Search results

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.

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).

This paper investigates how to embrace an “either/and” logic, borrowed from the Yin-Yang epistemological system, to provide a different perspective to the entrepreneurial orientation (EO) research and reframe its paradoxes and dilemmas.

The study adopts the duality map for paradox management, a tool designed to recognize and measure the threshold as a range within which opposite elements can be properly balanced for a healthy tension, to show that the apparently contradictory poles of the EO construct can co-exist within the same organization depending on specific situations, contexts and time.

By using duality maps as working models, the study shows that, in real life, the apparently contradictory poles of the EO construct co-exist in a healthy tension within the same organization and are managed in a constant process of dynamic balancing over time.

The present paper contributes to the EO research by providing a different perspective to the EO concept, thus filling the gap on how to go beyond the traditional polarized (“either/or”) paradigm that has dominated the EO literature since its origins.

EO is dominated by a polarized view that sees opposites as sharp dichotomies. However, the complexity and variability of today’s interconnected world are pushing scholars to move from this hegemonic Western perspective by adopting different cultural and philosophical approaches able to balance the inherent duality of the EO concept.

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.

We used the preceding definition to introduce our original article on resources in technology transfer that appeared in the fall 1994 issue of this publication. The emphasis is on technology transfer as a process, a series of interconnected events along a spectrum, leading from the discovery of a technology with potential value conceived in one institution up through its ultimate use by another institution. Naturally the process is frequently not a smooth one. Obstacles arise at many points along the way. These include such problems as lack of funding (by either or both parties to the process), lack of a champion to promote the technology (again in either or both parties to the process), cultural barriers within organizations, including the “not invented here” syndrome, impatience on the part of management to see quick results when it may not be possible to produce them, and lack of good information upon which to base decisions about the discovery, acquisition, adaptation, and use of technology. Clearly the technology transfer process is often expensive, protracted, and difficult.

This paper aims to review the latest management developments across the globe and pinpoint practical implications from cutting-edge research and case studies.

This briefing is prepared by an independent writer who adds their own impartial comments and places the articles in context.

This research paper concerns itself with understanding the paradoxes faced by diversity managers when attempting to successfully implement organizational diversity-enhancing initiatives. Three major paradoxes that confront diversity managers were identified: the need for change vs. the desire to maintain the status-quo, bureaucratic control vs. flexible procedures, and long-term business gains vs. short term losses. Diversity managers have the choice to adopt an either/or strategy or a manifold strategy to deal with these paradoxes. It was found that both strategies were initially used interchangeably, but as a diversity manager’s experience grew they employed the manifold strategy to effectively manage workplace tensions.

The briefing saves busy executives and researchers hours of reading time by selecting only the very best, most pertinent information and presenting it in a condensed and easy-to-digest format.

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.

Purpose – The author introduces the Eastern philosophy of wisdom, especially its epistemology of Yin-Yang Balancing as the Eastern cognitive frame, to shed light on the debates over the distinction and integration between research and practice as well as between qualitative and quantitative methods so as to solve the problems of relevance-rigor gap as well as complexity-simplicity gap. The author also applies the frame of Yin-Yang Balancing to the development of a novel method of case study.

Methodology/Approach – This is a conceptual article.

Central theme – The Eastern philosophy of wisdom is better at an open-minded exploration of open-ended issues by emphasizing relevance and complexity, while the Western philosophy of science is better at a closed-minded exploitation of close-ended issues by emphasizing rigor and simplicity. A geocentric integration of both Eastern and Western philosophies is needed.

Research and practical implications – Management research is far behind the need for theoretical insights into practical solutions largely due to the increasing gaps between relevance and rigor as well as between complex problems and simple solutions. The root cause of the two gaps lies in the overreliance on the Western philosophy of science, so a new light can be found in the Eastern philosophy of wisdom, and the ultimate solution is a geocentric integration of Eastern and Western philosophies. A novel method of case study can be built by applying the Eastern philosophy.

Originality/Value – The author highlights the urgent needs for the Eastern philosophy of wisdom and its integration with the Western philosophy of science toward a geocentric meta-paradigm. As a specific application of the geocentric meta-paradigm, the author proposes a novel method of case study called Yin-Yang Method.

Accumulated evidence suggests that efforts at diversity management (DM) yield mixed results or even fail in terms of promoting workforce diversity. Previous scholarly attempts to explain the mixed results of DM initiatives provided only partial understanding. This study applies a paradox perspective to better understand the challenges of DM from the vantage point of diversity managers, who play a central role in the promotion and implementation of diversity initiatives.

In-depth interviews with diversity managers in large business organizations in Israel explored practitioners' conceptions of the challenges underlying the implementation of diversity initiatives. A grounded theory approach was utilized.

The findings reveal the emergence of paradox: diversity initiatives generate organizational tensions that undermine their success and hence amplify the need for further diversity interventions. Three distinct paradoxes are identified: necessary change vs desire for stability; bureaucratic control vs flexible procedures; and long-term business gains vs short-term losses. Diversity managers utilize two opposing strategies to contend with these paradoxes.

This study does not represent voices of diverse employees or of top executives. The data focused on mid-level practitioners' descriptions of DM challenges and their methods of contending with them.

The findings shed light on an effective strategy of contending with paradox. Recognizing paradox and navigating it properly may greatly advance the success of costly DM change interventions. Implications are suggested regarding the academic education and training of DM practitioners.

Based on the paradox framework, which offers a novel vantage point for understanding the challenges of implementing DM, the findings contribute to the scholarly understanding of the limited success of DM interventions.