Pub Date : 2021-04-22DOI: 10.1177/10564926211007942
M. Vu, Ziyun Fan
This article explores silence as a phenomenon and practice in the workplace through a Buddhist-enacted lens where silence is intentionally encouraged. It brings forward a reconsideration of the roles of silence in organizations by proposing emancipatory dimensions of silence—reflexivity, self-decentralization, and transformation. Based on 54 interviews with employees and managers in a Vietnamese telecommunications organization, we discuss the dynamic nature of silence, and the possible coexistence of the constructive and the oppressive aspects of silence in a workplace spirituality context. Instead of studying silence as one-dimensional, we call for an integrated view and argue that studying silence requires consideration of the multiplicity of its interconnected dimensions. By considering silence as a relational and emerging processes constructed around its vagueness and uncertainties, our study reveals the many possible ways silence is organized and organizes and sheds light on silence as a marker of the complexities and paradoxes of organizational life.
{"title":"Sounds of Silence: The Reflexivity, Self-decentralization, and Transformation Dimensions of Silence at Work","authors":"M. Vu, Ziyun Fan","doi":"10.1177/10564926211007942","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10564926211007942","url":null,"abstract":"This article explores silence as a phenomenon and practice in the workplace through a Buddhist-enacted lens where silence is intentionally encouraged. It brings forward a reconsideration of the roles of silence in organizations by proposing emancipatory dimensions of silence—reflexivity, self-decentralization, and transformation. Based on 54 interviews with employees and managers in a Vietnamese telecommunications organization, we discuss the dynamic nature of silence, and the possible coexistence of the constructive and the oppressive aspects of silence in a workplace spirituality context. Instead of studying silence as one-dimensional, we call for an integrated view and argue that studying silence requires consideration of the multiplicity of its interconnected dimensions. By considering silence as a relational and emerging processes constructed around its vagueness and uncertainties, our study reveals the many possible ways silence is organized and organizes and sheds light on silence as a marker of the complexities and paradoxes of organizational life.","PeriodicalId":47877,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management Inquiry","volume":"31 1","pages":"307 - 325"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2021-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/10564926211007942","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46712160","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-15DOI: 10.1177/10564926211009430
W. Rowe, James O’Brien, Kenneth A. Nason
A Canadian Navy destroyer ran aground more than 45 years ago. I have been thinking about it ever since, while in the Navy, and during my career as a management educator. I also have discussed it with my coauthors. Here is what we believe we can learn from that grounding.
{"title":"Running Aground: Reflections on Belief, Organizational Culture, Strategy, and Performance","authors":"W. Rowe, James O’Brien, Kenneth A. Nason","doi":"10.1177/10564926211009430","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10564926211009430","url":null,"abstract":"A Canadian Navy destroyer ran aground more than 45 years ago. I have been thinking about it ever since, while in the Navy, and during my career as a management educator. I also have discussed it with my coauthors. Here is what we believe we can learn from that grounding.","PeriodicalId":47877,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management Inquiry","volume":"30 1","pages":"347 - 353"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2021-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/10564926211009430","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46233009","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-15DOI: 10.1177/10564926211007204
William S. Harvey, N. Arora
This essay outlines a unique set of challenges that we confronted as a PhD supervisor and candidate, drawing on a research project within a United States Federal Prison. We elicit the challenges that can be faced at different stages before, during, and after fieldwork, and share three lessons for others. First, exploring unique phenomena and processes often requires conducting research in extreme empirical contexts, which while challenging, helps to establish the boundaries within which other archetypes can be studied. Second, educating incarcerated individuals is a challenge and an opportunity, and requires creative approaches that can transcend work, family, and social boundaries. Finally, while it is tempting for supervisors and candidates to embark on PhDs for instrumental purposes, helping to support and develop each other should be the core motivation. We hope that others can learn from our experience and reflect on and share more widely their own experiences and practices.
