Living with paradox through irony

Gylfe, Philip; Franck, Henrika; Vaara, Eero

doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2019.03.002

Cited by 16 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Ethnographic studies perhaps come to mind most when researchers contemplate emergent and engaged types of research (see Gylfe et al. , 2019; Wenzel et al.…”

Section: Shifting Methods To Address Paradoxical Tensions In Scmmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seeing with fresh eyes – the potential of paradox theory to explore persistent, interdependent tensions in supply chains

Kocabasoglu-Hillmer,

Vanpoucke,

Son

et al. 2023

IJOPM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThis study explores the potential of paradox theory as a novel theoretical lens to investigate persistent and interdependent tensions in supply chains. It is based on a critical literature review focusing on paradoxes observed within complex supply chains in dynamic business environments, including the articles selected for this special issue, “Environmental Dynamism and Supply Chain Complexity: Managing the Paradoxes.”Design/methodology/approachThis study introduces the key concepts and themes of the paradox theory literature and possible methodological approaches to studying paradoxes in supply chains. Through a literature review, this study also reflects on the current state of paradox research in the field of operations and supply chain management (OSCM) and proposes future research questions.FindingsThe application of paradox theory to OSCM research is in its early stages. This paper presents opportunities to explore persistent and interdependent tensions in supply chains using paradox theory.Research limitations/implicationsThe paper suggests several new research questions that should be translated into more precise propositions. The main implication for research is a call to focus attention on how and why a paradox perspective can help supply chain researchers view complex supply chain problems with fresh eyes.Originality/valueThe study provides the first critical review of paradoxical tensions in OSCM research. While the papers in this special issue contribute significantly to a better understanding of these issues, there is still significant potential for understanding how to respond to paradoxes in supply chains.

show abstract

“…Ethnographic studies perhaps come to mind most when researchers contemplate emergent and engaged types of research (see Gylfe et al. , 2019; Wenzel et al.…”

Section: Shifting Methods To Address Paradoxical Tensions In Scmmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seeing with fresh eyes – the potential of paradox theory to explore persistent, interdependent tensions in supply chains

Kocabasoglu-Hillmer,

Vanpoucke,

Son

et al. 2023

IJOPM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Action research, also gaining recognition in supply chain research, can help assess the impacts of different response strategies (e.g., Lüscher & Lewis, 2008). Additional questions would benefit from considering other, less‐used techniques, such as ethnographic studies, specifically for emergent topics (e.g., Gylfe et al, 2019; Wenzel et al, 2019) or discourse analysis, to understand potentially differing responses on the part of diverse actors (Hardy et al, 2020). Conceptual research that makes use of metaphors and visual narratives helps scholars see problems “with fresh eyes” (Stephens et al, 2022).…”

Section: Further Research Opportunities At the Intersection Of Radica...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Radical innovations as supply chain disruptions? A paradox between change and stability

Kocabasoglu‐Hillmer

Roden

Vanpoucke

et al. 2023

J Supply Chain Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Supply chains withstand multiple tensions, and some of which are paradoxical. Radical product and process innovations bring such tensions to the forefront by disrupting supply chains. Using two illustrations, this article considers the paradoxical tension between change and stability in upstream supply chains, which becomes particularly salient after radical innovation. Furthermore, the article discusses why and how paradox theory can help firms understand and manage this pressing tension between stability and change. This article then presents future research opportunities for using paradox theory to investigate other persistent post‐innovation tensions in upstream supply chains. The aim of this article is to encourage new studies that develop responses to such paradoxical tensions, an area ripe for research.

show abstract

“…Although previous research has paid attention to organizational responses to paradoxes (e.g., Gaim, Clegg, & Cunha, 2020; Smith & Lewis, 2011), very few studies within paradox research have shed light on the discursive and rhetorical dimension of paradoxes, in particular the constructive effects of language in shaping and addressing paradoxes. The few studies that do so have focused on rhetorical techniques in change communication (Fiol, 2002), transcendence as a response to paradoxes (Bednarek, Paroutis, & Sillince, 2017), discursive aspects of paradoxical tensions in CSR reporting (Koep, 2017), and the role of irony in embracing organizational paradoxes (Gylfe, Franck, & Vaara, 2019). We take departure in this embryonic stream of discursive approaches within paradox research to study how organizations embrace the paradoxical tensions they create themselves when addressing their potential guilt.…”

Section: Guilt Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Organizational Guilt Management: A Paradox Perspective

Pollach

Ravazzani

Maier

2021

Group & Organization Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Alleged organizational wrongdoings are often characterized by high levels of uncertainty about what happened, which can take years to be established judicially. In this study, we examine organizations’ efforts to manage their stakeholders’ impressions of their possible guilt in this period of uncertainty. The study examines the discursive guilt-management strategies organizations employ in such situations to embrace the paradoxical tensions that emerge between their routine, positive self-presentations as responsible organizations and their communication about their possible guilt. Taking departure in impression management and a paradox perspective, we conceptualize guilt management as a discursive practice enacted in times of uncertainty. Specifically, we conduct a microlevel discourse analysis of corporate social responsibility (CSR) reports published by large US banks after the financial crisis and analyze how these banks managed impressions of their possible guilt, before they eventually agreed to legal settlements. We identify amending, bracketing, shifting locus of control, implicating, as well as reattributing and extending moral agency as central guilt-management strategies that embrace the paradoxical tensions between the banks’ positive self-presentations and their communication about their possible guilt. We conclude with a discussion of theoretical and methodological contributions to organization studies.

show abstract

Living with paradox through irony

Cited by 16 publications

References 21 publications

Seeing with fresh eyes – the potential of paradox theory to explore persistent, interdependent tensions in supply chains

Seeing with fresh eyes – the potential of paradox theory to explore persistent, interdependent tensions in supply chains

Radical innovations as supply chain disruptions? A paradox between change and stability

Organizational Guilt Management: A Paradox Perspective

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About