How Paradoxes Shape Members and the Member–Organization Relationship: An Identity Threat Perspective

References

• Andriopoulos C, Lewis MW (2009) Exploitation-exploration tensions and organizational ambidexterity: Managing paradoxes of innovation. Organ. Sci. 20(4):696–717.Link, Google Scholar
• Ashforth BE, Harrison SH, Corley KG (2008) Identification in organizations: An examination of four fundamental questions. J. Management 34(3):325–374.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bednar JS, Galvin BM, Ashforth BE, Hafermalz E (2020) Putting identification in motion: A dynamic view of organizational identification. Organ. Sci. 31(1):200–222.Link, Google Scholar
• Bednarek R, SmithWK (2023) “What may be”: Inspiration from Mary Parker Follett for paradox theory. Strategic Organ., ePub ahead of print January 9, https://doi.org/10.1177/14761270231151734.Google Scholar
• Beech N, Burns H, de Caestecker L, MacIntosh R, MacLean D (2004) Paradox as invitation to act in problematic change situations. Human Relations 57(10):1313–1332.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Berti M, Simpson AV (2021) The dark side of organizational paradoxes: The dynamics of disempowerment. Acad. Management Rev. 46(2):252–274.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Besharov ML (2014) The relational ecology of identification: How organizational identification emerges when individuals hold divergent values. Acad. Management J. 57(5):1485–1512.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bledow R, Frese M, Anderson N, Erez M, Farr J (2009) A dialectic perspective on innovation: Conflicting demands, multiple pathways, and ambidexterity. Indust. Organ. Psych. 2(3):305–337.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Branscombe NR, Ellemers N, Spears R, Doosje B (1999) The context and content of social identity threat. Ellemers N, Spears R, Doosje B, eds. Social Identity: Context, Commitment, Content (Blackwell Science, Oxford, UK), 35–58.Google Scholar
• Brickson SL (2012) Athletes, best friends, and social activists: An integrative model accounting for the role of identity in organizational identification. Organ. Sci. 24(1):226–245.Link, Google Scholar
• Clegg SR, da Cunha JV, Cunha MP (2002) Management paradoxes: A relational view. Human Relations 55(5):483–503.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Coyle-Shapiro JAM, Shore LM (2007) The employee–organization relationship: Where do we go from here? Human Resource Management Rev. 17(2):166–179.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Council of the European Union (2011) Council resolution on a renewed European agenda for adult learning. Official Journal of the European Union, C 372, 20.12.2011, 1–6.Google Scholar
• Cunha MP, Putnam LL (2019) Paradox theory and the paradox of success. Strategic Organ. 17(1):95–106.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Das TK, Teng BS (2000) Instabilities of strategic alliances: An internal tensions perspective. Organ. Sci. 11(1):77–101.Link, Google Scholar
• Dobrow SR, Smith WK, Posner MA (2011) Managing the grading paradox: Leveraging the power of choice in the classroom. Acad. Management Learn. Ed. 10(2):261–276.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dutton JE, Dukerich JM (1991) Keeping an eye on the mirror: Image and identity in organizational adaptation. Acad. Management J. 34(3):517–554.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dutton JE, Dukerich JM, Harquail CV (1994) Organizational images and member identification. Admin. Sci. Quart. 39(2):239–263.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt KM (1989) Building theories from case study research. Acad. Management Rev. 14(4):532–550.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt KM, Graebner ME (2007) Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Acad. Management J. 50(1):25–32.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt KM, Westcott BJ (1988) Paradoxical demands and the creation of excellence: The case of just-in-time manufacturing. Quinn RE, Cameron KS, eds. Paradox and Transformation: Toward a Theory of Change in Organization and Management, Ballinger Series on Innovation and Organizational Change (Ballinger Publishing Co/Harper & Row Publishers, New York), 169–193.Google Scholar
• Ellemers N, Spears R, Doosje B (2002) Self and social identity. Annual Rev. Psych. 53(1):161–186.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Elsbach KD, Kramer RM (1996) Members’ responses to organizational identity threats: Encountering and countering the business week rankings. Admin. Sci. Quart. 41(3):442–476.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ernst J, Schleiter AJ (2021) Organizational identity struggles and reconstruction during organizational change: Narratives as symbolic, emotional and practical glue. Organ. Stud. 42(6):891–910.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fairhurst GT (2019) Reflections: Return paradox to the wild? Paradox interventions and their implications. J. Change Management 19(1):6–22.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Farjoun M (2010) Beyond dualism: Stability and change as a duality. Acad. Management Rev. 35(2):202–225.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fiol CM (2002) Capitalizing on paradox: The role of language in transforming organizational identities. Organ. Sci. 13(6):653–666.Link, Google Scholar
