Search results

This chapter introduces two core notions from Niklas Luhmann’s social systems theory to paradox studies. Specifically, it offers the notions of decision paradox and deparadoxization as potential generative theoretical devices for paradox scholars. Drawing on these devices, the paper shifts focus to the everyday and mundane nature of decision paradox and the important role of deparadoxization (i.e., generating latency) in working through paradox. This contribution comes at a critical juncture for paradox scholarship, which has begun to converge around core theories, by opening up additional and possibly alternative theoretical pathways for understanding paradox. These ideas respond to recent calls in the literature to widen our theoretical repertoire and align scholarship more closely with the rich, pluralistic traditions of paradox studies.

This paper addresses decision-making for commercial real estate (CRE) firms and professionals within the context of rapid technological innovations capable of business model disruption. It considers the paradoxical notion of the need for CRE firms to become ambidextrous by simultaneously exploiting their existing business model and exploring possible opportunities and threats. The paper develops a practical approach, the paradox map, for dealing with this paradoxical problem.

This qualitative research draws on work from organizational management, leadership, social sciences and technology. This research frames the definition and development of an ambidextrous mindset and its components. Paradox management is explored as a possible source of useful tools.

The ambidextrous mindset is a paradox in that exploit and explore are ongoing interrelated opposing forces. Further, the mindset is the product of a number of sub-paradoxes that act as levers for its development and adjustment. The paradox map is developed to facilitate dealing with numerous paradoxes.

The paradox map is a useful tool for commercial real-estate firms to understand and develop an ambidextrous mindset.

Commercial real estate is experiencing a wave of substantive technological disruption in the proptech marketplace and beyond. This paper attempts to clarify the paradox of innovation and its underlying sub-paradoxes to help professionals navigate the interrelated landscape of exploiting past products and exploring innovations.

Business and society have been known to be interlinked by a thread called sustainability. However, over the years, this thread has lost its strength because of the dominance of an instrumental perspective towards corporate sustainability (CS). Literature shows that there are innumerable tensions around CS decisions and propose several reasons why decision-makers predominantly resort to the instrumental perspective (CS as a mean) rather than the intrinsic perspective (CS as an end) when addressing these tensions. In this chapter, the authors offer a novel solution to overcome this issue by adapting the existing definition of moral imagination (MI) from the business ethics domain to the CS domain with the help of climate science literacy and mental models of climate phenomena. The authors posit that practicing this adapted MI can facilitate decision-makers to move from the instrumental perspective to adopt an intrinsic perspective through integrative and paradox approaches when handling tensions in CS decisions. The authors contribute to the broad field of sustainability by proposing a conceptual framework that links MI to the intrinsic perspective of CS decisions. This chapter not only offers several theoretical contributions and future research directions but also posits that the empirical verification of this framework can offer much-needed insights to managers and policy-makers to combat one of the significant threats to the survival of our planet, climate crisis.

The purpose of this paper is to describe how top management teams' expertise in comprehensive and intuitive decision-making contributes to effective improvisational decision-making in times of crisis. Also, improvisational decision-making, as a means for balancing or transcending the dualities of comprehensive and intuitive decision processes, enables the three strategic decision-making processes to coexist and contribute to decision-quality when in crisis.

After providing a general overview of comprehensive, intuitive and improvisational decision-making and introducing paradox theory, this paper offers a conceptual model of the link between improvisational decision-making and decision quality in crisis situations. Three boundary conditions are discussed: expertise in comprehensive decision-making, expertise in intuitive decision-making and the paradoxical balanced combination of comprehensive and intuitive decision-making. Two brief cases are included to illustrate the theory.

Although comprehensive and intuitive decision-making are rooted in distinct information processing approaches with different cognitive demands and at times contradictory logics, they can be combined in unique ways when senior executives improvise decisions in crisis situations.

Particularly in the contexts of crises, it is critical for managers to understand the value of improvisational decision-making and the balanced combination of decision-making tools available to them in order to make rapid and quality decisions. Potential action research interventions are suggested.

This paper offers an integrated model of decision-making, encompassing comprehensive, intuitive and improvisational processes and highlights the combinatory and synergistic nature of these approaches in a crisis.

