Addressing grand challenges confronts organizations with global–local and other paradoxes that can result in ‘paradox knots’ where responding to one paradox impacts another. Drawing on a longitudinal qualitative case study of an NGO operating in Uganda, we study how such knots impact ‘paradox salience’, i.e. their visibility and perceived urgency. We elucidate the knotted nature of two paradoxes: a global–local paradox and an identity elasticity paradox. Our analysis shows how the salience of these paradoxes developed inversely as the organization’s response to the global–local paradox amplified the salience of the identity elasticity paradox while its response to the identity elasticity paradox mitigated the salience of the global–local paradox. With these findings we contribute to the paradox literature by developing the concept of knotting mechanisms that tie paradoxes together and at the same time impact their salience within organizations. We explain how such mechanisms can produce different types of paradox knots and discuss what differentiates these types. We further contribute to the literatures that discuss NGOs’ local adaptation processes and identity elasticity by showing how the fluidity of organizational identity acts as a precondition for the local contextualization of development solutions.
AndriopoulosConstantineGotsiManto (2017). Methods of paradox. In SmithWendy K.LewisMarianne W.JarzabkowskiPaulaLangleyAnn (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of organizational paradox (pp. 513–528). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
2.
AndriopoulosConstantineLewisMarianne W. (2009). Exploitation-exploration tensions and organizational ambidexterity: Managing paradoxes of innovation. Organization Science, 20, 696–717.
3.
BalboaCristina M. (2018). The paradox of scale: How NGOs build, maintain, and lose authority in environmental governance. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
4.
BanerjeeSubhabrata B. (2003). Who sustains whose development? Sustainable development and the reinvention of nature. Organization Studies, 24, 143–180.
5.
Ben DavidYaelRubel-LifschitzTammy (2023). The right to success: Paradoxical tensions between contested logics in a multi-sectoral collaboration to promote scientific excellence in Israel. Organization Studies, 44, 2031–2055.
6.
BitzerVerenaSchoutenGreetje (2023). Out of balance: Global–local tensions in multi-stakeholder partnerships and the emergence of rival initiatives in producing countries. Organization & Environment, 36, 387–410.
7.
CloutierCharlotteLangleyAnn (2020). What makes a process theoretical contribution?Organization Theory, 1, 2631787720902473.
8.
CloutierCharlotteRavasiDavide (2020). Identity trajectories: Explaining long-term patterns of continuity and change in organizational identities. Academy of Management Journal, 63, 1196–1235.
9.
CorbinJuliet M.StraussAnselm L. (2015). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (4th ed.). Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore, Washington, DC, Boston: SAGE.
10.
CunhaMiguel P. e.PutnamLinda L. (2019). Paradox theory and the paradox of success. Strategic Organization, 17, 95–106.
11.
DavisGerald F.MarquisChristopher (2005). Prospects for organization theory in the early twenty-first century: Institutional fields and mechanisms. Organization Science, 16, 332–343.
12.
DouJunshengSuEmmaWangSong (2019). When does family ownership promote proactive environmental strategy? The role of the firm’s long-term orientation. Journal of Business Ethics, 158, 81–95.
13.
DyckBrunoSilvestreBruno S. (2019). A novel NGO approach to facilitate the adoption of sustainable innovations in low-income countries: Lessons from small-scale farms in Nicaragua. Organization Studies, 40, 443–461.
FairhurstGail T.PutnamLinda L. (2023). Performing organizational paradoxes. New York, NY: Routledge.
16.
FeldmanMartha S.BellJeannineBergerMichele T. (2003). Gaining access: A practical and theoretical guide for qualitative research. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.
GeertzClifford (1973). The interpretation of cultures: Selected essays. New York, NY: Basic Books.
19.
GioiaDennis A.SchultzMajkenCorleyKevin G. (2000). Organizational identity, image, and adaptive instability. Academy of Management Review, 25, 63–81.
20.
