Search results

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.

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.

Although the place stakeholders play a key role in participatory place branding, surprisingly little interest has been shown in the people involved in participatory place branding initiatives. The purpose of this study is to explore place stakeholders’ perceptions of the meaning and scope of place branding.

This paper is based on two cases of participatory place branding, and the research design is inspired by participatory action research. The empirical material comprises observations, qualitative questionnaires and interviews.

This study identifies and describes four paradoxes in place stakeholders’ perceptions of the meaning and scope of place branding, embracing the target group (internal vs external), the objective (explore vs exploit), the stakeholders’ role (active vs passive) and the main value of place branding initiatives (process vs outcome). Furthermore, in this study, the place stakeholders’ paradoxical perceptions of place branding meant that, during the participatory processes, the authors encountered and needed to manage various opinions and behaviours, for example, “critics”, “innovators” and “relators”.

This paper contributes with a new perspective on participatory place branding. By capturing place stakeholders’ perceptions and understanding of place branding, this paper develops our knowledge and understanding of the starting point of participatory processes.

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.

Aiming to resolve cross-cultural paradoxes in combining artificial intelligence (AI) with human intelligence (HI) for international humanitarian logistics, this paper aims to adopt an unorthodox Yin–Yang dialectic approach to address how AI–HI interactions can be interpreted as a sophisticated cross-cultural knowledge creation (KC) system that enables more effective decision-making for providing humanitarian relief across borders.

This paper is conceptual and pragmatic in nature, whereas its structure design follows the requirements of a real impact study.

Based on experimental information and logical reasoning, the authors first identify three critical cross-cultural challenges in AI–HI collaboration: paradoxes of building a cross-cultural KC system, paradoxes of integrative AI and HI in moral judgement and paradoxes of processing moral-related information with emotions in AI–HI collaboration. Then applying the Yin–Yang dialectic to interpret Klir’s epistemological frame (1993), the authors propose an unconventional stratified system of cross-cultural KC for understanding integrative AI–HI decision-making for humanitarian logistics across cultures.

This paper aids not only in deeply understanding complex issues stemming from human emotions and cultural cognitions in the context of cross-border humanitarian logistics, but also equips culturally-diverse stakeholders to effectively navigate these challenges and their potential ramifications. It enhances the decision-making process and optimizes the synergy between AI and HI for cross-cultural humanitarian logistics.

The originality lies in the use of a cognitive methodology of the Yin–Yang dialectic to metaphorize the dynamic genesis of integrative AI-HI KC for international humanitarian logistics. Based on system science and knowledge management, this paper applies game theory, multi-objective optimization and Markov decision process to operationalize the conceptual framework in the context of cross-cultural humanitarian logistics.

This study aims to provide an overall framework that connects and explains a macro-perspective of the findings from the five studies of this special issue. Through this, we aim to answer two main questions: How can Lean and Industry 4.0 be integrated, and what are the outcomes for workers from such integration?

The special issue received 64 papers that were evaluated in multiple stages until this final sample of five papers that describe different facets of the integration between Lean and Industry 4.0 and their relationship with worker activities. In this introduction, we review the main findings of these five studies and propose an integrative view and associated propositions. A discussion provides directions to advance the field further.

The framework shows that when Lean and Industry 4.0 are integrated, companies will face two types of tensions, dialectical and paradoxical, which require different managerial approaches. By managing such tensions, the Lean-Industry 4.0 integration can help improve social performance, as well as develop systematic problem-solving and cumulative learning capabilities. Five important themes for this field of research are outlined: the importance of work routines, legitimation, competence, sense and mental flexibility.

This study brings a new theoretical perspective to the integration of Lean with Industry 4.0-related digital technologies. The results go beyond the usual view of improving operational performance and dig into the effects on workers. It also shows that the integration process relies on and can enhance human capabilities such as learning and problem-solving.

This paper seeks to understand kaizen in practice as it travels through time and space in the organisational setting.

A qualitative case study was carried out at a multinational company using mainly interviews for the data collection that were analysed from an actor-network theory (ANT) perspective.

This paper finds that the company deals with a series of paradoxes while managing the kaizen process. Efficiency and quality paradoxes are the basis for starting kaizen projects. Furthermore, intrinsic, and extrinsic motivation, emerge in these processes, and paradoxes relate to how spontaneous ideas emerge in a deliberated context of cost-saving objectives. The supply chain finance team coordinates kaizen projects with the collaboration of plant managers, promoting the paradox of autonomy and control. In addition, as kaizen mobilises and enrols the actors, some trials of strength emerge, showing actors who oppose the kaizen network and create competing networks that mutually exist in the firm.

This study presents valuable insights for professionals to successfully implement kaizen methodologies that take advantage of developing a network for problem-solving in organizations.

This study highlights the supply chain finance team's role in enrolling the actors within a network built by practitioners engaged in kaizen projects. Usually, engineers, quality, or manufacturing teams lead kaizen projects, and only occasionally, accounting and financial teams participate, including multidisciplinary teams.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a dynamic, multi-faceted and multi-temporal model of organizational change capability (OCC) to better grasp the complexity of this construct which is still mainly defined through its facilitating conditions rather than its own characteristics.

Building on the literature on organizational learning, punctuated equilibrium, continuous transformation, organizational ambidexterity and dynamic capabilities, this paper critically analyzes the OCC construct by challenging the ways it is currently studied.

This paper highlights that OCC contains five dynamically and temporally interrelated dimensions: learning from past change experience, managing continuous change, managing episodic change, managing change without compromising core organizational activities as well as anticipating future change. A set of propositions that link the construct to its facilitators and outcomes are also suggested.

This conceptual analysis shows that recognizing the existence of tensions in change management constructs is crucial to gaining a deeper understanding of the complexities that organizations are facing today. In addition, by proposing a model both in continuity with the literature by adopting a dynamic conception of OCC, but also in discontinuity by shifting the focal point of analysis towards the essence of the construct rather than its peripheral variables, this research takes a step forward to tackle the remaining misconceptions around the interpretation of change capability.

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused havoc on a global scale for supply chains, which put forward higher demand for organizations to reassess their global supply chain strategy and improve supply chain sustainability. The purpose of this paper is to understand how leader's paradoxical cognition affect supply chain sustainability.

This study conceptualizes a research model grounded in upper echelons theory and propose a chain-mediating model under the moderating effect of big data analytics. Using PLS-SEM method, we test the hypotheses using survey data collected from supply chain managers or leaders of the supply chain team from 193 firms.

The results indicate that supply chain ambidexterity and organizational learning play a mediating role in the relationship between leaders' paradoxical cognition on supply chain sustainability, respectively, and these two variables have a chain-mediating role in the relationship above. In addition, the big data analytics negatively moderates the relationship between leader's paradoxical cognition and organizational learning, and further moderates our chain mediating model.

This research initiatively focuses on the micro-foundations of supply chain sustainability from managerial cognition and firstly provides empirical evidence about the impact of leader's paradoxical cognition on supply chain sustainability.

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.