{"title":"Educating Incarcerated Professionals: Challenges and Lessons from an Extreme PhD Context","authors":"William S. Harvey, N. Arora","doi":"10.1177/10564926211007204","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10564926211007204","url":null,"abstract":"This essay outlines a unique set of challenges that we confronted as a PhD supervisor and candidate, drawing on a research project within a United States Federal Prison. We elicit the challenges that can be faced at different stages before, during, and after fieldwork, and share three lessons for others. First, exploring unique phenomena and processes often requires conducting research in extreme empirical contexts, which while challenging, helps to establish the boundaries within which other archetypes can be studied. Second, educating incarcerated individuals is a challenge and an opportunity, and requires creative approaches that can transcend work, family, and social boundaries. Finally, while it is tempting for supervisors and candidates to embark on PhDs for instrumental purposes, helping to support and develop each other should be the core motivation. We hope that others can learn from our experience and reflect on and share more widely their own experiences and practices.","PeriodicalId":47877,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management Inquiry","volume":"30 1","pages":"461 - 467"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2021-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/10564926211007204","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42791922","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-01DOI: 10.1177/1056492620986859
J. Keller, Simone Carmine, P. Jarzabkowski, Marianne W. Lewis, Camille Pradies, Garima Sharma, Wendy K. Smith, R. Vince
In this commentary on three articles from dozens of paradox theory scholars on paradox approaches to examining the COVID-19 pandemic and how the COVID-19 pandemic informs paradox theory, the authors involved in coordinating the collection of three papers discuss the process of bringing together scholars from around the world to discuss the pandemic. Four other preeminent paradox theorists offer additional commentaries on the papers in this Collection.
{"title":"Our Collective Tensions: Paradox Research Community’s Response to COVID-19","authors":"J. Keller, Simone Carmine, P. Jarzabkowski, Marianne W. Lewis, Camille Pradies, Garima Sharma, Wendy K. Smith, R. Vince","doi":"10.1177/1056492620986859","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492620986859","url":null,"abstract":"In this commentary on three articles from dozens of paradox theory scholars on paradox approaches to examining the COVID-19 pandemic and how the COVID-19 pandemic informs paradox theory, the authors involved in coordinating the collection of three papers discuss the process of bringing together scholars from around the world to discuss the pandemic. Four other preeminent paradox theorists offer additional commentaries on the papers in this Collection.","PeriodicalId":47877,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management Inquiry","volume":"30 1","pages":"168 - 176"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2021-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1056492620986859","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42115276","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-01DOI: 10.1177/1056492621994435
Pablo Martin de Holan, Richard W. Stackman
{"title":"From the Editors","authors":"Pablo Martin de Holan, Richard W. Stackman","doi":"10.1177/1056492621994435","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492621994435","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47877,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management Inquiry","volume":"30 1","pages":"119 - 120"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2021-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1056492621994435","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41985732","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-01DOI: 10.1177/1056492620986863
Simone Carmine, C. Andriopoulos, Manto Gotsi, Charmine E J Härtel, A. Krzemińska, N. Mafico, Camille Pradies, H. Raza, Tatbeeq Raza-Ullah, Stephanie Schrage, Garima Sharma, Natalie Slawinski, Lea Stadtler, Andrea Tunarosa, Casper Winther-Hansen, J. Keller
The COVID-19 pandemic is a massive exogenous shock that reverberated around the world, forcing all types of organizations to change overnight—from the local coffee shop to the international airline. As we try to make sense of the events surrounding the pandemic, one question that has perplexed both scholars and managers alike has been the extent to which this experience is qualitatively different from others. One area of research to turn to is research on organizational paradoxes, as the organizational paradox literature has focused extensively on how organizations experience change (e.g., Jay, 2013; Lüscher & Lewis, 2008; Smith & Tracey, 2016). According to the paradox literature, major exogenous change impacts organizations by increasing the saliency of organizational tensions (Smith & Lewis, 2011), such as tensions between exploration and exploitation (e.g., Smith, 2014), cooperation and competition (e.g., Raza-Ullah et al., 2014), or control and collaboration (e.g., Sundaramurthy & Lewis, 2003). The increased salience of tensions is critical for understanding organizations undergoing major change because tensions are both multi-level and multi-faceted, impacting actors ranging from the CEO to the front-line employee (Jarzabkowski et al., 2013) and involving responses that are cognitive (e.g., MironSpektor et al., 2018), emotional (e.g., Vince & Broussine, 1996), and material (e.g., Knight & Paroutis, 2017). By focusing attention on the tensions that organizations experience during the pandemic and their responses, the paradox