HahnTobiasKnightEric (2021). The ontology of organizational paradox: A quantum approach. Academy of Management Review, 46, 362–384.
21.
HedströmPeterSwedbergRichard (2010). Social mechanisms: An introductory essay. In HedströmPeterSwedbergRichard (Eds.), Social mechanisms (pp. 1–31). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
22.
HengstIris-ArianeJarzabkowskiPaulaHoeglMartinMuethelMiriam (2020). Toward a process theory of making sustainability strategies legitimate in action. Academy of Management Journal, 63, 246–271.
23.
HenriksenThomas D.NielsenRikke K.VikkelsøSigneBévortFransMogensenMette (2021). A paradox rarely comes alone: A quantitative approach to investigating knotted leadership paradoxes in SMEs. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 37, 101135.
24.
JarzabkowskiPaula (2008). Shaping strategy as a structuration process. Academy of Management Journal, 51, 621–650.
25.
JarzabkowskiPaulaBednarekRebeccaChalkiasKonstantinosCacciatoriEugenia (2019). Exploring inter-organizational paradoxes: Methodological lessons from a study of a grand challenge. Strategic Organization, 17, 120–132.
26.
JarzabkowskiPaulaBednarekRebeccaChalkiasKonstantinosCacciatoriEugenia (2022). Enabling rapid financial response to disasters: Knotting and reknotting multiple paradoxes in interorganizational systems. Academy of Management Journal, 65, 1477–1506.
27.
JarzabkowskiPaulaLêJane K. (2017). We have to do this and that? You must be joking: Constructing and responding to paradox through humor. Organization Studies, 38, 433–462.
28.
JayJasonSoderstromSaraGrantGabriel (2017). Navigating the paradoxes of sustainability. In SmithWendy K.LewisMarianne W.JarzabkowskiPaulaLangleyAnn (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of organizational paradox (pp. 353–372). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
29.
Jimenez PenaCarolinaMazutisDaina (2024). Organizational identity and corporate sustainability: A systematic literature review. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2024(1), 17348.
KnightEricParoutisSotirios (2017). Becoming salient: The TMT leader’s role in shaping the interpretive context of paradoxical tensions. Organization Studies, 38, 403–432.
32.
KorkeamäkiLauriSjödinDavidKohtamäkiMarkoParidaVinit (2022). Coping with the relational paradoxes of outcome-based services. Industrial Marketing Management, 104, 14–27.
33.
KouaméSaouréHafsiTaïebOliverDavidLangleyAnn (2022). Creating and sustaining stakeholder emotional resonance with organizational identity in social mission-driven organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 65, 1864–1893.
34.
KreinerGlen E.HollensbeElaineSheepMathew L.SmithBrett R.KatariaNiyati (2015). Elasticity and the dialectic tensions of organizational identity: How can we hold together while we are pulling apart?Academy of Management Journal, 58, 981–1011.
35.
LangleyAnn (1999). Strategies for theorizing from process data. Academy of Management Review, 24, 691–710.
36.
LangleyAnnTsoukasHaridimos (Eds.) (2017). The SAGE handbook of process organization studies. Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore, Washington, DC, Melbourne: SAGE.
37.
LewisMarianne W. (2000). Exploring paradox: Toward a more comprehensive guide. Academy of Management Review, 25, 760–776.
38.
LuongPauline J.WeinthalErika (1999). The NGO paradox: Democratic goals and non-democratic outcomes in Kazakhstan. Europe-Asia Studies, 51, 1267–1284.
39.
MaficoNkosanaKrzeminskaAnnaHärtelCharmineKellerJosh (2021). The mirroring of intercultural and hybridity experiences: A study of African immigrant social entrepreneurs. Journal of Business Venturing, 36, 106093.
40.
ManzhynskiSiarheiBiedenbachGalina (2023). The knotted paradox of coopetition for sustainability: Investigating the interplay between core paradox properties. Industrial Marketing Management, 110, 31–45.
