Transcendence through Rhetorical Practices: Responding to Paradox in the Science Sector

Organization Studies

Volumn 38, Issue 1, 2017, Pages 77-101

  Bednarek, Rebecca ^a   Paroutis, Sotirios ^b   Sillince, John ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WARWICK   (United Kingdom)

^c NEWCASTLE UNIVERSITY BUSINESS SCHOOL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

paradox; rhetoric; science organizations; transcendence

Indexed keywords

EID: 85009083335     PISSN: 01708406     EISSN: 17413044     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0170840616655486     Document Type: Article

References (90)

1. Abdallah C., Denis J.-L., Langley A., (2011). Having your cake and eating it too: Discourses of transcendence and their role in organizational change dynamics. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 24, 333–348.
2. Abdallah C., Langley A., (2013). The double edge of ambiguity in strategic planning. Journal of Management Studies, 51, 235–264.
3. Alvesson M., (1993). Organizations as rhetoric: Knowledge-intensive firms and the struggle with ambiguity. Journal of Management Studies, 30, 997–1015.
4. Andriopoulos C., Lewis M. W., (2009). Exploitation-exploration tensions and organizational ambidexterity: Managing paradoxes of innovation. Organization Science, 20, 696–717.
5. Bakhtin M., (1981). Forms of time and of the chronotope in the novel. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
6. Balogun J., Jacobs C., Jarzabkowski P., Mantere S., Vaara E., (2014). Placing strategy discourse in context: Sociomateriality, sensemaking, and power. Journal of Management Studies, 51, 175–201.
7. Bartunek J. M., (1984). Changing interpretive schemes and organizational restructuring: The example of a religious order. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29, 355–372.
8. Beech N., Burns H., Caestecker L. D., MacIntosh R., MacLean D., (2004). Paradox as invitation to act in problematic change situations. Human Relations, 57, 1313–1332.
9. Bledow R., Frese M., Anderson N., Erez M., Farr J., (2009). A dialectic perspective on innovation: Conflicting demands, multiple pathways, and ambidexterity. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 2, 305–337.
10. Burke K., (1989). A rhetoric of motives. Berkeley: University of California Press.
11. Cameron K. S., (1986). Effectiveness as paradox: Consensus and conflict in conceptions of organizational effectiveness. Management Science, 32, 539–553.
12. Carter C., Mueller F., (2002). The ‘long march’ of the management modernizers: Ritual, rhetoric and rationality. Human Relations, 55, 1325–1354.
13. Chen M.-J., (2008). Reconceptualizing the competition—cooperation relationship a transparadox perspective. Journal of Management Inquiry, 17, 288–304.
14. Cheney G., Christensen L. T., Conrad C., Lair D. J., (2004). Corporate rhetoric as organizational discourse. In Grant D., Hardy C., Oswick C., Putnam L., (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organizational discourse (pp. 79–105). London, UK: SAGE.
15. Chia R., Holt R., (2006). Strategy as practical coping: A Heideggerian perspective. Organization Studies, 27, 635–655.
16. Clegg S. R., Cunha J. V., Cunha M. P., (2002). Management paradoxes: A relational view. Human Relations, 55, 483–503.
17. Colyvas J. A., Powell W. W., (2006). Roads to institutionalization: The remaking of boundaries between public and private science. Research in Organizational Behavior, 27, 305–353.
18. Crown Research Institute Taskforce. (2010). How to enhance the value of New Zealand’s investment in Crown Research Institutes. Wellington, New Zealand. Retrieved from http://www.mbie.govt.nz/info-services/science-innovation/research-organisations/pdf-document-library/report-of-the-cri-taskforce.pdf
19. Dameron S., Torset C., (2014). The discursive construction of strategists’ subjectivities: Towards a paradox lens on strategy. Journal of Management Studies, 51, 291–319.
20. Davenport S., Leitch S., Rip A., (2003). The ‘user’ in research funding negotiation processes. Science and Public Policy, 30, 239–250.
21. Denis J.-L., Langley A., Rouleau L., (2007). Strategizing in pluralistic contexts: Rethinking theoretical frames. Human Relations, 60, 179–215.
22. De Rond M., Miller A. N., (2005). Publish or perish: Bane or boon of academic life? Journal of Management Inquiry, 14, 321–329.
23. Eisenhardt K. M., (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14, 532–550.
24. Eisenhardt K. M., Furr N. R., Bingham C. B., (2010). Microfoundations of performance: Balancing efficiency and flexibility in dynamic environments. Organization Science, 21, 1263–1273.
25. El-Sawad A., Arnold J., Cohen L., (2004). ‘Doublethink’: The prevalence and function of contradiction in accounts of organizational life. Human Relations, 57, 1179–1203.
26. Erkama N., Vaara E., (2010). Struggles over legitimacy in global organizational restructuring: A rhetorical perspective on legitimation strategies and dynamics in a shutdown case. Organization Studies, 31, 813–839.
27. Farjoun M., (2010). Beyond dualism: Stability and change as a duality. Academy of Management Review, 35, 202–226.