literature can provide shards of clarity to this otherwise incomprehensible event. At the same time, unpacking the pandemic experience through a paradox lens can reveal new insights on organizational tensions, enabling scholars to gain sense of future, seemingly, senseless events. To address the organizational experience during the COVID-19 pandemic through a paradox lens, we explore five examples of tensions that have been especially salient during the pandemic crisis: the short-term versus long-term tensions (see Slawinski later in the text); social versus economic goal tensions (see Schrage later in the text), learning versus performing tensions (see Winther-Hansen, Carmine, Andriopoulos, and Gotsi later in the text); common good versus individual privacy tensions (see Raza and Keller later in the text) and agency tensions (see Krzeminska, Mafico, and Härtel, and Tunarosa later in the text). As uncertainty about the size and scope of the pandemic, the duration of the pandemic, and the government’s capacity to manage the pandemic has raised the saliency of tensions, organizations have been faced with the heightened urge to navigate short-term and long-term goals (see Slawinski later in the text). For organizations that depend on global supply chains (i.e., multinational corporations), 986863 JMIXXX10.1177/1056492620986863Journal of Management InquiryCarmine et al. research-article2021
{"title":"A Paradox Approach to Organizational Tensions During the Pandemic Crisis","authors":"Simone Carmine, C. Andriopoulos, Manto Gotsi, Charmine E J Härtel, A. Krzemińska, N. Mafico, Camille Pradies, H. Raza, Tatbeeq Raza-Ullah, Stephanie Schrage, Garima Sharma, Natalie Slawinski, Lea Stadtler, Andrea Tunarosa, Casper Winther-Hansen, J. Keller","doi":"10.1177/1056492620986863","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492620986863","url":null,"abstract":"The COVID-19 pandemic is a massive exogenous shock that reverberated around the world, forcing all types of organizations to change overnight—from the local coffee shop to the international airline. As we try to make sense of the events surrounding the pandemic, one question that has perplexed both scholars and managers alike has been the extent to which this experience is qualitatively different from others. One area of research to turn to is research on organizational paradoxes, as the organizational paradox literature has focused extensively on how organizations experience change (e.g., Jay, 2013; Lüscher & Lewis, 2008; Smith & Tracey, 2016). According to the paradox literature, major exogenous change impacts organizations by increasing the saliency of organizational tensions (Smith & Lewis, 2011), such as tensions between exploration and exploitation (e.g., Smith, 2014), cooperation and competition (e.g., Raza-Ullah et al., 2014), or control and collaboration (e.g., Sundaramurthy & Lewis, 2003). The increased salience of tensions is critical for understanding organizations undergoing major change because tensions are both multi-level and multi-faceted, impacting actors ranging from the CEO to the front-line employee (Jarzabkowski et al., 2013) and involving responses that are cognitive (e.g., MironSpektor et al., 2018), emotional (e.g., Vince & Broussine, 1996), and material (e.g., Knight & Paroutis, 2017). By focusing attention on the tensions that organizations experience during the pandemic and their responses, the paradox literature can provide shards of clarity to this otherwise incomprehensible event. At the same time, unpacking the pandemic experience through a paradox lens can reveal new insights on organizational tensions, enabling scholars to gain sense of future, seemingly, senseless events. To address the organizational experience during the COVID-19 pandemic through a paradox lens, we explore five examples of tensions that have been especially salient during the pandemic crisis: the short-term versus long-term tensions (see Slawinski later in the text); social versus economic goal tensions (see Schrage later in the text), learning versus performing tensions (see Winther-Hansen, Carmine, Andriopoulos, and Gotsi later in the text); common good versus individual privacy tensions (see Raza and Keller later in the text) and agency tensions (see Krzeminska, Mafico, and Härtel, and Tunarosa later in the text). As uncertainty about the size and scope of the pandemic, the duration of the pandemic, and the government’s capacity to manage the pandemic has raised the saliency of tensions, organizations have been faced with the heightened urge to navigate short-term and long-term goals (see Slawinski later in the text). For organizations that depend on global supply chains (i.e., multinational corporations), 986863 JMIXXX10.1177/1056492620986863Journal of Management InquiryCarmine et al. research-article2021","PeriodicalId":47877,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management Inquiry","volume":"30 1","pages":"138 - 153"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2021-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1056492620986863","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45852663","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-01DOI: 10.1177/1056492620986604
Garima Sharma, Jean Bartunek, Patrice M. Buzzanell, Simone Carmine, Carsyn Endres, M. Etter, Gail T. Fairhurst, Tobias Hahn, Patrick Lê, Xin Li, V. Pamphile, Camille Pradies, Linda L. Putnam, Kimberly Rocheville, J. Schad, Mathew L. Sheep, J. Keller
COVID-19 isn’t going away soon [..] By now we know [. . .] that the novel Coronavirus will be with us for a rather long time. [. . .] In the interest of managing our expectations and governing ourselves accordingly, it might be helpful, for our pandemic state of mind, to envision this predicament—existentially, at least—as a soliton wave: a wave that just keeps rolling and rolling, carrying on under its own power for a great distance.
