Skip to main content
EXTENDED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Published in:
Read chapter Read first chapter

2024 | OriginalPaper | Chapter

13. Paradox Skills: Umgang mit Zielkonflikten einer nachhaltigen Transformation

Authors : Nadine Pratt, Elisabeth Suntrup-Andresen, Beate Klingenberg

Published in: Kompetenzen für die Arbeitswelten der Zukunft

Publisher: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden

Log in

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Zusammenfassung

Der Blick auf die Sustainable Development Goals der Agenda 2030 der United Nations zeigt: Nachhaltige Entwicklung ist nicht nur in hohem Maße komplex und vielschichtig. Sie ist auch geprägt von einer Vielzahl von Spannungen und Zielkonflikten. In Anbetracht dessen, identifizieren unterschiedliche Frameworks Fähigkeiten im Umgang mit Zielkonflikten, Spannungsfeldern und Paradoxien im Nachhaltigkeitskontext als zentrale Fähigkeiten der Zukunft (Paradox Skills). Der Beitrag erläutert anhand von Frameworks der OECD, des Stifterverbandes in Zusammenarbeit mit McKinsey und der Europäischen Kommission die Notwendigkeit für diese Paradox Skills. Anschließend werden archetypische Paradoxien im Kontext der Nachhaltigkeit beispielhaft diskutiert und veranschaulicht. Kern des Beitrages ist ein Überblick über Tools für den Umgang mit wahrgenommenen Zielkonflikten und zugrunde liegenden Paradoxien im Nachhaltigkeitsmanagement.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Business + Economics & Engineering + Technology"

Online-Abonnement

Springer Professional "Business + Economics & Engineering + Technology" gives you access to:

  • more than 102.000 books
  • more than 537 journals

from the following subject areas:

  • Automotive
  • Construction + Real Estate
  • Business IT + Informatics
  • Electrical Engineering + Electronics
  • Energy + Sustainability
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Leadership
  • Marketing + Sales
  • Mechanical Engineering + Materials
  • Insurance + Risk


Secure your knowledge advantage now!

inform now

Springer Professional "Engineering + Technology"

Online-Abonnement

Springer Professional "Engineering + Technology" gives you access to:

  • more than 67.000 books
  • more than 390 journals

from the following specialised fileds:

  • Automotive
  • Business IT + Informatics
  • Construction + Real Estate
  • Electrical Engineering + Electronics
  • Energy + Sustainability
  • Mechanical Engineering + Materials





 

Secure your knowledge advantage now!

inform now

Springer Professional "Business + Economics"

Online-Abonnement

Springer Professional "Business + Economics" gives you access to:

  • more than 67.000 books
  • more than 340 journals

from the following specialised fileds:

  • Construction + Real Estate
  • Business IT + Informatics
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Leadership
  • Marketing + Sales
  • Insurance + Risk



Secure your knowledge advantage now!

inform now
previous chapter Future Skillsets als kritischer Erfolgsfaktor: Ein neues Framework mit einem innovativen Quantifizierungsmodell des Digital Mindsets in KMU
next chapter Rolle der beruflichen Bildung: Ausbildung muss umlernen
Footnotes
1
Übersetzt aus dem Englischen (European Commission, 2019, S. 2): „a fair and prosperous society, with a modern, resource-efficient and competitive economy“.
 
2
Übersetzt aus dem Englischen (Hahn et al., 2018, S. 237): „A paradox perspective on corporate sustainability accommodates interrelated yet conflicting economic, environmental, and social concerns with the objective of achieving superior business contributions to sustainable development.“
 
3
Übersetzt aus dem Englischen; „the extent to which one is accepting of and energized by tensions“ (Miron-Spektor et al., 2018, S. 26).
 
4
Der Test kann abgerufen werden unter: https://​paradox.​lerner.​udel.​edu/​.
 
5
Both-And-Thinking, im Kontext des Sustainability Mindsets als Beides-Und-Denken verstanden, das über Sowohl-als-auch Denken hinausgeht.
 
