Search results

The study aims to identify the central paradoxical tensions existing in developing resilience in organisations. The main thrust of this study is to develop a thorough understanding of diverse conflicting tensions in building resilience and develop the possible strategies to surmount these tensions.

Using the case study approach, the study applied theory-elaboration strategy as this study is based on well-established literature from both digitalisation and resilience. The study uses the paradox theory lens in a case study to reconcile both theories with contextual idiosyncrasies.

The paradox theory lens provides perspectives to understand tensions during resilience development and the role of digital transformation in this process. It assesses the potential solutions for surmounting tensions in resilient operations. The mapping of workable solutions with different paradoxes and propositions has been proposed for future empirical research.

The study suggests that practitioners should not consider resilience and sustainability as mutually exclusive; instead, managers must embrace ongoing tensions to bring solutions to address these two essential organisational priorities.

To the best of the authors' knowledge, this is the first empirical study that applies paradox theory to understand how an organisation can build resilience while confronting several paradoxes. The study findings support that resilience practices can move in tandem with environmental sustainability goals rather than being usually mutually exclusive.

The main goal of any organization is to achieve the best quality of work through employees, and managers play a very important role in this field. Managers and leaders of organizations often face with paradoxes that make decision-making difficult. The purpose of this paper is to develop a competency model for human resource managers considering the importance of the role of paradoxes for organizations.

The research methodology is of a mixed type and with an approach based on paradox theory and using theme analysis and fuzzy Delphi, it seeks to provide a model of paradoxical managers’ competence. The statistical sample included 11 experts working in the information and communication technology industry, who were selected using the snowball and judgmental sampling method.

The results of this research show that the competency model of human resource managers has three managerial, organizational and individual levels and has 15 themes including strategic partner, organizational knowledge, awareness of the industry environment, awareness of the external environment, paradoxical thinking, managerial knowledge, relationship management, resource management , leadership, human resources analyzer, information technology (IT) knowledge, personality traits, development, multitasking and cognitive competence. The most important theme identified is paradoxical thinking and familiarity with IT knowledge, and it is suggested that human resource managers working in this field should preferably study technical and engineering fields at the undergraduate level and shift to human resource management fields at the graduate level.

The distinguishing feature of this paper is the presentation of a competency model based on paradox theory. Paradoxes are part of organizational life. Therefore, there should be a paradoxical view in all organizational analysis.

This paper aims to discuss the work of non-executive directors (NEDs) as inherently paradoxical. Paradox refers to the presence of persistent contradictions between interdependent forces. Those persistent tensions are explored, and approaches are indicated to stimulate the adaptive use of paradoxes as forces of innovation and renewal.

This conceptual approach can be read as an invitation for corporate governance scholars to embrace the logic of paradox to expand the understanding of this topic. Paradox is not conceptualized as an alternative to dominant structural views, including board composition, but as a complementary conceptual perspective, a meta-theoretical lens to shed light on the tensions inherent to governance.

The authors propose that paradox theory offers a fresh conceptual lens to study the role of NEDs. This approach may help NEDs to turn tensions and paradoxes visible to develop a rich understanding of their work, as well as helping them navigate the complexities of organizing, a process rich in inherent paradoxicality.

Organizational paradox theory is a bourgeoning field of study, but the conceptual lens of paradox has still been underexplored in the study of corporate governance.

The integration of industry 4.0 has become a priority for many organizations. However, not all organizations are suitable and capable of implementing industry 4.0 because it requires a dynamic and flexible implementation strategy. The implementation of industry 4.0 often involves overcoming several tensions between internal and external stakeholders. This paper aims to explore the paradoxical tensions that arise for health-care organizations when integrating industry 4.0. Moreover, it discusses how a paradox lens can support the conceptualization and proposes techniques for handling tensions during the integration of industry 4.0.

This qualitative and in-depth study draws upon 32 semi-structured interviews. The empirical case concerns how two health-care organizations handle paradoxical tensions during the integration of industry 4.0.

The exploration resulted in six recurring technology tensions: technology invention (modularized design vs. flexible design), technology collaboration (automation vs. human augmentation), technology-driven patient experience (control vs. autonomy), technology uncertainty (short-term experimentation vs. long-term planning), technology invention and diffusion through collaborative efforts among stakeholders (selective vs. intensive collaboration) and technological innovation (market maintenance vs. disruption).

A paradox theory-informed conceptual model is proposed for how to handle tensions during the integration of industry 4.0. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first paper to introduce paradox theory for quality management, including lean and Six Sigma.

Since the 1980's, diversity management (DM) has been regarded as a relevant scholarly and practical endeavour laden with different and often contrasting rationales and conceptualisations. In this regard, the current literature on DM largely differentiates between two overarching approaches – the instrumental and the critical approach with varying conceptualisations and underlying understandings of DM. The purpose of this paper is to discuss how a paradox lens can be utilised to bridge existing understandings of diversity management.

The authors aim to discuss the current state of DM literature and reconceptualise DM from a paradox lens.

The authors argue that the use of a paradox lens on DM allows for challenges to be brought forward instead of ignored or hidden away by illuminating and actively acknowledging both the liberating but also the challenging and oftentimes constraining experiences for the actors involved. Thus, a Paradox lens offers space for embracing and utilising paradoxes when working with diversity.

Diversity management is no new concept in the field of human resource management and several scholars argue that the longstanding divide between the instrumental and critical approach remains problematic and limiting for the practice of DM. Hence, the value of reconceptualising DM from a paradox lens lies in bridging the two approaches in order to give way to viewing DM as a nuanced, dynamic and multifaceted practice that can accommodate complexity and contradictions in new and potentially beneficial manners.