{"title":"A Paradox Approach to Societal Tensions during the Pandemic Crisis","authors":"Garima Sharma, Jean Bartunek, Patrice M. Buzzanell, Simone Carmine, Carsyn Endres, M. Etter, Gail T. Fairhurst, Tobias Hahn, Patrick Lê, Xin Li, V. Pamphile, Camille Pradies, Linda L. Putnam, Kimberly Rocheville, J. Schad, Mathew L. Sheep, J. Keller","doi":"10.1177/1056492620986604","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492620986604","url":null,"abstract":"COVID-19 isn’t going away soon [..] By now we know [. . .] that the novel Coronavirus will be with us for a rather long time. [. . .] In the interest of managing our expectations and governing ourselves accordingly, it might be helpful, for our pandemic state of mind, to envision this predicament—existentially, at least—as a soliton wave: a wave that just keeps rolling and rolling, carrying on under its own power for a great distance.","PeriodicalId":47877,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management Inquiry","volume":"30 1","pages":"121 - 137"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2021-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1056492620986604","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43152212","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-02-12DOI: 10.1177/1056492621990719
Deniz Öztürk
This study aims to develop a contextualized perspective for understanding the variation in the persistence of founders’ ideological imprints across different periods. We argue for the time-varying influence of political circumstances on ideological imprinting to grasp the consequences of multiple different imprints. Employing a multiple-case study research design that relies heavily on archival data, we explored the political contextual sources of variation in political cartoons of Turkish humor magazines from 1972 to 2015. Our findings show that the variation in the persistence of ideological imprints is related to political changes that result in (in)congruence between the founder’s political ideology and the ideology of the governing party, the type of political ideology that the founder represents, and change within the party ideology over time. By revealing how political contexts surrounding imprints lead to persistence, we contribute to imprinting theory and the organizational implications of political ideologies in non-Western contexts.
{"title":"What Does Political Context Tell Us? Understanding the Persistence of Ideological Imprints in the Case of Turkish Humor Magazines","authors":"Deniz Öztürk","doi":"10.1177/1056492621990719","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492621990719","url":null,"abstract":"This study aims to develop a contextualized perspective for understanding the variation in the persistence of founders’ ideological imprints across different periods. We argue for the time-varying influence of political circumstances on ideological imprinting to grasp the consequences of multiple different imprints. Employing a multiple-case study research design that relies heavily on archival data, we explored the political contextual sources of variation in political cartoons of Turkish humor magazines from 1972 to 2015. Our findings show that the variation in the persistence of ideological imprints is related to political changes that result in (in)congruence between the founder’s political ideology and the ideology of the governing party, the type of political ideology that the founder represents, and change within the party ideology over time. By revealing how political contexts surrounding imprints lead to persistence, we contribute to imprinting theory and the organizational implications of political ideologies in non-Western contexts.","PeriodicalId":47877,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management Inquiry","volume":"31 1","pages":"197 - 218"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2021-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1056492621990719","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42878866","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-02-01DOI: 10.1177/1056492620986858
R. Bies, T. M. Tripp, Laurie J. Barclay
Throughout history, there are numerous examples of business and government leaders who have fallen from grace only to rise again, and have a “second act” and a “second chance” as a legitimate social actor or leader—that is, they achieved redemption. We explore “the road to redemption” of leaders—when and why it occurs, and what “bumps” prevent it. In our analysis, we conceptualize redemption as a process with three elements—remorse, rehabilitation, and restoration—and as an outcome (the restoration of legitimacy). We argue that achieving redemption is not a product of chance; rather, it is a social construction process of narrative creation and identity construction involving many parties. Also, the road to redemption is shaped by cultural-specific factors—and it is temporally dependent. From this framework, we identify new directions for the theory and practice of leadership.