6
Eine Demoversion des Sustainability Mindset Indicators findet sich hier: https://​smindicator.​com/​indicator-demo/​.
 
7
Ein breiter Fundus an Materialien findet sich ebenso online unter https://​bothandthinking.​net/​.
 
Literature
Beech, N., Burns, H., de Caestecker, L., MacIntosh, R., & MacLean, D. (2004). Paradox as invitation to act in problematic change situations. Human Relations, 57(10), 1313–1332.CrossRef
Besharov, M. L. (2014). How organizational identification emerges when individuals hold divergent values. Academy of Management Journals, 57(5), 1485–1512.
Boyatzis, R. E., & Akrivou, K. (2006). The ideal self as the driver of intentional change. Journal of Management Development, 25(7), 624–642.CrossRef
Carmine, S., & De Marchi, V. (2023). Reviewing paradox theory in corporate sustainability toward a systems perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 184, 139–158.CrossRef
Clegg, S. R., da Cunha, J. V., & e Cunha, M. P. (2002). Management paradoxes: A relational view. Human Relations, 55(5), 483–503.CrossRef
Cooperrider, D., Whitney, D., & Stavros, J. (2008). Appreciative inquiry handbook: For leaders of change. Berrett-Koehler Publishers Incorporated.
Directive (EU) 2022/2464 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 December 2022 amending Regulation (EU) No 537/2014, Directive 2004/109/EC, Directive 2006/43/EC and Directive 2013/34/EU, as regards corporate sustainability reporting (Text with EEA relevance), http://​data.​europa.​eu/​eli/​dir/​2022/​2464/​oj. Zugegriffen: 25. Juni 2024.
Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21 century business. Capstone Publishing Limited.
Fiss, P. C., & Zajac, E. J. (2006). The symbolic management of strategic change: Sensegiving via framing and decoupling. Academy of Management Journal, 49(6), 1173–1193.CrossRef
Griffiths, A., & Petrick, J. A. (2001). Corporate architectures for sustainability. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 21(12), 1573–1585.CrossRef
Hahn, T., Figge, F., Pinkse, J., & Preuss, L. (2010). Trade-offs in corporate sustainability: You can’t have your cake and eat it. Business Strategy and the Environment, 19(4), 217–229.CrossRef
Hahn, T., & Figge, F. (2011). Beyond the bounded instrumentality in current corporate sustainability research: Toward an inclusive notion of profitability. Journal of Business Ethics, 104(3), 325–345.CrossRef
Hahn, T., Preuss, L., Pinkse, J., & Figge, F. (2014). Cognitive frames in corporate sustainability: Managerial sensemaking with paradoxical and business case frames. The Academy of Management Review, 39(4), 463–487.CrossRef
Hahn, T., Pinkse, J., Preuss, L., & Figge, F. (2015). Tensions in corporate sustainability: Towards an integrative framework. Journal of Business Ethics, 127(2), 297–316.CrossRef
Hahn, T., Pinkse, J., Preuss, L., & Figge, F. (2016). Ambidexterity for corporate social performance. Organization Studies, 37(2), 213–235.CrossRef
Hahn, T., Figge, F., & Pinkse, J. (2018). A paradox perspective on corporate sustainability: Descriptive, instrumental, and normative aspects. Journal of Business Ethics, 148, 235–248.CrossRef
Herlyn, E. (2020). Die Agenda 2030 als systemische Herausforderung – Zielkonflikte und weitere Umsetzungsherausforderungen. In E. Herlyn & M. Lévy-Tödter (Hrsg.), Die Agenda 2030 als Magisches Vieleck der Nachhaltigkeit – Systemische Perspektiven. Springer Gabler.
Huzzard, T., & Östergren, K. (2002). When norms collide: Learning under organizational hypocrisy. British Journal of Management, 13(2), S47–S59.
Ivory, S. B., & Brooks, S. B. (2018). Managing corporate sustainability with a paradoxical lens: Lessons from strategic agility. Journal of Business Ethics, 148, 347–361.CrossRef
Johnson, B. (2011). Polarity management: Identifying and managing unsolvable problems. HRD Press.
Johnson, B. (2020). And: Making a difference by leveraging polarity, paradox or dilemma. Foundations. Volume One. HRD Press.
Johnson, B. (2021). And: Making a Difference by leveraging polarity, paradox or dilemma. Applications. Volume Two. HRD Press.
Klingenberg, B., & Boffelli, A. (2023). Innovative teaching: A case study on teaching sustainable supply chain management and a sustainability mindset. Proceedings of the 54th decision sciences annual conference, Decision Science Institute, Atlanta, November 18–20.
Kolk, A., & Pinkse, J. (2008). A perspective on multinational enterprises and climate change: Learning from ‘an inconvenient truth’? Journal of International Business Studies, 39(8), 1359–1378.CrossRef
Lewis, M. W., & Smith, W. K. (2022). Reflections on the 2021 AMR decade award: Navigating paradox is paradoxical. Academy of Management Review, 47(4), 528–548.CrossRef
