Top

Published in:

2019 | OriginalPaper | Chapter

4. The Foundation: A New Perspective on Management in Complexity

Author : Jan Heiberg Johansen

Published in: Paradox Management

Publisher: Springer International Publishing

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

search-config

AI-assisted search

Off

Abstract

Forty years ago, the pioneers of paradox management initiated a series of events leading to the development of organizational paradoxes as a new perspective on organizations. It gradually changes management practice to see organizations through a paradox lens.

A number of theoretical positions emerge when investigating the early paradox literature. These positions on organizational paradox are generally united in the view that organizations are characterized by contradictions and paradoxes and that organizational actors discover paradoxes as cognitive and emotional tensions. They differ in their view on how contradictions are and throughout history have been embedded in organizations. The three areas, the emergence of the concept of paradox in organizational theory, the contradictions, and the tensions, form the chapter’s structure.

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

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

previous chapter The Historical Context: Contradictory Ideals of Management

next chapter The Paradox Types: Tensions in Organizing, Performance, Belonging, and Learning

Apker, J., Propp, K. M., & Zabava Ford, W. S. (2005). Negotiating Status and Identity Tensions in Healthcare Team Interactions: An Exploration of Nurse Role Dialectics. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 33(2), 93–115.CrossRef

Argyris, C. (1982). The Executive Mind and Double-Loop Learning. Organizational Dynamics, 11(2), 5–22.CrossRef

Ashcraft, K. L., & Trethewey, A. (2004). Developing Tension: An Agenda for Applied Research on the Organization of Irrationality. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 32(2), 171–181.CrossRef

Ashforth, B. E., Rogers, K. M., Pratt, M. G., & Pradies, C. (2014). Ambivalence in Organizations: A Multilevel Approach. Organization Science, 25(5), 1453–1478.CrossRef

Barnes, L. B. (1981). Managing the Paradox of Organizational Trust. Harvard Business Review, 59(2), 107–116.

Bateson, G. (1972). Steps to an Ecology of the Mind. New York, NY: Ballentine Books.

Bateson, G. (1979). Mind and Nature: A Necessary Unity. New York, NY: Dutton.

Benson, J. K. (1973). The Analysis of Bureaucratic-Professional Conflict: Functional Versus Dialectical Approaches. Sociological Quarterly, 14(3), 376–394.CrossRef

Benson, J. K. (1977). Organizations: A Dialectical View. Administrative Science Quarterly, 22(1), 1–21.CrossRef

Benson, J. K. (1983). A Dialectical Method for the Study of Organizations. In G. Morgan (Ed.), Beyond Method: Strategies for Social Research (pp. 331–346). Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.

Besharov, M. L., & Smith, W. K. (2014). Multiple Institutional Logics in Organizations: Explaining Their Varied Nature and Implications. Academy of Management Review, 39(3), 364–381.CrossRef

Bisel, R. S. (2009). On a Growing Dualism in Organizational Discourse Research. Management Communication Quarterly, 22(4), 614–638.CrossRef

Calton, J. M., & Payne, S. L. (2003). Coping with Paradox: Multistakeholder Learning Dialogue as a Pluralist Sensemaking Process for Addressing Messy Problems. Business & Society, 42(1), 7–42.CrossRef

Cameron, K. (1986). Effectiveness as Paradox: Consensus and Conflict in Conceptions of Organizational Effectiveness. Management Science, 32, 539–553.CrossRef

Chen, M. J. (2014). Presidential Address – Becoming Ambicultural: A Personal Quest, and Aspiration for Organizations. Academy of Management Review, 39(2), 119–137.CrossRef

Chen, M.-J. (2002). Transcending Paradox: The Chinese ‘Middle Way’ Perspective. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 19, 179–199.CrossRef

Chen, M.-J. (2008). Reconceptualizing the Competition–Cooperation Relationship: A Transparadox Perspective. Journal of Management Inquiry, 17(4), 288–304.CrossRef

Churchman, C. W. (1971). The Design of Inquiring Systems Basic Concepts of Systems and Organization. New York: Basic Books.

Clegg, S. R., Cunha, J. V., & Cunha, M. P. (2002). Management Paradoxes: A Relational View. Human Relations, 55(5), 483–503.CrossRef

Collins, J. (2001). Good to Great. New York: Random House Books.

Collins, J., & Porras, J. (1997). Built to Last: Successful Habits of Visionary Companies. New York: Harper-Business.

Cosier, R. A., & Aplin, J. C. (1980). A Critical View of Dialectical Inquiry as a Tool in Strategic Planning. Strategic Management Journal, 1(4), 343–356.CrossRef

Cosier, R. A., Ruble, T. L., & Aplin, J. C. (1978). An Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Dialectical Inquiry Systems. Management Science, 24(14), 1483–1490.CrossRef

Cunha, M. P., Rego, A., & Vaccaro, A. (2014). Organizations as Human Communities and Internal Markets: Searching for Duality. Journal of Business Ethics, 120(4), 441–455.