{"title":"Second Acts and Second Chances: The Bumpy Road to Redemption","authors":"R. Bies, T. M. Tripp, Laurie J. Barclay","doi":"10.1177/1056492620986858","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492620986858","url":null,"abstract":"Throughout history, there are numerous examples of business and government leaders who have fallen from grace only to rise again, and have a “second act” and a “second chance” as a legitimate social actor or leader—that is, they achieved redemption. We explore “the road to redemption” of leaders—when and why it occurs, and what “bumps” prevent it. In our analysis, we conceptualize redemption as a process with three elements—remorse, rehabilitation, and restoration—and as an outcome (the restoration of legitimacy). We argue that achieving redemption is not a product of chance; rather, it is a social construction process of narrative creation and identity construction involving many parties. Also, the road to redemption is shaped by cultural-specific factors—and it is temporally dependent. From this framework, we identify new directions for the theory and practice of leadership.","PeriodicalId":47877,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management Inquiry","volume":"30 1","pages":"371 - 384"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2021-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1056492620986858","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43616085","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-27DOI: 10.1177/1056492620986874
Camille Pradies, Ina Aust, R. Bednarek, J. Brandl, Simone Carmine, J. Cheal, Miguel Pina e Cunha, M. Gaim, A. Keegan, J. Lê, Ella Miron-Spektor, Rikke Kristine Nielsen, V. Pouthier, Garima Sharma, Jennifer L. Sparr, R. Vince, J. Keller
Organizational life has always been filled with tensions, but the COVID-19 pandemic is amplifying this experience in fundamental ways. Across the globe, employees were forced to quickly adjust to working from home, striving to remain productive while adapting to new technologies and workpractices (Lanzolla et al., 2020). Essential employees, such as medical personnel, have been grappling with the desire to deliver care to those with need without risking themselves (Kniffin et al., 2020). Leaders have been balancing optimism with realism and finding ways to engender psychological proximity despite managing their followers from afar (Gibson, 2020). These interconnected tensions have been accentuated not just within domains (e.g., work), but also across domains (Ladge et al., 2012). Working parents, for example, have been renegotiating boundaries as they pursue their work goals while home-schooling their children and caring for their elderly relatives (Power, 2020). To address the multitude of tensions that employees are experiencing during the pandemic, we turn to paradox theory, which provides a metalevel approach to studying tensions across organizational contexts (Schad et al., 2016), including work–life boundaries (Peters & Blomme, 2019). Paradox theory addresses questions about how people perceive tensions (Sharma & Good, 2013), frame tensions (Keller et al., 2017; Miron-Spektor et al., 2011; Pradies et al., 2020), reason about tensions (Keller & Sadler-Smith, 2019), and feel about tensions (Ashforth et al., 2014; Pradies et al., forthcoming; Vince & Broussine, 1996). Paradox theory begins with the premise that employees’ experience with tensions is shaped by both environmental factors and employees’ cognitive and emotional processes (Smith & Lewis, 2011). The environmental factors do not only include macrolevel conditions such as those stemming from a pandemic crisis (Schad & Bansal, 2018), but more proximal conditions within the organization, such as organizational systems (Keegan et al., 2019), leadership (Zhang et al., 2015), and social context (Keller et al., 2020; Pradies et al., forthcoming). Paradox theory therefore provides a holistic account of how employees experience and respond to tensions from major events such as the pandemic crisis. In this article, we present seven short essays that focus on various aspects of the lived experience during the pandemic crisis through a paradox theoretical lens, providing new insights on the pandemic while also using the pandemic experience to push the boundaries of paradox theory. Bednarek and Lê (see below) discuss how the boundary between work and life has become blurred yet our sense of them opposed has peaked. To them, the pandemic invites us to expand our understanding of the concept of balance central to paradox theory. The next three essays focus on how managers shape 986874 JMIXXX10.1177/1056492620986874Journal of Management InquiryPradies et al. research-article2021