Lüdeke-Freund, F., Breuer, H., & Massa, L. (2022). Sustainable Business Model Design – 45 Patterns. Druck- und Verlagshaus Zarbock.
Lüscher, L. S., & Lewis, M. W. (2008). Organizational change and managerial sensemaking: Working through paradox. Academy of Management Journal, 51(2), 221–240.CrossRef
Maletič, M., Maletič, D., Dahlgaard, J. J., Dahlgaard-Park, S. M., & Gomiscek, B. (2014). Sustainability exploration and sustainability exploitation: From a literature review towards a conceptual framework. Journal of Cleaner Production, 79, 182–194.CrossRef
Meadows, D., & Wright, D. (2009). Thinking in systems: A primer. Earthscan.
Miron-Spektor, E., Gino, F., & Argote, L. (2011). Paradoxical frames and creative sparks: Enhancing individual creativity through conflict and integration. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 116(2), 229–240.CrossRef
Miron-Spektor, E., Ingram, A. S., Keller, J., Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. (2018). Microfoundations of organizational paradox: The problem is how we think about the problem. Academy of Management Journal, 61(1), 26–45.CrossRef
OECD. (2019). OECD Future of Education and Skills 2030. Conceptual learning framework. Transformative Competencies for 2030. OECD Publishing. Transformative_Competencies _for_2030_concept_note.pdf (oecd.org). Zugegriffen: 05. Aug. 2023.
O’Reilly, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2004). The ambidextrous organization. Harvard Business Review, 82(4), 74–81.
O’Reilly, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2008). Ambidexterity as a dynamic capability: Resolving the innovator’s dilemma. Research in Organizational Behavior, 28, 185–206.
Rimanoczy, I. (2010). Business leaders committing to and fostering sustainability initiatives. ProQuest Dissertation Publishing.
Rimanoczy, I., & Turner, E. (2012). Action reflection learning: Solving real business problems by connecting learning with earning (S. 91–97). Hachette.
Rimanoczy, I. (2020). The sustainability mindset principles: A guide to developing a mindset for a better world. Routledge.CrossRef
Rimanoczy, I. (2022). The resource workbook for educators (Bd. 1–4). Self-published, Amazon.com.
Schultz, F. C. (2022). Approaching tensions in business model innovation for sustainability: An ordonomic meta-framework on tensions. European Journal of Sustainable Development., 11(4), 47–60.CrossRef
Seligman, M. E., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2014). Positive psychology: An introduction. In M. Csikszentmihalyi (Hrsg.), Flow and the foundations of positive psychology: The collected works of Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi (S. 279–298). Springer.CrossRef
Smith, W. K., & Besharov, M. (2019). Bowing before dual goods: How structured flexibility sustains organizational hybridity. Administrative science quarterly, 64(1), 1–44.CrossRef
Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. (2011). Toward a theory of paradox: A dynamic equilibrium model of organizing. Academy of Management Review, 36(2), 381–403.
Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. (2022). Both/and thinking: Embracing creative tensions to solve your toughest problems. Harvard Business School Publishing.
Sundaramurthy, C., & Lewis, M. (2003). Control and collaboration: Paradoxes of governance. Academy of Management Review, 28(3), 397–415.CrossRef
Turner, E. (2013). Gentle Interventions for team coaching: Little things that make a big difference (S.130). LIM LLC.
Van der Byl, C. A., & Slawinski, N. (2015). Embracing tensions in corporate sustainability: A review of research from win-wins and trade-offs to paradoxes and beyond. Organization & Environment, 28(1), 54–79.CrossRef
Van Bommel, K. (2018). Managing tensions in sustainable business models: Exploring instrumental and integrative strategies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 196, 829–841.CrossRef
Yuan, W., Bao, Y., & Verbeke, A. (2011). Integrating CSR insitiatives in business: An organizing framework. Journal of Business Ethics, 101(1), 75–92.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Paradox Skills: Umgang mit Zielkonflikten einer nachhaltigen Transformation
Authors
Nadine Pratt
Elisabeth Suntrup-Andresen
Beate Klingenberg
Copyright Year
2024
Book
Kompetenzen für die Arbeitswelten der Zukunft

Print ISBN: 978-3-658-44958-2

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-658-44959-9

Copyright Year: 2024

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-44959-9_13

Premium Partner

    Image Credits