Deetz, S. (1996). Describing Differences in Approaches to Organization Science: Rethinking Burrell and Morgan and Their Legacy. Organization Science, 7(2), 191–207.CrossRef

Drummond, H. (1998). Is Escalation Always Irrational? Organization Studies, 19(6), 911–929.CrossRef

Dunn, M. B., & Jones, C. (2010). Institutional Logics and Institutional Pluralism: The Contestation of Care and Science Logics in Medical Education, 1967–2005. Administrative Science Quarterly, 55(1), 114–149.CrossRef

Engeström, Y., & Sannino, A. (2011). Discursive Manifestations of Contradictions in Organizational Change Efforts: A Methodological Framework. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 24(3), 368–387.CrossRef

Fairhurst, G. T., Smith, W. K., Banghart, S. G., Lewis, M. W., Putnam, L. L., Raisch, S., & Schad, J. (2016). Diverging and Converging: Integrative Insights on a Paradox Meta-Perspective. The Academy of Management Annals, 10(1), 173–182.CrossRef

Fang, T. (2012). Yin Yang: A New Perspective on Culture. Management and Organization Review, 8(1), 25–50.CrossRef

Farjoun, M. (2010). Beyond Dualism: Stability and Change as a Duality. Academy of Management Review, 35(2), 202–225.

Giddens, A. (1984). The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.

Heydebrand, W. (1977). Organizational Contradictions in Public Bureaucracies: Toward a Marxian Theory of Organizations. Sociological Quarterly, 18(1), 83–107.CrossRef

Jackson, W. A. (1999). Dualism, Duality and the Complexity of Economic Institutions. International Journal of Social Economics, 26(4), 545–558.CrossRef

Janssens, M., & Steyaert, C. (1999). The World in Two and a Third Way Out? The Concept of Duality in Organization Theory and Practice. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 15(2), 121–139.CrossRef

Jarzabkowski, P. A., & Le, J. K. (2016). We Have to Do This and That? You Must Be Joking: Constructing and Responding to Paradox Through Humor. Organization Studies, 38, 433–462.CrossRef

Jian, G. (2007). Unpacking Unintended Consequences in Planned Organizational Change: A Process Model. Management Communication Quarterly, 21(1), 5–28.CrossRef

Kets de Vries, M. F. R. (1980). Organizational Paradoxes: Clinical Approaches to Management. London: Tavistock Publications.

Kozica, A., & Brandl, J. (2015). Handling Paradoxical Tensions through Conventions: The Case of Performance Appraisal. Zeitschrift für Personalforschung, 29(1), 49–68.

Lautsch, B. A., Kossek, E. E., & Eaton, S. C. (2009). Supervisory Approaches and Paradoxes in Managing Telecommuting Implementation. Human Relations, 62(6), 795–827.CrossRef

Lewis, M. W. (2000). Exploring Paradox: Toward a More Comprehensive Guide. Academy of Management Review, 25(4), 760–776.CrossRef

Lewis, M. W., & Kelemen, M. L. (2002). Multiparadigm Inquiry: Exploring Organizational Pluralism and Paradox. Human Relations, 55(2), 251–275.CrossRef

Li, P. P. (2014). The Unique Value of Yin-Yang Balancing: A Critical Response. Management and Organization Review, 10(02), 321–332.

Li, X. (2014). Can Yin-Yang Guide Chinese Indigenous Management Research? Management and Organization Review, 10(01), 7–27.CrossRef

Łukowski, P. (2011). Paradoxes (Vol. 31). New York: Springer Science & Business Media.CrossRef

Mason, R. O. (1969). A Dialectical Approach to Strategic Planning. Management Science, 15(8), 403–414.CrossRef

McGuire, T. (2006). ‘Paradoxing the Dialectic’: The Impact of Patients’ Sexual Harassment in the Discursive Construction of Nurses’ Caregiving Roles. Management Communication Quarterly, 19(3), 416–450.CrossRef

Mitroff, I. I., Emshoff, J. R., & Kilmann, R. H. (1979). Assumptional Analysis: A Methodology for Strategic Problem Solving. Management Science, 25(6), 583–593.CrossRef

Nippert-Eng, C. E. (1996a). Calendars and Keys: The Classification of “Home” and “Work”. Sociological Forum, 11(3), 563–582.CrossRef

Nippert-Eng, C. E. (1996b). Home and Work: Negotiating Boundaries through Everyday Life. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRef

Poole, M. S., & Van de Ven, A. H. (1989). Using Paradox to Build Management and Organization Theories. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 562–578.CrossRef

Putnam, L. L. (2013). Primary and Secondary Contradictions: A Literature Review and Future Directions. Management Communication Quarterly, 27(4), 623–630.CrossRef

Putnam, L. L. (2015). Unpacking the Dialectic: Alternative Views on the Discourse-Materiality Relationship. Journal of Management Studies, 52(5), 706–716.CrossRef

Putnam, L. L., Fairhurst, G. T., & Banghart, S. (2016). Contradictions, Dialectics, and Paradoxes in Organizations: A Constitutive Approach. The Academy of Management Annals, 10(1), 65–171.