组织生活一直充满紧张，但COVID-19大流行正在从根本上放大这种体验。在全球范围内，员工被迫迅速适应在家工作，在适应新技术和工作实践的同时努力保持生产力(Lanzolla et al.， 2020)。医务人员等基本员工一直在努力满足向有需要的人提供护理而不冒生命危险的愿望(Kniffin et al.， 2020)。领导者一直在平衡乐观主义和现实主义，并找到方法来产生心理上的接近，尽管从远处管理他们的追随者(Gibson, 2020)。这些相互关联的紧张关系不仅在领域内(例如，工作)得到了加强，而且在领域之间也得到了加强(Ladge等人，2012)。例如，在职父母在追求工作目标的同时，在家教育孩子和照顾年迈的亲戚，他们一直在重新协商界限(Power, 2020)。为了解决员工在大流行期间经历的众多紧张关系，我们求助于悖论理论，该理论提供了一种金属层面的方法来研究跨组织背景的紧张关系(Schad等人，2016)，包括工作与生活的界限(Peters & Blomme, 2019)。悖论理论解决了人们如何感知紧张关系(Sharma & Good, 2013)、框架紧张关系(Keller et al.， 2017;Miron-Spektor et al.， 2011;Pradies等人，2020)，对紧张的原因(Keller & Sadler-Smith, 2019)，以及对紧张的感受(Ashforth等人，2014;Pradies等人，即将出版;Vince & broussin, 1996)。悖论理论的前提是，员工的紧张经历是由环境因素和员工的认知和情感过程共同塑造的(Smith & Lewis, 2011)。环境因素不仅包括宏观层面的条件，如大流行危机(Schad & Bansal, 2018)，还包括组织内部更近的条件，如组织系统(Keegan等人，2019)、领导力(Zhang等人，2015)和社会背景(Keller等人，2020;Pradies et al.，即将出版)。因此，悖论理论为员工如何体验和应对大流行危机等重大事件带来的紧张局势提供了一个全面的解释。在本文中，我们提出了七篇短文，通过悖论理论的视角关注大流行危机期间生活经验的各个方面，提供了关于大流行的新见解，同时也利用大流行经验推动了悖论理论的界限。Bednarek和Lê(见下文)讨论了工作和生活之间的界限如何变得模糊，而我们对它们对立的感觉已经达到顶峰。对他们来说，大流行促使我们扩大对悖论理论核心的平衡概念的理解。接下来的三篇文章侧重于管理者如何塑造986874 JMIXXX10.1177/1056492620986874Journal of Management InquiryPradies等人的研究文章2021
{"title":"The Lived Experience of Paradox: How Individuals Navigate Tensions during the Pandemic Crisis","authors":"Camille Pradies, Ina Aust, R. Bednarek, J. Brandl, Simone Carmine, J. Cheal, Miguel Pina e Cunha, M. Gaim, A. Keegan, J. Lê, Ella Miron-Spektor, Rikke Kristine Nielsen, V. Pouthier, Garima Sharma, Jennifer L. Sparr, R. Vince, J. Keller","doi":"10.1177/1056492620986874","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492620986874","url":null,"abstract":"Organizational life has always been filled with tensions, but the COVID-19 pandemic is amplifying this experience in fundamental ways. Across the globe, employees were forced to quickly adjust to working from home, striving to remain productive while adapting to new technologies and workpractices (Lanzolla et al., 2020). Essential employees, such as medical personnel, have been grappling with the desire to deliver care to those with need without risking themselves (Kniffin et al., 2020). Leaders have been balancing optimism with realism and finding ways to engender psychological proximity despite managing their followers from afar (Gibson, 2020). These interconnected tensions have been accentuated not just within domains (e.g., work), but also across domains (Ladge et al., 2012). Working parents, for example, have been renegotiating boundaries as they pursue their work goals while home-schooling their children and caring for their elderly relatives (Power, 2020). To address the multitude of tensions that employees are experiencing during the pandemic, we turn to paradox theory, which provides a metalevel approach to studying tensions across organizational contexts (Schad et al., 2016), including work–life boundaries (Peters & Blomme, 2019). Paradox theory addresses questions about how people perceive tensions (Sharma & Good, 2013), frame tensions (Keller et al., 2017; Miron-Spektor et al., 2011; Pradies et al., 2020), reason about tensions (Keller & Sadler-Smith, 2019), and feel about tensions (Ashforth et al., 2014; Pradies et al., forthcoming; Vince & Broussine, 1996). Paradox theory begins with the premise that employees’ experience with tensions is shaped by both environmental factors and employees’ cognitive and emotional processes (Smith & Lewis, 2011). The environmental factors do not only include macrolevel conditions such as those stemming from a pandemic crisis (Schad & Bansal, 2018), but more proximal conditions within the organization, such as organizational systems (Keegan et al., 2019), leadership (Zhang et al., 2015), and social context (Keller et al., 2020; Pradies et al., forthcoming). Paradox theory therefore provides a holistic account of how employees experience and respond to tensions from major events such as the pandemic crisis. In this article, we present seven short essays that focus on various aspects of the lived experience during the pandemic crisis through a paradox theoretical lens, providing new insights on the pandemic while also using the pandemic experience to push the boundaries of paradox theory. Bednarek and Lê (see below) discuss how the boundary between work and life has become blurred yet our sense of them opposed has peaked. To them, the pandemic invites us to expand our understanding of the concept of balance central to paradox theory. The next three essays focus on how managers shape 986874 JMIXXX10.1177/1056492620986874Journal of Management InquiryPradies et al. research-article2021","PeriodicalId":47877,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management Inquiry","volume":"30 1","pages":"154 - 167"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2021-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1056492620986874","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45704466","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：