The study of paradox in strategy and organization studies has grown rapidly over the last 25 years. Paradox, as contradictory yet interrelated opposites that exist simultaneously and persist over time, can be qualified as a successful area of study. Yet success, however sweet, may come at a price, namely, premature convergence on theoretical concepts, overconfidence in dominant explanations, and institutionalizing labels that protect dominant logics. We discuss the risk of paradox theory being vulnerable to the paradox of success and focus on ways to avoid narrowness in theory building.
AmasonACMooneyAC (2008) The Icarus paradox revisited: How strong performance sows the seeds of dysfunction in future strategic decision-making. Strategic Organization6(4): 407–434
2.
AndriopoulosCLewisMW (2009) Exploitation-exploration tensions and organizational ambidexterity: Managing paradoxes of innovation. Organization Science20(4): 696–717.
3.
AndriopolousCMiron-SpecktorESmithWK (2014) Call for papers: Paradoxes and unreason: Provoking greater examinations into organizational life. European Group on Organizational Studies Colloquium 2015. Available at: www.egosnet.org
4.
ArgyrisC (1994) Good communication that blocks learning. Harvard Business Review, July–August, pp. 77–85.
5.
Atuahene-GimaK (2005) Resolving the capability-rigidity paradox in new product innovation. Journal of Marketing69(4): 61–83.
6.
AudiaPGLockeEASmithKG (2000) The paradox of success: An archival and a laboratory study of strategic persistence following radical environmental change. Academy of Management Journal43(5): 837–853.
7.
BakkenTHernesT (2006) Organizing is both a verb and a noun: Weick meets Whitehead. Organization Studies27(11): 1599–1616.
8.
BargeJKLeeMMadduxKet al. (2008) Managing dualities in planned change initiatives. Journal of Applied Communication Research36(4): 364–390.
9.
BensonJK (1977) Organizations: A dialectical view. Administrative Science Quarterly22(1): 1–21.
10.
BerglundJWerrA (2000) The invincible character of management consulting rhetoric: How one blends incommensurates while keeping them apart. Organization7(4): 633–655.
11.
CampbellJL (2006) Institutional analysis and the paradox of corporate social responsibility. American Behavioral Scientist49(7): 925–938.
12.
CarmeliAHaleviMY (2009) How top management team behavioral integration and behavioral complexity enable organizational ambidexterity: The moderating role of contextual ambidexterity. Leadership Quarterly20(2): 207–218.
13.
CarterC (2013) The age of strategy: Strategy, organizations and society. Business History55(7): 1047–1057.
14.
CastillaEJBenardS (2010) The paradox of meritocracy in organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly55(4): 543–576.
15.
ChenMJ (2002) Transcending paradox: The Chinese “middle way” perspective. Asia Pacific Journal of Management19(2–3): 179–199.
16.
ClarkeM (1998) Can specialists be general managers? Developing paradoxical thinking in middle managers. Journal of Management Development17(3): 191–206.
CollinsJPorrasJ (1994) Built to Last: Successful Habits of Visionary Companies. New York: Harper Business.
19.
CooperR (1986) Organization/disorganization. Social Science Information25(2): 299–335.
20.
CunhaMPCleggSRRegoA (2012) Surprising organization. In: PitsisTSimpsonADehlinE (eds) Handbook of Organizational and Managerial Innovation. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 295–316.
21.
DameronSTorsetC (2014) The discursive construction of strategists’ subjectivities: Towards a paradox lens on strategy. Journal of Management Studies51(2): 291–319.
22.
DavisJPEisenhardtKM (2011) Rotating leadership and collaborative innovation: Recombination processes in symbiotic relationships. Administrative Science Quarterly56: 159–201.
23.
ElsassPM (1993) The paradox of success: Too much of a good thing?Academy of Management Perspectives7(3): 84–85.
24.
FairhurstGTSmithWKBanghartSGet al. (2016) Diverging and converging: Integrative insights on a paradox meta-perspective. Academy of Management Annals10(1): 173–182.
25.
FarjounM (2010) Beyond dualism: Stability and change as duality. Academy of Management Review35: 202–225.
26.
