Paradox, Dialectics or Trade‐Offs? A Double Loop Model of Paradox

Berti, Marco; Cunha, Miguel Piña e

doi:10.1111/joms.12899

Cited by 36 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 163 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The paradoxical effects of SBC on cost efficiency and idiosyncratic risk A burgeoning stream of literature has adopted paradox theory to examine different types of paradoxes and the response strategies to address them (Berti and Cunha, 2023;Schad et al, 2016). Paradox is defined as "contradictory yet interrelated elements that exist simultaneously and persist over time" (Smith and Lewis, 2011, p. 382).…”

Section: 3mentioning

confidence: 99%

How does digitalization alter the paradox of supply base concentration? The effects of digitalization intensity and breadth

Yang¹,

Hu²,

Shao³

et al. 2023

IJOPM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe highly uncertain and turbulent environments nowadays intensify the paradoxical effects of supply base concentration (SBC) on improving cost efficiency while increasing idiosyncratic risk (IR). Digitalization is regarded as a remedy for this paradox, yet digitization's potentially curative effect has not been empirically tested. Leveraging the lenses of paradox theory and information processing theory (IPT), this study explores how two distinct dimensions of digitalization, i.e. digitalization intensity (DI) and digitalization breadth (DB), reconcile the paradoxical effects of SBC.Design/methodology/approachUsing a panel dataset of 1,238 Chinese manufacturing firms in the period of 2012–2020, this study utilizes fixed-effects regression models to test the proposed hypotheses.FindingsThe authors discover that SBC enhances a firm's cost efficiency but induces greater IR. More importantly, there is evidence that DI restrains the amplifying effect of SBC on IR. However, DB weakens the enhancing effect of SBC on cost efficiency and aggravates the SBC's exacerbating effect on IR.Originality/valueThis study advances the understanding of the paradoxical effects of SBC on cost efficiency and IR from a paradox theory perspective. More importantly, to the best of the authors' knowledge, the authors' study is the first to untangle the differential roles of DI and DB in reconciling the paradox of SBC. This study also provides practitioners with nuanced insights into how the practitioners should use appropriate tactics to deploy digital technologies effectively.

show abstract

Section: 3mentioning

confidence: 99%

How does digitalization alter the paradox of supply base concentration? The effects of digitalization intensity and breadth

Yang¹,

Hu²,

Shao³

et al. 2023

IJOPM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Scholars seek to strengthen paradox theory by refining definitional clarity (Berti & Cunha, 2022; Smith, 2014; Smith & Lewis, 2011), identifying central concepts of opposition, interrelation, persistence, and undecidability, as well as differentiating paradox from dilemmas, dialectics, or dichotomies (Putnam et al, 2016). Some have analysed key processes at the heart of paradox dynamics, such as vicious and virtuous cycles (Pradies, Tunarosa, Lewis, & Courtois, 2021; Sundaramurthy & Lewis, 2003), or provided reflection on paradox’s either inherent or socially constructed nature through insights on the salience or latency of paradox (Hahn & Knight, 2021a; Pradies, 2022; Schad & Bansal, 2018).…”

Section: Paradox Theory: Rich In Reflexivity Yet Blind To the Use Of ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Despite their interrelated nature, their binary conception minimizes theoretical convergence (Cunha & Putnam, 2019), revealing limits to understanding paradox, as Schad et al (2019) note. A vibrant cross-disciplinary intellectual community of paradox scholars has emerged, employing a variety of methods to address a wide array of topics (Berti & Cunha, 2022; Putnam et al, 2016; Schad et al, 2016), tensions and their management (Keller et al, 2021; Schad et al, 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Figure is Worth a Thousand Words: The role of visualization in paradox theorizing

Pradies

Berti

Cunha

et al. 2023

Organization Studies

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Visualization (i.e., the use of figures and images to represent findings and conceptual models) is central to theorizing. Yet, by focusing solely on the textual content of papers, analysis has inadvertently marginalized the graphic representations of key ideas. We review the paradox literature not just in terms of what authors have written but also how they have visualized models concisely. An analysis of figures in paradox articles captures the essential role that visuals play in our understanding of competing tensions, leveraging the power of imagery. We explore paradox visually, searching for the figurative materialization of paradox; more particularly, we seek visual signs that render abstract ideas more saliently and concretely. We contribute to paradox theory in three ways. First, we show how visuals constitute the lynchpin between convergent and divergent forces, allowing scholars to simultaneously reinforce and challenge current understanding. Second, we offer a tool for scholars to theorize competing demands based on three key antinomies, or dualities, that define the terrain of research in our field. Third, we reveal the performative effect of figures by identifying the ongoing dominance of certain classes of paradox visuals, which allows us to point to uncharted territories for paradox research.

show abstract

“…A rapidly growing body of conceptual (e.g. Berti and Cunha, 2022;Purvanova and Kenda, 2018;Volk et al, 2022), qualitative (e.g. Klonek et al, 2021;Yin, 2022), and quantitative research (e.g.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A rapidly growing body of conceptual (e.g. Berti and Cunha, 2022; Purvanova and Kenda, 2018; Volk et al. , 2022), qualitative (e.g.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A multiperspective approach to paradoxical leadership: the moderating effect of intelligence and trait emotions on leader behavior

Collins

2023

LODJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeParadoxical leadership concerns competing yet interrelated leader behaviors in response to conflicting workplace demands. Emerging research examines the outcomes of paradoxical leadership, yet less is known about its antecedents. This article aims to examine the combined effect of leader fluid intelligence, trait anxiety and trait anger, on transformational leadership and abusive supervision as contrasting paradoxical leader behaviors.Design/methodology/approachThis study involves 157 leader–manager dyads, and 137 leader–follower teams utilizing a cross-correlational, time-lagged, online survey design.FindingsResults indicate that leader fluid intelligence moderates the relationship between leader trait emotions and behavior such that low fluid intelligence and high trait anxiety results in manager perceptions of low transformational leadership, while low fluid intelligence and high trait anger results in follower perceptions of high abusive supervision.Originality/valueThe results suggest that fluid intelligence is a common factor that determines how leader trait emotions (anxiety and anger) are expressed through paradoxical leader behaviors as perceived by different hierarchical observers (i.e. a leader's superior and subordinates).

show abstract

Paradox, Dialectics or Trade‐Offs? A Double Loop Model of Paradox

Cited by 36 publications

References 163 publications

How does digitalization alter the paradox of supply base concentration? The effects of digitalization intensity and breadth

How does digitalization alter the paradox of supply base concentration? The effects of digitalization intensity and breadth

A Figure is Worth a Thousand Words: The role of visualization in paradox theorizing

A multiperspective approach to paradoxical leadership: the moderating effect of intelligence and trait emotions on leader behavior

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About