28. Feldman M., Orlikowski W., (2011). Theorizing practice and practicing theory. Organization Science, 22, 1240–1253.
29. Follett M., (1941). Dynamic administration: The collected works of Mary Parker Follett (Metcalf H. C., Urwick L., Eds.). New York, NY: Harper and Brothers Publishers.
30. Gill A. M., Whedbee K., (1997). Rhetoric. In van Dijk Teun A., (Ed.), Discourse as structure and process (pp. 157–184). London, UK: SAGE.
31. Grant D., Hardy C., Oswick C., Putnam L. L., (2004). Introduction: Organizational discourse, exploring the field. In Putnam L. L., Grant D., Hardy C., Oswick C., (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organizational discourse (pp. 1–16). London, UK: SAGE.
32. Green S. E., Jr (2004). A rhetorical theory of diffusion. Academy of management Review, 29, 653–669.
33. Greenwood R., Raynard M., Kodeih F., Micellota E., Lounsbury M., (2011). Institutional complexity and organizational responses. Annals of the Academy of Management, 5, 1–55.
34. Harmon D. J., Green S. E.Jr, Goodnight T. G., (2015). A model of rhetorical legitimation: The structure of communication and cognition underlying institutional maintenance and change. Academy of Management Review, 40, 76–95.
35. Hatch M. J., Erhlich S. B., (1993). Spontaneous humour as an indicator of paradox and ambiguity in organizations. Organization Studies, 14, 505–526.
36. Heracleous L., (2006). A tale of three discourses: The dominant, the strategic and the marginalized. Journal of Management Studies, 43, 1059–1087.
37. Heracleous L., Barrett M., (2001). Organizational change as discourse: Communicative actions and deep structures in the context of information technology implementation. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 755–778.
38. Holt R., Macpherson A., (2010). Sensemaking, rhetoric and the socially competent entrepreneur. International Small Business Journal, 28, 20–42.
39. Jarzabkowski P., Lê J., (2016). We have to do this and that? You must be joking. Constructing and responding to paradox through humor. Organization Studies. 1–30. Published online ahead of print. DOI: 10.1177/0170840616640846.
40. Jarzabkowski P., Lê J., Van de Ven A. H., (2013). Responding to competing strategic demands: How organizing, belonging, and performing paradoxes coevolve. Strategic Organization, 11, 245–280.
41. Jarzabkowski P., Sillince J., (2007). A rhetoric-in-context approach to building commitment to multiple strategic goals. Organization Studies, 28, 1639–1665.
42. Jarzabkowski P., Sillince J., Shaw D., (2010). Strategic ambiguity as a rhetorical resource for enabling multiple interests. Human Relations, 63, 219–248.
43. Jay J., (2013). Navigating paradox as a mechanism of change and innovation in hybrid organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 56, 137–159.
44. Kets de, Vries M. F. R., Miller D., (1987). Interpreting organizational texts. Journal of Management Studies, 24, 233–247.
45. Knight E., Paroutis S., (2016). Becoming salient: The TMT leader’s role in shaping the interpretive context of paradoxical tensions. Organization Studies. 1–30. Published online ahead of print. DOI: 10.1177/0170840616640844.
46. Kraatz M. S., Block E., (2008). Organizational implications of institutional pluralism. In Greenwood R., Oliver C., Sahlin K., Suddaby R., (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of organizational institutionalism (pp. 243–275). London, UK: SAGE.
47. Langley A., (1999). Strategies for theorizing form process data. Academy of Management Review, 24, 691–710.
48. Lawrence P. R., Lorsch J. W., (1967). Organization and environment: Managing differentiation and integration. Boston, MA: Harvard University.
49. Leitch S., Davenport S., (2005). The politics of discourse: Marketization of the New Zealand science and innovation system. Human Relations, 58, 891–912.
50. Lewis M. W., (2000). Exploring paradox: Toward a more comprehensive guide. Academy of Management Review, 25, 760–776.
51. Lewis M. W., Andriopoulos C., Smith W. K., (2014). Paradoxical leadership to enable strategic agility. California Management Review, 56, 58–77.
52. Lewis M. W., Grimes A. I., (1999). Metatriangulation: Building theory from multiple paradigms. Academy of Management Review, 24, 672–690.
53. Lewis M. W., Smith W. K., (2014). Paradox as a metatheoretical perspective: Sharpening the focus and widening the scope. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 50, 127–149.
54. Linstead S., (2001). Rhetoric and organizational control: A framework for analysis. In Westwood R., Linstead S., (Eds.), The language of organization (pp. 217–240). London, UK: SAGE.
55. Luscher L. S., Lewis M. W., (2008). Organizational change and managerial sensemaking: Working through paradox. Academy of Management Journal, 51, 221–240.
56. March J., (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2, 71–87.
57. Meyer M., (2003). Academic entrepreneurs or entrepreneurial academics? Research–based ventures and public support mechanisms. R&D Management, 33, 107–115.
58. Michaud V., (2014). Mediating the paradoxes of organizational governance through numbers. Organization Studies, 35, 75–101.
