The rubber band effect: Managing the stability-change paradox in routines

Rosales, Virginia; Gaim, Medhanie; Berti, Marco; Cunha, Miguel Piña e

doi:10.1016/j.scaman.2022.101194

Cited by 10 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 68 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This can be achieved by accommodating opposite poles, when 'individuals interweave constraints with their own experiences and knowledgeably act to facilitate discovery' (Milosevic et al, 2018(Milosevic et al, , p. 1191, or when they develop collective practices to combine conflicting but complementary logics (Smets et al, 2015). Working through paradoxes requires flexibility, to oscillate between contradictory demands, using elastic practices (Gümüsay et al, 2020;Rosales et al, 2022), zig-zagging between different logic demands (Smith and Besharov, 2019) or using temporal separation to attend different requirements (Ramus et al, 2020). In some cases it is possible to transcend the opposition by reframing the situation, adopting holistic cognitive frames (Zhang et al, 2015), rearranging organizational practices and resources (Schneider et al, 2021), or enacting rhetorical strategies (Bednarek et al, 2017).…”

Section: The Conceptual Core Of Paradox Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Berti

Cunha

2022

J Management Studies

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Paradox literature is emerging as one of the most vital streams in management studies, but it is affected by some growing pains. First, the concept of paradox is still too fuzzy, which impacts empirical research and hinders communication with other literatures. Second, the assumption that paradoxes are always best met with acceptance and search for balance is problematic because it limits the heuristic potential of a paradox lens, because it constrains the range of sustainable responses to contradictions, and because it may induce to appeasement in face of injustice. In this paper we propose to strengthen paradox theory by incorporating the contributions of two alternative perspectives on organizational tensions: trade‐offs and dialectics. We thus present a model which expands organizational paradox theory by: (1) clarifying the concept of organizational paradox; and (2) offering a model that better describes the varied phenomenology, causes and consequences of organizational tensions and paradoxes.

show abstract

Section: The Conceptual Core Of Paradox Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Berti

Cunha

2022

J Management Studies

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Since both voices are valued, in dialogical interaction tensions are generative and remain ever-present in the form of a rubber band (Rosales et al, 2022), with their continued interplay stimulating endless variation within practice and across actors. Both demands are important, and the realization that paradox is a natural and persistent condition of organizing (Jarzabkowski & Lê, 2017) highlights that organizing is not an exercise in orchestral harmony but a state of being atonal while maintaining order.…”

Section: Theoretical Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

In Praise of Paradox Persistence: Evidence from the Sydney Opera House Project

Gaim

Clegg

Cunha

2022

Project Management Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Organizational paradoxes persist. In their persistence, they resist closure; we demonstrate how, by using an exemplary project, that of the construction of the Sydney Opera House. By analyzing paradoxes encountered in the construction of a notable contemporary architectural project, we discuss how dialogical interactions enable options to emerge in the form of responses that were not previously evident. Engaging paradoxes dialogically requires accepting rather than denying contradictions, meaning that rather than resolving them in favor of one pole or the other, the contradictions remain in play. Monologic interactions—favoring dominant and singular voices, rather than producing consensus—repress dissent, leading to conflict, through suppressing paradox.

show abstract

“…However, progress monitoring during acquisition integration can be difficult (Bansal, King and Meglio, 2022), when experience and knowledge is tacit. Interestingly, routines encourage tacit knowledge within their agents that is commonly understood but not explicitly stated (D'Adderio and Pollock, 2020; Parmigiani and Howard-Grenville, 2011;Rosales et al, 2022), making it difficult to assess. Combined, the need to align routinization to fit a strategic intent might be questioned when managers have knowledge that is tacit and difficult to capture (Senker, 1995).…”

Section: An Orchestrating Effect Of Strategic Manda Intentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Benefitting from Acquisition Experience During Integration: The Moderating Effect of Strategic M&A Intent

Felker

Bauer

Friesl

et al. 2023

British J of Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research suggests that M&A performance improves through routinization and/or codified experience. Traditionally, acquisition research has drawn a direct link between the two knowledge accumulation mechanisms and acquisition performance. Yet, how lessons learned are captured and applied in subsequent events remains largely unanswered. We argue that routinization and codification may both result in standardized acquisition integration approaches that promise greater efficiency. Our results show that experience can be captured and applied through standardized acquisition integration approaches. Importantly, our findings show that a strategic M&A intent influences the relationships between routinization and codified experience, and standardized acquisition integration approaches. We find that a strong strategic M&A intent strengthens the relationship between codification and standardization, but it weakens the relationship between routinization and standardization. We test our hypotheses with a combination of primary survey and secondary data to offer managerial and research insights. By combining three pertinent M&A literature streams – acquisition experience, acquisition integration and acquisition intent – we shed light on the importance of organizational learning and strategic direction on acquisition performance.

show abstract

The rubber band effect: Managing the stability-change paradox in routines

Cited by 10 publications

References 68 publications

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

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

In Praise of Paradox Persistence: Evidence from the Sydney Opera House Project

Benefitting from Acquisition Experience During Integration: The Moderating Effect of Strategic M&A Intent

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About