Search results

The purpose of this paper is to explore the interplay between firm boundary decisions and the management of both efficiency and flexibility and the implications this has for modular design in the provision of advanced services.

A single case study in the defence industry employs semi-structured interviews supplemented by secondary data. Data are analysed using thematic analysis.

The findings provide a process model of boundary negotiations for the design of efficient and flexible modular systems consisting of three phases; boundary ambiguity, boundary defences and boundary alignment.

The study provides a process framework for boundary negotiations to help organisations navigate the management of both-and efficiency and flexibility in the provision of advanced services.

Drawing upon modularity, paradox and systems theory, this article provides novel theoretical insight into the relationship between firm boundary decisions and the management of both-and efficiency vs. flexibility in the provision of product upgrade services.

In a fast-paced and hypercompetitive environment, organizational members are awash with paradoxes where they are forced to accomplish opposing goals simultaneously (“both/and”) instead of choosing one over the other (“either/or”). The literature has acknowledged paradox as a common type of contradiction in managing information and information technology (IT), but few studies have investigated how individuals can leverage paradoxical tensions. Drawing upon paradox theory, this study develops a research model that embodies a “both/and” paradigm in paradoxical tensions via analytical alignment, a paradox mindset and resilience under environmental dynamism.

This study examines the research model using hierarchical regression analysis with 308 analytics experts.

Empirical results find that the alignment of analytical technology and data-driven culture (AT-2DC) has a positive effect on a paradox mindset. Results also show that a paradox mindset has a positive influence on resilience. AT-2DC alignment also mediates the relationship between paradox mindset and resilience. In addition, AT-2DC alignment is more critical to a paradox mindset under a high level of environmental dynamism.

This study sheds light on how individuals can leverage paradoxical tensions with a “both/and” perspective and stay resilient when managing opposing demands and changes.

This study aims to determine the extent to which the use of coordinating conjunctions enhances or impairs definitional clarity.

In two studies, a sample of 736 construct definitions from the Journal of Marketing, Journal of Marketing Research and Journal of Consumer Research over a 30-year period was judged for ambiguity and vagueness by both academic and lay judges.

The authors demonstrate that constructing definitions using both “and” and “or” increases the ambiguity and vagueness of the construct’s meaning. The most frequently used conjunction is “and” which appeared in 42 per cent of the definitions. A significant percentage (26 per cent) contain the conjunction “or.”

A framework for understanding alternative interpretations of “and” or “or” is developed. Five recommendations are proposed for evaluating the use of “and” and “or” in construct definitions. Theorists in all academic fields should not use both “and” and “or” in the same construct definition.

A five-step process is proposed for evaluating the use of “and” and “or” in construct definitions. Theorists should not use both “and” and “or” in the same construct definition.

This is the first exploration of how specific wording patterns used in construct definitions in academic research affect the clarity of the definition.

The author argues and explains that the indigenous Eastern epistemological frame of yin-yang balancing can be taken as a unique system of thinking toward a meta-perspective. It is not only deeply rooted in the indigenous Eastern culture traditions, but also bears salient global implications, especially in the domain of paradox management. The purpose and contribution of this chapter are twofold: (1) to explain the unique and salient features of yin-yang balancing (the “either/and” system to reframe paradox into duality as partially conflicting and partially complementary, both spatially and temporarily) as compared with the Western logic systems (the “either/or” and “both/or” or “both/and” systems); and (2) to explore the global implications of the “either/and” system for future paradox research, including the three unique themes of overlap between opposites with the “seed” of one opposite inside the other; threshold from the contingent balance between partial separation and partial integration in line with specific contexts through three operating mechanisms, and knot for the special role of third-party to shift paradox from a dyadic level to a triadic and even a multiplex level.

Inspired by leadership research, this paper aims to further the literature on management controls (MCs) by highlighting two managerial capabilities that cultivate dynamic tension. More specifically, we explore how countervailing MCs can be designed and used to create a coordinated and adaptable organisation. These capabilities reveal key insights into dynamic tension because they help us to understand the role of managers and why, how and when some companies succeed in creating dynamic tension while others struggle.

These research objectives are met through a case study on a global manufacturing company called GLOCOMP to preserve anonymity. The authors chose GLOCOMP because it comprises many internal units that must work in a coordinated fashion. However, it is equally important that the units are flexible enough to adapt to their unique local conditions. These two aspirations must be balanced, which necessitates dynamic tension between MCs. Hence, the case provides fertile ground for us to investigate the capabilities that help managers design and use countervailing MCs.

The empirical setting shows that cognitive and behavioural complexity are the keys to successfully designing and using countervailing loose and tight MCs concurrently. Using MCs that work in opposite directions produces a dynamic tension that helps individual units to coordinate their internal supply chains while adapting to fulfil unique roles within the company.

This paper extends previous research by exploring two specific managerial capabilities that enable dynamic tension – cognitive and behavioural complexity. The authors provide specific insights into how managers can create dynamic tension and, further, by highlighting the specific capabilities that give rise to dynamic tension, the authors outline a procedural perspective where a manager’s capabilities and dynamic tension inform one another. The resulting virtuous circle extends the understanding of the relationship between dynamic tension and managerial expertise beyond what the authors currently know as a linear cause-effect correlation.

The paper debunks Peter P. Li’s assertion that Yin-Yang is superior to any other cognitive frames or logical systems for paradox research. The purpose of this paper is to alert the Chinese indigenous management researchers to the danger of Chinese exceptionalism and over-confidence.