• Glaser BG, Strauss AL (2017) The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research (Routledge, New York).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hahn T, Knight E (2021) The ontology of organizational paradox: A quantum approach. Acad. Management Rev. 46(2):362–384.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hahn T, Sharma G, Glavas A (2023) Employee-CSR tensions: Drivers of employee (dis)engagement with contested CSR initiatives. J. Management Stud., ePub ahead of print March 28, https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12923.Google Scholar
• Howard-Grenville J, Metzger ML, Meyer AD (2012) Rekindling the flame: Processes of identity resurrection. Acad. Management J. 56(1):113–136.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Huy QN (2002) Emotional balancing of organizational continuity and radical change: The contribution of middle managers. Admin. Sci. Quart. 47(1):31–69.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jarzabkowski P, Bednarek R, Chalkias K, Cacciatori E (2019) Exploring inter-organizational paradoxes: Methodological lessons from a study of a grand challenge. Strategic Organ. 17(1):120–132.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Keller J, Loewenstein J, Yan J (2017) Culture, conditions and paradoxical frames. Organ. Stud. 38(3–4):539–560.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Klarner P, Raisch S (2013) Move to the beat—Rhythms of change and firm performance. Acad. Management J. 56(1):160–184.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kreiner GE, Ashforth BE (2004) Evidence toward an expanded model of organizational identification. J. Organ. Behav. 25(1):1–27.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Langley A (1999) Strategies for theorizing from process data. Acad. Management Rev. 24(4):691–710.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Leonard-Barton D (1992) Core capabilities and core rigidities: A paradox in managing new product development. Strategic Management J. 13(1):111–125.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lewis MW (2000) Paradox: Toward a more comprehensive guide. Acad. Management Rev. 25(4):760–776.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lewis MW, Smith WK (2022) Reflections on the 2021 AMR Decade Award: Navigating paradox is paradoxical. Acad. Management Rev. 47(4):528–548.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lüscher LS, Lewis MW (2008) Organizational change and managerial sensemaking: Working through paradox. Acad. Management J. 51(2):221–240.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mael F, Ashforth BE (1992) Alumni and their alma mater: A partial test of the reformulated model of organizational identification. J. Organ. Behav. 13(2):103–123.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Meyer AD (1991) Visual data in organizational research. Organ. Sci. 2(2):218–236.Link, Google Scholar
• Miron-Spektor E, Gino F, Argote L (2011a) Paradoxical frames and creative sparks: Enhancing individual creativity through conflict and integration. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 116(2):229–240.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Miron-Spektor E, Miriam E, Naveh E (2011b) The effect of conformist and attentive-to-detail members on team innovation: Reconciling the innovation paradox. Acad. Management J. 54(4):740–760.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Miron-Spektor E, Ingram A, Keller J, Smith WK, Lewis MW (2018) Microfoundations of organizational paradox: The problem is how we think about the problem. Acad. Management J. 61(1):26–45.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Panayiotou A, Putnam LL, Kassinis G (2019) Generating tensions: A multilevel, process analysis of organizational change. Strategic Organ. 17(1):8–37.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Petriglieri JL (2011) Under threat: Responses to and the consequences of threats to individuals’ identities. Acad. Management Rev. 36(4):641–662.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Petriglieri JL, Devine BA (2016) Mobilizing organizational action against identity threats: The role of organizational members’ perceptions and responses. Pratt MG, Schultz M, Ashforth BE, Ravasi D, eds. The Oxford Handbook of Organizational Identity (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK), 239–256.Google Scholar