59. Miron-Spektor E., Gino F., Argote L., (2011). Paradoxical frames and creative sparks: Enhancing individual creativity through conflict and integration. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 116, 229–240.
60. Mueller F., Sillince J. A., Howorth C., Harvey C., (2004). A rounded picture as what we need: Rhetorical strategies, arguments and the negotiation of change in a UK Hospital Trust. Organization Studies, 25, 75–93.
61. Murninghan J. K., Conlon D. E., (1991). The dynamics of intense work groups: A study of British string quartets. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36, 165–186.
62. Pache AC., Santos F., (2013). Inside the hybrid organization: Selective coupling as a response to conflicting institutional logics. Academy of Management Journal, 56, 972–1001.
63. Papachroni A., Heracleous L., Paroutis S., (2016). In pursuit of ambidexterity: Managerial reactions to innovation-efficiency tensions. Human Relations. 1–32. Published online ahead of print. DOI: 10.1177/0018726715625343.
64. Poole M. S., Van de Ven A., (1989). Using paradox to build management and organization theories. Academy of Management Review, 14, 562–578.
65. Poulakos J., (1983). Toward a sophistic definition of rhetoric. Philosophy & Rhetoric, 16, 35–48.
66. Quinn R. E., (1988). Beyond rational management: Mastering the paradoxes and competing demands of high performance. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
67. Rip A., (2004). Strategic research, post-modern universities and research training. Higher Education Policy, 17, 153–166.
68. Sauermann H., Stephan P., (2013). Conflicting logics? A multidimensional view of industrial and academic science. Organization Science, 24, 889–909.
69. Schmitt A., Raisch S., (2013). Corporate Turnarounds: The duality of retrenchment and recovery. Journal of Management Studies, 50, 1216–1244.
70. Sillince J. A., (2002). A model of the strength and appropriateness of argumentation in organizational contexts. Journal of Management Studies, 39, 585–618.
71. Sillince J. A., (2005). A contingency theory of rhetorical congruence. Academy of Management Review, 30, 608–621.
72. Sillince J. A., Jarzabkowski P., Shaw D., (2012). Shaping strategic action through the rhetorical construction and exploitation of ambiguity. Organization Science, 23, 630–650.
73. Slawinski N., Bansal P., (2015). Short on time: Intertemporal tensions in business sustainability. Organization Science, 26, 531–549.
74. Smith W. K., (2014). Dynamic decision making: A model of senior leaders managing strategic paradoxes. Academy of Management Journal, 57, 1592–1623.
75. Smith W. K., Binns A., Tushman M. L., (2010). Complex business models: Managing strategic paradoxes simultaneously. Long Range Planning, 43, 448–461.
76. Smith W. K., Gonin M., Besharov M. L., (2014). Managing social-business tensions: A review and research agenda for social enterprise. Business Ethics Quarterly, 23, 407–442.
77. Smith W. K., Lewis M. W., (2011). Toward a theory of paradox: A dynamic equilibrium model of organizing. Academy of Management Review, 36, 381–403.
78. Smith W. K., Tushman M. L., (2005). Managing strategic contradictions: A top management model for managing innovation streams. Organization Science, 16, 522–536.
79. Sonenshein S., (2010). We’re changing—Or are we? Untangling the role of progressive, regressive, and stability narratives during strategic change implementation. Academy of Management Journal, 53, 477–512.
80. Stone M., Brush C. G., (1996). Planning in ambiguous contexts: The dilemma of meeting needs for commitment and demands for legitimacy. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 633–652.
81. Suddaby R., Greenwood R., (2005). Rhetorical strategies of legitimacy. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50, 35–67.
82. Symon G., (2005). Exploring resistance from a rhetorical perspective. Organization Studies, 26, 1641–1663.
83. Tertiary Education Commission. (2008). Centres of Research Excellence, Vol. 2008.
84. Vince R., Broussine M., (1996). Paradox, defense and attachment: Accessing and working with emotions and relations underlying organizational change. Organization Studies, 17, 1–21.
85. Watson T. J., (1995). Rhetoric, discourse and argument in organizational sense making: A reflexive tale. Organization Studies, 16, 805–821.
86. Werner C. M., Baxter L. A., (1994). Temporal qualities of relationships: Organismic, transactional, and dialectical views. In Knapp M., Miller G., (Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal communication. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
87. Westenholz A., (1993). Paradoxical thinking and change in the frames of reference. Organization Studies, 14, 37–58.
88. Whittle A., Mueller F., Mangan A., (2008). In search of subtlety: Discursive devices and rhetorical competence. Management Communication Quarterly, 22, 99–122.
89. Wolcott H. F., (1994). Transforming qualitative data: Description, analysis and interpretation. Thousand Oaks, CA; London, UK; New Delhi, India: SAGE.
90. Yin R. K., (2009). Case study research: Design and methods, 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.