Quinn, R. E., & Cameron, K. (1983). Organizational Life Cycles and Shifting Criteria of Effectiveness: Some Preliminary Evidence. Management Science, 29(1), 33–51.CrossRef

Raza-Ullah, T., Bengtsson, M., & Kock, S. (2014). The Coopetition Paradox and Tension in Coopetition at Multiple Levels. Industrial Marketing Management, 43(2), 189–198.CrossRef

Rees, L., Rothman, N. B., Lehavy, R., & Sanchez-Burks, J. (2013). The Ambivalent Mind Can Be a Wise Mind: Emotional Ambivalence Increases Judgment Accuracy. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49(3), 360–367.CrossRef

Rohrbaugh, J. (1981). Operationalizing the Competing Values Approach: Measuring Performance in the Employment Service. Public Productivity Review, 5, 141–159.CrossRef

Schad, J., Lewis, M. W., Raisch, S., & Smith, W. K. (2016). Paradox Research in Management Science: Looking Back to Move Forward. The Academy of Management Annals, 10(1), 5–64.CrossRef

Schneider, L. (1971). Dialectic in Sociology. American Sociological Review, 36(4), 667–678.CrossRef

Schultz, M., & Hatch, M. J. (1996). Living with Multiple Paradigms: The Case of Paradigm Interplay in Organizational Culture Studies. Academy of Management Review, 21(2), 529–557.

Schwenk, C. R. (1984). Effects of Planning Aids and Presentation Media on Performance and Affective Responses in Strategic Decision-Making. Management Science, 30(3), 263–272.CrossRef

Schwenk, C. R. (1989). Research Notes and Communications a Meta-Analysis on the Comparative Effectiveness of Devil’s Advocacy and Dialectical Inquiry. Strategic Management Journal, 10(3), 303–306.CrossRef

Sheep, M. L., Fairhurst, G. T., & Khazanchi, S. (2016). Knots in the Discourse of Innovation: Investigating Multiple Tensions in a Reacquired Spin-Off. Organization Studies, 38, 463–488.CrossRef

Smarandache, F. (2010). Paradoxism’s Manifestos and International Folklore. Glendale: Kappa & Omega.

Smith, K. K., & Berg, D. N. (1987). Paradoxes of Group Life: Understanding Conflict, Paralysis, and Movement in Group Dynamics. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Smith, W. K. (2014). Dynamic Decision Making: A Model of Senior Leaders Managing Strategic Paradoxes. Academy of Management Journal, 57(6), 1592–1623.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., Jarzabkowski, P., & Langley, A. (2017). Introduction: The Paradoxes of Paradox. In W. K. Smith, M. W. Lewis, P. Jarzabkowski, & A. Langley (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Organizational Paradox. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRef

Surman, E. (2002). Dialectics of Dualism: The Symbolic Importance of the Home/Work Divide. Ephemera: Theory & Politics in Organization, 2(3), 209–223.

Tse, T. (2013). Paradox Resolution: A Means to Achieve Strategic Innovation. European Management Journal, 31(6), 682–696.CrossRef

Tsoukas, H., & Cunha, M. (2017). On Organizational Circularity: Vicious and Virtuous Circles in Organizing. In W. K. Smith, M. W. Lewis, P. Jarzabkowski, & A. Langley (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Organizational Paradox. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

van Bommel, K., & Spicer, A. (2017). Critical Management Studies and Paradox. In W. K. Smith, M. W. Lewis, P. Jarzabkowski, & A. Langley (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Organizational Paradox (p. 17). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Vince, R., & Broussine, M. (1996). Paradox, Defense and Attachment: Accessing and Working with Emotions and Relations Underlying Organizational Change. Organization Studies, 17(1), 1–21.CrossRef

Wagner, J. A. (1978). The Organizational Double Bind: Toward an Understanding of Rationality and Its Complement. Academy of Management Review, 3(4), 786–795.CrossRef

Watzlawick, P., Beavin, J. H., & Jackson, D. D. (1967). Pragmatics of Human Communication: A Study of Interactional Patterns, Pathologies, and Paradoxes. New York, NY: WW.

Weick, K. E. (1979). The Social Psychology of Organizing. Redding, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in Organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Wieland, S. M. B. (2010). Ideal Selves as Resources for the Situated Practice of Identity. Management Communication Quarterly, 24(4), 503–528.CrossRef

Wood, J. T., & Conrad, C. (1983). Paradox in the Experiences of Professional Women. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 47(4), 305–322.CrossRef

Zeitz, G. (1980). Interorganizational Dialectics. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25(1), 72–88.CrossRef

Title: The Foundation: A New Perspective on Management in Complexity
Author: Jan Heiberg Johansen
Publisher: Springer International Publishing
Book: Paradox Management
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-94814-0

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-319-94815-7

Copyright Year: 2019
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94815-7_4