• Piening EP, Salge TO, Antons D, Kreiner GE (2020) Standing together or falling apart? Understanding employees’ responses to organizational identity threats. Acad. Management Rev. 45(2):325–351.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pradies C (2022) With head and heart: How emotions shape paradox navigation in veterinary work. Acad. Management J. 66(2):521–552.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pradies C, Aust I, Bednarek R, Brandl J, Carmine S, Cheal J, Pina e Cunha M, et al. (2021) The lived experience of paradox: How individuals navigate tensions during the pandemic crisis. J. Management Inquiry 30(2):154–167.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Putnam LL, Fairhurst GT, Banghart S (2016) Contradictions, dialectics, and paradoxes in organizations: A constitutive approach. Acad. Manag. Ann. 10(1):65–171.Google Scholar
• Putnam LL, Myers KK, Gailliard BM (2014) Examining the tensions in workplace flexibility and exploring options for new directions. Human Relations 67(4):413–440.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Quinn RE, Cameron KS, eds. (1988) Paradox and Transformation: Toward a Theory of Change in Organization and Management (Ballinger Publishing Co/Harper & Row Publishers, New York).Google Scholar
• Raffaelli R, DeJordy R, McDonald RM (2021) How leaders with divergent visions generate novel strategy: Navigating the paradox of preservation and modernization in Swiss watchmaking. Acad. Management J. 65(5):1593–1622.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Raisch S, Birkinshaw J (2008) Organizational ambidexterity: Antecedents, outcomes, and moderators. J. Management 34(3):375–409.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schad J, Lewis MW, Raisch S, Smith WK (2016) Paradox research in management science: Looking back to move forward. Acad. Management Ann. 10(1):5–64.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Silverman D (2016) Qualitative Research (Sage, London).Google Scholar
• Slawinski N, Bansal P (2015) Short on time: Intertemporal tensions in business sustainability. Organ. Sci. 26(2):531–549.Link, Google Scholar
• Smith WK (2014) Dynamic decision making: A model of senior leaders managing strategic paradoxes. Acad. Management J. 57(6):1592–1623.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Smith KK, Berg DN (1987) A paradoxical conception of group dynamics. Human Relations 40(10):633–657.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Smith WK, Lewis MW (2011) Toward a theory of paradox: A dynamic equilibrium model of organizing. Acad. Management Rev. 36(2):381–403.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Smith WK, Tracey P (2016) Institutional complexity and paradox theory: Complementarities of competing demands. Strategic Organ. 14(4):455–466.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Smith WK, Tushman ML (2005) Managing strategic contradictions: A top management model for managing innovation streams. Organ. Sci. 16(5):522–536.Link, Google Scholar
• Stake RE (2000) Case studies. Denzin NK, Lincoln YS, eds. Handbook of Qualitative Research (SAGE Publications Inc., London).Google Scholar
• Stohl C, Cheney G (2001) Participatory processes/paradoxical practices: Communication and the dilemmas of organizational democracy. Management Comm. Quart. 14(3):349–407.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Strauss A, Corbin JM (1990) Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques (Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA).Google Scholar
• Sundaramurthy C, Lewis M (2003) Control and collaboration: Paradoxes of governance. Acad. Management Rev. 28(3):397–415.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Vince R, Broussine M (1996) Paradox, defense and attachment: Accessing and working with emotions and relations underlying organizational change. Organ. Stud. 17(1):1–21.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Visnjic I, Jovanovic M, Raisch S (2021) Managing the transition to a dual business model: Tradeoff, paradox, and routinized practices. Organ. Sci. 33(5):1964–1989.Link, Google Scholar
• Waeger D, Weber K (2019) Institutional complexity and organizational change: An open polity perspective. Acad. Management Rev. 44(2):1–24.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Waldman DA, Putnam LL, Miron-Spektor E, Siegel D (2019) The role of paradox theory in decision making and management research. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 155:1–6.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Weiser AK, Laamanen T (2022) Extending the dynamic equilibrium model of paradox: Unveiling the dissipative dynamics in organizations. Organ. Theory 3(3).Google Scholar
• Yin RK (2009) Case Study Research: Design and Methods (SAGE Publications Inc., London).Google Scholar
• Yuan R, Li S, Yu B (2019) Neither “local” nor “global”: Chinese university students’ identity paradoxes in the internationalization of higher education. Higher Ed. 77(6):963–978.Crossref, Google Scholar