Paradox as an Interactional Resource: An ethnomethodological analysis into the interconnectedness of organizational paradoxes

Abstract

In this paper, we demonstrate how performing and belonging paradoxes act as triggers, mitigators and amplifiers for each other in moment-by-moment interaction. We show how expressing a performing paradox as part of group practice triggers belonging tensions, particularly when there is a strong expectation towards a uniform value-base. We further demonstrate how another performing paradox at the organization level is constructed to mitigate the belonging paradox through latency. This leads to an amplification dynamic where a paradox that is more socially appropriate is reinforced in order to cope with a more interactionally problematic one. Our results speak to research on the intertwined nature of paradoxical tensions and the relationship between latency and salience in working through paradox. Our study advocates for developing a more systematic approach for studying the interactional foundations of organizational paradox and offers ethnomethodological conversation analysis (EMCA) as one means to achieve improved understanding in this domain.

The Right to Success: Paradoxical tensions between contested logics in a multi-sectoral collaboration to promote scientific excellence in Israel

“…Recent studies go beyond studying a single paradoxical tension, and explore how multiple tensions are intertwined. For example, Lempiälä, Tiitinen and Vanharanta (2023) show how performing and belonging paradoxes act as triggers, mitigators and amplifiers for each other.…”

Opening new brokerage opportunities while closing existing ones: The Tertius Iungens orientation as a source of network advantage

“…The organizational paradox perspective focuses on seemingly contradictory organizational phenomena that are, in fact, interrelated, mutually enabling, and fully functional only in the presence of both antipodes (Farjoun, 2010; Lempiälä et al, in press; Smith & Lewis, 2011). The notion of paradoxes is evident in everyday activities, as, for example, people make mistakes to generate competence, work long hours to obtain leisure time, and allow their loved ones to be “free” to have them as their “own.” The paradoxical phenomena “seem logical in isolation but absurd and irrational when appearing simultaneously” (Lewis, 2000, p. 760).…”

Participatory Practices During Organizational Change: Rethinking Participation and Resistance

“…To name a few, the paradox of design (i.e., imposing mandates for empowering employees), the paradox of formalization (i.e., routinizing participation, which eliminates spontaneity), the paradox of representation (i.e., becoming co-opted by dominant interests), and the paradox of homogeneity (i.e., valuing agreement over disagreement while supporting diversity of opinion) are embedded in participation (Stohl & Cheney, 2001). Recent literature urges scholars to explore interactional foundations of paradox (i.e., how and why paradoxes are constructed in organizational interactions; Lempiälä et al, 2022). These tensions, contradictions, and paradoxes are a critical reality of organizational life; they influence how change is experienced (Fairhurst et al, 2002;Jian, 2007) and pave the way for unintended consequences (Jian, 2007) that can be expressed in the form of resistance and reactions from stakeholders.…”