FarjounM (2017) Contradictions, dialectics, and paradoxes. In: LangleyATsoukasH (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Process Organization Studies. London: SAGE, pp. 87–109.
27.
FraherALBranickiJGrintK (2017) Mindfulness in action: Discovering how U.S. Navy SEALs build capacity for mindfulness in high-reliability organizations (HROs). Academy of Management Discoveries. Epub ahead of print 29December2016. DOI: 10.5465/amd.2014.0146.
28.
FredbergT (2014) If I say it’s complex, it bloody well will be: CEO strategies for managing paradox. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science50(2): 171–188.
29.
GaimM (2017) Paradox as the new normal: Essays on framing, managing and sustaining organizational tensions. PhD Thesis, Umea School of Business and Economics, Sweden.
30.
HahnTFiggeFPinkseJet al. (2017) A paradox perspective on corporate sustainability: Descriptive, instrumental, and normative aspects. Journal of Business Ethics. Epub ahead of print 7June. DOI: 10.1007/s10551–017–3587–2.
31.
HargraveTJVan de VenAH (2017) Integrating dialectical and paradox perspectives on managing contradictions in organizations. Organization Studies38(3–4): 319–339.
32.
HeracleousLWirtzJ (2014) Singapore airlines: Achieving sustainable advantage through mastering paradox. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science50(2): 150–170.
33.
HirschPMLevinDZ (1999) Umbrella advocates versus validity police: A life-cycle model. Organization Science10(2): 199–212.
34.
HuxhamCBeechN (2003) Contrary prescriptions: Recognizing good practice tensions in management. Organization Studies24(1): 69–93.
35.
IedemaRDegelingPBraithwaiteJet al. (2004) “It’s an interesting conversation I’m hearing”: The doctor as manager. Organization Studies25(1): 15–33.
36.
JarzabkowskiPLêJKVan de VenAH (2013) Responding to competing strategic demands: How organizing, belonging, and performing paradoxes coevolve. Strategic Organization11(3): 245–280.
37.
JulesCGoodD (2014) Introduction to the special issue on paradox in context: Advances in theory and practice. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science50(2): 123–126.
38.
KanMMPerryKW (2004) Identifying paradox: A grounded theory of leadership in overcoming resistance to change. Leadership Quarterly15(4): 467–491.
39.
KornbergerM (2013) Clausewitz: On strategy. Business History55(7): 1058–1073.
40.
KuiperHMillerSMartinezEet al. (1997) Urban adolescent females’ views on the implant and contraceptive decision-making: A double paradox. Family Planning Perspectives29(4): 167–172.
41.
LangleyA (2016) Paradox theory and research. Presented at the Annual European Group on Organization Studies Colloquium, Naples, 7–9 July.
42.
LangleyATsoukasH (2017) Introduction: Process thinking, process theorizing and process researching. In: LangleyATsoukasH (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Process Organization Studies. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE, pp. 1–25.
43.
LeonardiPMTreemJWJacksonMH (2010) The connectivity paradox: Using technology to both decrease and increase perceptions of distance in distributed work arrangements. Journal of Applied Communication Research38(1): 85–105.
44.
LewisMW (2000) Exploring paradox: Toward a more comprehensive guide. Academy of Management Review25(4): 760–776.
45.
LewisMWAndriopoulosCSmithWK (2014) Paradoxical leadership to enable strategic agility. California Management Review56(3): 58–77.
46.
LiPP (2016) Global implications of the indigenous epistemological system from the East: How to apply yin-yang balancing to paradox management. Cross Cultural & Strategic Management23(1): 42–77.
47.
LuscherLSLewisMS (2008) Organizational change and managerial sensemaking: Working through paradox. Academy of Management Journal51(2): 221–240.
48.
LuscherLSLewisMWIngramA (2006) The social construction of organizational change paradoxes. Journal of Organizational Change Management194(4): 491–502.
49.
McCabeD (2016) “Curiouser and curiouser!”: Organizations as wonderland—A metaphorical alternative to the rational model. Human Relations69(4): 945–973.
50.
MillerD (1990) The Icarus Paradox: How Exceptional Companies Bring about Their Own Downfall. New York: Harper Business.
51.
MillerD (1993) The architecture of simplicity. Academy of Management Review18: 116–138.