41.
McKagueKevinZietsmaCharleneOliverChristine (2015). Building the social structure of a market. Organization Studies, 36, 1063–1093.
42.
MilesMatthew B.HubermanA. Michael (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
43.
Miron-SpektorEllaIngramAmyKellerJoshuaSmithWendy K.LewisMarianne W. (2018). Microfoundations of organizational paradox: The problem is how we think about the problem. Academy of Management Journal, 61, 26–45.
44.
PooleMarshall S.van de VenAndrew H. (1989). Using paradox to build management and organization theories. Academy of Management Review, 14, 562–578.
45.
RavasiDavideSchultzMajken (2006). Responding to organizational identity threats: Exploring the role of organizational culture. Academy of Management Journal, 49, 433–458.
46.
RaynoldsLaura T. (2014). Fairtrade, certification, and labor: Global and local tensions in improving conditions for agricultural workers. Agriculture and Human Values, 31, 499–511.
47.
RunfolaAndreaPernaAndreaBaraldiEnricoGregoriGian L. (2017). The use of qualitative case studies in top business and management journals: A quantitative analysis of recent patterns. European Management Journal, 35, 116–127.
48.
RuysschaertDenisSallesDenis (2014). Towards global voluntary standards: Questioning the effectiveness in attaining conservation goals. Ecological Economics, 107, 438–446.
49.
SchadJonathanBansalPratima (2018). Seeing the forest and the trees: How a systems perspective informs paradox research. Journal of Management Studies, 55, 1490–1506.
50.
SchadJonathanLewisMarianne W.RaischSebastianSmithWendy K. (2016). Paradox rresearch in management science: Looking back to move forward. The Academy of Management Annals, 10, 5–64.
51.
SchadJonathanSmithWendy K. (2019). Addressing grand challenges’ paradoxes: Leadership skills to manage inconsistencies. Journal of Leadership Studies, 12(4), 55–59.
52.
SchneikerAndrea (2015). Humanitarian NGO security networks and organisational learning: Identity matters and matters of identity. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 26, 144–170.
53.
SheepMathew L.FairhurstGail T.KhazanchiShalini (2017). Knots in the discourse of innovation: Investigating multiple tensions in a reacquired spin-off. Organization Studies, 38, 463–488.
54.
SmithWendy K.LewisMarianne W. (2011). Toward a theory of paradox: A dynamic equilibrium model of organizing. Academy of Management Review, 36, 381–403.
55.
TraceyPaulCreedW. E. Douglas (2017). Beyond managerial dilemmas: The study of institutional paradoxes in organization theory. In SmithWendy K.LewisMarianne W.JarzabkowskiPaulaLangleyAnn (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of organizational paradox (pp. 162–177). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
56.
TuckermannHarald (2019). Visibilizing and invisibilizing paradox: A process study of interactions in a hospital executive board. Organization Studies, 40, 1851–1872.
57.
van de VenAndrew H. (1992). Suggestions for studying strategy process: A research note. Strategic Management Journal, 13, 169–188.
58.
van WijkJakomijnvan WijkJeroenDrostSarahStamWouter (2020). Challenges in building robust interventions in contexts of poverty: Insights from an NGO-driven multi-stakeholder network in Ethiopia. Organization Studies, 41, 1391–1415.
59.
VenkataramanHemalathaVermeulenPatrickRaaijmakersAafkeMairJohanna (2016). Market meets community: Institutional logics as strategic resources for development work. Organization Studies, 37, 709–733.
60.
WijayaAtikaGlasbergenPieter (2016). Toward a new scenario in agricultural sustainability certification? The response of the Indonesian national government to private certification. The Journal of Environment & Development, 25, 219–246.
61.
ZilberTammar B. (2020). The methodology/theory interface: Ethnography and the microfoundations of institutions. Organization Theory, 1, 263178772091943.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