Over the past decades, scholars advanced foundational insights about paradox in organization theory. In this double volume, we seek to expand upon these insights through interdisciplinary theorizing. We do so for two reasons. First, we think that now is a moment to build on those foundations toward richer, more complex insights by learning from disciplines outside of organization theory. Second, as our world increasingly faces grand challenges, scholars turn to paradox theory. Yet as the challenges become more complex, authors turn to other disciplines to ensure the requisite complexity of our own theories. To advance these goals, we invited scholars with knowledge in paradox theory to explore how these ideas could be expanded by outside disciplines. This provides a both/and opportunity for paradox theory: both learning from outside disciplines beyond existing boundaries and enriching our insights in organization scholarship. The result is an impressive collection of papers about paradox theory that draws from four outside realms – the realm of belief, the realm of physical systems, the realm of social structures, and the realm of expression. In this introduction, we expand on why paradox theory is ripe for interdisciplinary theorizing, explore the benefits of doing so, and introduce the papers in this double volume.

Interdisciplinary research allows us to broaden our sights and expand our theories. Yet, such research surfaces a number of challenges. We highlight three issues – superficiality, lack of focus, and consilience - and discuss how they can be addressed in interdisciplinary research. In particular, we focus on the implications for interdisciplinary work with paradox scholarship. We explore how these issues can be navigated as scholars bring together different epistemologies, ontologies and methodologies within interdisciplinary research, and illustrate our key points by drawing on extant work in paradox theory and on examples from this double volume. Our paper contributes to paradox scholarship, and to organizational theory more broadly, by offering practices about how to implement interdisciplinary research while also advancing our understanding about available research methods.

Managerial decisions ultimately determine the success or failure of a business strategy, and difficulties often arise when managers must decide how best to allocate scarce resources between activities. Adopting a cognitive framing perspective, this study aims to explore managers’ accounts of decision-making problems and how they solve them.

Interviews with 18 managers from the Austrian beverage industry were analysed to identify the kinds of decision-making problems they encounter and to understand how they solved those problems.

The participating managers perceived challenging decision-making problems as either a dilemma or a paradox. Dilemmas were resolved by committing entirely to one alternative or by focussing on one alternative at a time. In the case of paradoxes, managers looked for creative solutions, blending experimentation, humour and past experiences to create outside-the-box solutions that would simultaneously engage all alternatives.

This study provides empirical evidence of how managers frame challenging problems as dilemmas or paradoxes, and what types of coping mechanisms they use to identify and execute feasible solutions. While the current literature tends to emphasize the benefits of framing problems as paradoxes, the present findings also confirm the usefulness of dilemma-based solutions. A better understanding of these processes can help managers to make more thoughtful and better decisions.

Online privacy research has seen a focus on user behavior over the last decade, partly to understand and explain user decision-making and seeming inconsistencies regarding users' stated preferences. This article investigates the level of modeling that contemporary approaches rely on to explain said inconsistencies and whether drawn conclusions are justified by the applied modeling methodology. Additionally, it provides resources for researchers interested in using computational modeling.

The article uses data from a pre-existing literature review on the privacy paradox (N = 179 articles) to identify three characteristics of prior research: (1) the frequency of references to computational-level theories of human decision-making and perception in the literature, (2) the frequency of interpretations of human decision-making based on computational-level theories, and (3) the frequency of actual computational-level modeling implementations.

After excluding unrelated articles, 44.1 percent of investigated articles reference at least one theory that has been traditionally interpreted on a computational level. 33.1 percent of all relevant articles make statements regarding computational properties of human cognition in online privacy scenarios. Meanwhile, 5.1 percent of all relevant articles apply formalized computational-level modeling to substantiate their claims.

The findings highlight the importance of formal, computational-level modeling in online privacy research, which has so far drawn computational-level conclusions without utilizing appropriate modeling techniques. Furthermore, this article provides an overview of said modeling techniques and their benefits to researchers, as well as references for model theories and resources for practical implementation.

This paper aims to show how a common aspect of complex problems is that they often contain some form of paradox. By addressing the inherent paradox, decision‐makers can better understand and solve complex problems.

The paper identifies nine paradoxes that are encountered with surprising frequency in corporate decision making.

The paper finds that learning to recognize the most frequent types of problem‐solving paradoxes and their influence will save leaders some frustration, and perhaps help them and other members of the management team do a better job of navigating their firm's opportunities and challenges.

The paper explains why the only way to make truly “rational” decisions is to invent parts of the picture that do not exist because they lie somewhere in the future or beyond our ability to calculate.

By identifying nine seemingly illogical paradoxes that often thwart “rational” decision making, and suggesting how to deal with them, the author offers a handy guide for leaders.