The purpose of this paper is to advance the understanding of paradoxes, underlying tensions and potential management strategies when integrating digital technologies into existing lean-based production systems (LPSs), with the aim of achieving synergies and fostering the development of production systems.

This study adopts a collaborative management research (CMR) approach to identify patterns of organisational tensions and paradoxes and explore management strategies to overcome them. The data were collected through interviews and focus group interviews with experts on lean and/or digital technologies from the companies, from documents and from workshops with the in-case researchers.

The findings of this paper provide insights into the salient organisational paradoxes embraced in the integration of digital technologies in LPS by identifying different aspects of the performing, organising, learning and belonging paradoxes. Furthermore, the findings demonstrate the intricacies and relatedness between different paradoxes and their resolutions, and more specifically, how a resolution strategy adopted to manage one paradox might unintentionally generate new tensions. This, in turn, calls for either re-contextualising actions to counteract the drift or the adoption of new resolution strategies.

This paper adds perspective to operations management (OM) research through the use of paradox theory, and we (1) provide a fine-grained perspective on why integration sometimes “fails” and label the forces of internal drift as mechanisms of imbalances and (2) provide detailed insights into how different management and resolution strategies are adopted, especially by identifying re-contextualising actions as a key to rebalancing organisational paradoxes in favour of the integration of digital technologies in LPSs.

People donate to charities with the aim of improving society. Yet, many charities fail to use donations efficiently or have ineffective interventions. The authors explore the strategic operational priorities and processes that enable charities to efficiently implement their interventions and have a positive impact on society.

The authors first review the literature on charities to gain a deeper understanding of the current state of knowledge on charity operations. The authors then employ the lens of paradox theory and perform a qualitative investigation of six case studies to explore various aspects of the operations of charities that are known for being cost-effective.

The authors reveal how the strategic operational decisions of charities, as well as the processes they implement, help them resolve the tensions arising from the cost-effectiveness paradox. The authors show that cost-effective charities make strategic operational decisions that help maintain two diverging priorities: prioritizing the status quo and prioritizing change in how they deliver value. Another set of strategic decisions helps balance these two diverging priorities. The authors then show how these charities create and then maintain cost-effective operations.

The authors address recent calls for research on non-profit organizations in the field of operations management. To authors’ knowledge, it is the first in-depth study of exemplary charity operations. The results can be used by charity executives as a benchmarking tool when they develop and implement their charitable interventions and by government agencies and potential donors when they select charities for their donations. Finally, the results should have implications for other organizations trying to have a positive societal impact.

Cross-cultural cognitive paradoxes have frequently broken the existing boundaries of knowledge and stimulated demands for knowledge creation (KC), and such paradoxes have triggered and will continue to trigger novel risks in the context of international business (IB). Given the nascency of relevant issues, this study aims to develop a more comprehensive understanding of KC across cultures by proposing a Yin-Yang dialectical systems theory of KC as micro-foundation to more systematically frame the risk/paradox-resolving mechanism elicited by cultural collisions.

This paper is conceptual in nature. The authors first critically review the literature to lay a broad theoretical foundation. Integrating the philosophy- and praxis-based views, the authors reposition knowledge as a Yin-Yang dialectical system of knowing, with yin representing the tacit while yang represents the explicit. Next, the authors justify the underling logic of realising KC through a contradiction-resolving process. On this basis, the authors draw upon the Yijing’s Later Heaven Sequence (LHS) as the source domain of a heuristic metaphor to reconceptualise KC as a dynamic capability in the IB context.

Using the LHS paradigm to metaphorically map the intricate patterns of interaction and interconnectivity among the involved individuals, organisations and all related stakeholders, this research identifies and theorises the overall dynamic capability of KC in the IB context, which comprises five sets of processes: contradiction, conflict, communication, compromise and conversion.

This research highlights that KC is simultaneously activated and constrained by human actions as well as by the socially constructed context in which it emerges, which helps individuals, organisations and policy makers more clearly frame the novel risks induced by cross-cultural cognitive conflicts in the IB context.

The authors synthesise Yin-Yang dialectics with the approach of collective phronesis, proposing a novel, praxis-oriented Yin-Yang dialectical systems theory of KC. It provides a deeper understanding of the epistemological paradox inherent in all knowledge, thus enabling KC to be rationalised by a sounder logical reasoning. By fusing the macro and micro perspectives on KC, the authors also enrich existing theory and future theory building in the domain of knowledge management.

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.

This study aims to investigate the relationship between strategy intent (product-service innovation intention) and outcome (product-service innovation outcome), and the role that external sources of innovation play in influencing this relationship.

Using data obtained from the community innovation survey, we apply a logit regression to a sample of 1,419 Portuguese firms. By examining the moderating effect of open innovation breadth, we assess how the relationship between differentiation intent and outcome is contingent upon the involvement of external stakeholders.

Our findings reveal that the relationship between differentiation intent and outcome is contingent upon the moderating effect of open innovation breadth. Our analysis suggests that the negative influence of different sources of innovation can be addressed by adopting a paradox lens.

This research provides valuable insights for managers. By simultaneously pursuing a differentiation strategy and engaging in collaboration with external sources, firms may compromise their ability to effectively differentiate their offer. Managers should consider the potential tensions arising from internal and external stakeholder relationships to optimize their innovation strategies.

This study contributes to the existing literature by shedding light on the role of external innovation sources in influencing the relationship between differentiation intent and outcome and the importance that information systems may have in this relationship. By exploring the moderating effect of open innovation breadth, we provide a nuanced understanding of how firms can navigate organizational tensions and leverage innovation for competitive advantage.