To show that Peter P. Li’s assertion is doubtful, the authors identify the flaws in his analysis.

The authors find that there are three serious flaws in Peter P. Li’s analysis. First, there are four defects in the typology of cognitive frames he built in order to compare Yin-Yang with the others. Second, his understanding of dialectics in general and Hegelian dialectics in particular is flawed. And finally, without resorting to Yin-Yang, many scholars can develop theories that are equivalent to those derived from Yin-Yang.

Due to the page limit, this paper only focuses on arguing that Yin-Yang is not superior to other cognitive frames or logical systems without going one step further to explain in which situations Yin-Yang are valuable and might be more suitable than others for helping us understand some research issues.

This paper implies that we should not blindly believe that the Chinese way of thinking and acting is superior to other people’s. Chinese people should be open-minded in the globalized era, not only promoting their own culture but also appreciating and learning from other cultures.

The reduction of cultural exceptionalism and ethnocentrism can make cross-cultural communication and interaction smoother.

This paper is a rigorous critique on the “Yin-Yang being superior” assertion of Peter P. Li.

The author argues and explains that the indigenous Eastern epistemological system of Yin-Yang balancing should be taken as a novel system or frame of thinking, which is deeply rooted in the indigenous Eastern culture traditions, but it has significant global implications, especially in the domain of paradox management. The purpose of this paper is twofold: first, to provide a detailed elaboration of the indigenous Eastern epistemological system of Yin-Yang balancing in contrast to the Western logic systems; and second, to provide a roadmap for applying the system of Yin-Yang balancing to complex issues in the area of management, in general, and paradoxical issues, in particular.

This is a conceptual paper with a focus on theory-building.

The author elaborates on the indigenous features of Yin-Yang balancing, in contrast to Aristotle’s formal logic and Hegel’s dialectical logic in the West, to further explore the former’s global implications for the increased attention to research on paradox management. In particular, the author posits that Yin-Yang balancing appears to be better suited for paradox management than the more commonly used logics available in the Western literature. Built upon the Yin-Yang balancing, a practical tool of Duality Map for paradox management is proposed.

The system of Yin-Yang balancing proposed in this paper has the potential to embrace logical systems available in the West into a geocentric (East-meeting-West) meta-system. This paper further shows how to apply Yin-Yang balancing with the tool of Duality Map to the most salient paradoxes in the domain of management, including value-profit balance (triple bottom lines), exploration-exploitation balance (ambidexterity), cooperation-competition balance (co-opetition), globalization-localization balance (glocalization), institution-agency balance (institutional entrepreneurship), simultaneously positive and negative attitudes toward an entity (ambivalence), and etic-emic balance (geocentric) across all domains of management research.

The primary challenge for management researchers is to find a way to achieve a geocentric integration between the West and the East at the fundamental level of philosophy. The hope is that the philosophical traditions in the East will facilitate such integration. In particular, the Eastern philosophy of wisdom has a unique capacity to reframe paradox from a negative problem (i.e. a problem of inconsistency to be resolved by dualism in terms of separating opposite elements) to a positive solution (i.e. a solution of completeness or holism to be achieved by duality in terms of partially separating and partially integrating opposite elements).

Organizations are full of contradictions and leadership dilemmas. Managers often face challenges such as selecting between two contradicting options such that which one is more important can hardly be judged. To manage contradicting dynamics, today’s managers can adopt the paradoxical leadership approach. We build a theoretical model to investigate the influence of paradoxical leadership on multi-dimensional project agility (proactivity, adaptability, and resilience), and multi-dimensional project success (management, investment, and ownership success).

Drawing on survey-based data from the China–Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) megaproject (N = 209), we performed covariance-based structural equation modeling to test the conceptual model.

The findings show that (1) paradoxical leadership has a significant positive impact on megaproject success, (2) paradoxical leadership has a significant positive influence on project agility, (3) project agility has a significant positive effect on megaproject success, and (4) project agility has a significant effect that mediates the link between paradoxical leadership and megaproject success. This research provides a theoretical and practical comprehension of paradoxical leadership with a new perspective on megaprojects.

This study provides an extension of the existing studies on paradoxical leadership and identifies the role of contradicting dynamics and their impact on multiple facets of megaproject success. It not only clarifies the relationship between paradoxical leadership and megaproject success, but also identifies the mediating role of project agility that can play an effective role in mobilizing success in megaprojects.

Bill Clinton is exemplary of a new conception of leadership appropriate for the 21st century. In spite of his sexual proclivities (for which he received harsh criticism and impeachment proceedings) Clinton’s physicality signals an end of a Gnostic view of leadership that separates the knowing head from the rest of the body. We propose that 20th century manifestations of leadership are no longer appropriate for this age, and we illustrate this idea with the ‘reality’ television series Undercover Boss. Further, by exploring artist Peter Robinson’s installation The End of the Twentieth Century we claim that Clinton’s call for inclusivity, a ‘both–and’ approach that characterizes his late- and post-Presidential rhetoric, opens possibilities for alternative constructs that place the body at the heart of leadership. Our exploration of Clinton’s physicality is through his speech to the APEC business leaders in 1999, his commentary on the movie documentary The Hunting of the President and his speech to the 2004 Democratic National Convention. In each of these he reaches out to his audiences through physical and verbal gestures. He pleads for tolerance and understanding so that people may find commonalities among their flaws and differences. Through enacting the physical ‘doing’ of leadership in these instances, Bill Clinton offers an exemplar of re-locating leadership within its physical context.