a one-hit wonder. It’s not a gamble. It’s a repeatable mental posture—a discipline that consistently reveals hidden value when awareness and sagacity meet good fortune.
“Frequently” doesn’t sell as easily as “magically.” That’s why it’s quietly missing from today’s serendipity hype.
A Jester’s Final Word
Twelve years ago, I warned against reducing deep insights to shallow slogans. Now, twenty years into my journey as a serendipity advocate I feel the responsibility more than ever to defend what must not be lost.
So let me say this clearly: Coincidensity is real. Valuable. Designable. But it is not serendipity. Serendipity is rarer, deeper, and infinitely more personal. It must be respected, not repackaged.
Let’s stop confusing crowds with discoveries. Let’s bring frequently back to the heart of serendipity.
Let’s keep the magic, the discipline, and the mystery intact. Let’s do what I’ve been saying for twenty years: Respect Serendipity!
P.S.
And maybe—just maybe—those who keep promoting “daily serendipitous encounters” should be vaccinated against conceptual confusion. I propose a Respect Serendipity! vaccine—a mental immune boost that protects against the infectious spread of diluted definitions and misplaced buzzwords. Side effects may include critical thinking, historical perspective, and long-term immunity to conceptual fluff.