52.
PeterlinJPearseNJDimovskiV (2015) Strategic decision making for organizational sustainability: The implications of servant leadership and sustainable leadership approaches. Economic and Business Review for Central and South-eastern Europe17(3): 273–290.
53.
PinsonneaultARivardS (1998) Information technology and the nature of managerial work: From the productivity paradox to the Icarus paradox?MIS Quarterly22(3): 287–311.
54.
PutnamLL (2015) Moving beyond “both/and” approaches: Alternative strategies for managing paradoxical tensions. Presented at the annual European Group on Organizational Studies Colloquium, Athens, 2–4 July.
55.
PutnamLLFairhurstGTBanghartS (2016) Contradictions, dialectics, and paradoxes in organizations: A constitutive approach. Academy of Management Annals10(1): 65–171.
56.
RittelHWJWebberMM (1973) Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences4: 155–169.
57.
SandoffMWidellG (2015) Translating as response to paradoxes–when implementing HRM strategies in service organisations. German Journal of Human Resource Management29(3–4): 303–321.
58.
SchadJLewisMWRaischSet al. (2016) Paradox research in management science: Looking back to move forward. Academy of Management Annals10(1): 5–64.
59.
SchonDA (1983) The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. New York: Basic Books.
60.
ScottWR (1987) The adolescence of institutional theory. Administrative Science Quarterly32: 493–511.
61.
ScottWR (2008) Approaching adulthood: The maturing of institutional theory. Theory and Society37(5): 427–442.
62.
SheepMLFairhurstGTKhazanchiS (2017) Knots in the discourse of innovation: Investigating multiple tensions in a reacquired spin-off. Organization Studies38(3–4): 463–488.
63.
SmithWKLewisMW (2011) Toward a theory of paradox: A dynamic equilibrium model of organizing. Academy of Management Review36(2): 381–403.
64.
SmithWKTushmanML (2005) Managing strategic contradictions: A top management model for managing innovation streams. Organization Science16(5): 522–536.
65.
SmithWKBinnsATushmanML (2010) Complex business models: Managing strategic paradoxes simultaneously. Long Range Planning43(2–3): 448–461.
66.
SmithWKErezMJarvenpaaSet al. (2017) Adding complexity to theories of paradox, tensions, and dualities of innovation and change: Introduction to organization studies special issue on paradox, tensions, and dualities of innovation and change. Organization Studies38(3–4): 303–317.
67.
SmithWKGoninMBesharovML (2013) Managing social-business tensions: A review and research agenda for social enterprise. Business Ethics Quarterly23(3): 407–442.
68.
SmithWKLewisMTushmanM (2016) “Both/and” leadership. Harvard Business Review94(5): 63–70.
69.
StohlC (2011) Paradoxes of connectivity: Boundary permeability, technological variability, and organisational durability. Australian Journal of Communication38(2): 123–139.
70.
TakeuchiHOsonoEShimizuN (2008) The contradictions that drive Toyota’s success. Harvard Business Review, June, pp. 96–104.
71.
The Price Waterhouse Change Integration Team (1996) The Paradox Principles: How High-Performance Companies Manage Chaos, Complexity, and Contradiction to Achieve Superior Results. Chicago, IL: Irwin.
72.
TseT (2013) Paradox resolution: A means to achieve strategic innovation. European Management Journal31(6): 682–696.
73.
TsoukasH (2005) Complex Knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
TsoukasHCunhaMP (2017) On organizational circularity: Vicious and virtuous circles in organizing. In: LewisMWSmithWKJarzabkowskiPLangleyA (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Organizational Paradox: Approaches to Plurality, Tensions, and Contradictions. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 393–412.
76.
TsoukasHPapouliasDB (1996) Understanding social reforms: A conceptual analysis. Journal of the Operational Research Society47(7): 853–863.
77.
VásquezCSchoenebornDSergiV (2015) Summoning the spirits: Organizational texts and the (dis)ordering properties of communication. Human Relations69(3): 629–659.
78.
WedemanA (2012) Double Paradox, Rapid Growth and Rising Corruption in China. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
79.
WeickKE (1979) The Social Psychology of Organizing, 2nd edn.New York: McGraw-Hill.
