Purpose Digital transformation rarely unfolds as smoothly as planned. Organizations frequently encounter persistent tensions between workforce autonomy and algorithmic control, despite management’s best efforts. While paradox theory has established that these tensions are inherent organizational features rather than solvable problems (Smith and Lewis, 2011; Lewis, 2000), practitioners still lack concrete tools to measure their severity, anticipate their trajectory or systematically evaluate intervention strategies. This study aims to examine why digital transformation rarely unfolds as smoothly as planned, focusing specifically on the persistent tensions that emerge between workforce autonomy and algorithmic control. Design/methodology/approach The authors integrate paradox theory (Smith and Lewis, 2011; Schad et al., 2016) with mathematical modeling techniques grounded in differential equations and game theory (Friedman, 1991; Weibull, 1995). The framework is applied to Walton Hi-Tech Industries Limited, Bangladesh’s largest electronics manufacturer (annual revenue: 7,512 BDT Crore; 23,298 employees), examining paradoxical tensions across five operational units during company-wide digital transformation. This mixed-methods approach integrates 50 semistructured interviews with survey data from 250 employees, triangulated through observational data and archival records (Jick, 1979). Findings Paradox intensity varies substantially across organizational units, with a 1.7-fold difference between the highest (retail: 0.82) and lowest (R&D: 0.48) scores. The analysis identifies four distinct stable organizational configurations, challenging universal change management approaches (Kotter, 1996; By, 2005). Participatory management strategies demonstrate 40% greater effectiveness than top-down control methods (Spreitzer, 1995; Clegg et al., 2002). Walton’s retail division emerges as the highest-risk unit for potential dysfunction. Research limitations/implications The single-case, cross-sectional design limits the generalizability of the findings (Yin, 2018). Longitudinal research across diverse organizational contexts would strengthen the framework’s external validity (Pettigrew, 1990). Future work should establish predictive relationships between paradox intensity and specific performance outcomes. Practical implications The framework enables managers to: diagnose paradox intensity before implementing new systems; identify vulnerable organizational units; design context-sensitive interventions; and evaluate the long-term sustainability of current configurations. A ready-to-implement diagnostic instrument is provided. Originality/value This research makes three contributions: first, it operationalizes “paradox salience” (Jarzabkowski et al., 2022) as a measurable construct with validated assessment tools; second, it demonstrates the framework’s utility through rigorous empirical application; third, it shows how formal modeling can generate actionable insights for change management practitioners, bridging the theory-practice divide in digital transformation research (Henfridsson and Yoo, 2014; Hinings et al., 2018).

What does it mean to “embody” paradox? In this paper, we adopt a "literal" interpretation of this question, examining how physical bodies experience, enact, and respond to knotted paradoxical tensions within the context of interpersonal and structural power relationships. We draw on a qualitative study of self-employed, community midwives (N=47) whom we interviewed jointly with their family members (N=51). Our findings paint a rich picture of how midwives experience knotted tensions through embodied polarities of presence-absence and energy-fatigue. We also elucidate how paradox knotting and power relations combine to transform midwives’ experiences of embodied tensions into a restrictive “triple bind,” where physical depletion adds a “third dimension” of material constraint to the interpersonal and structural constraints that characterize double binds. We detail three response patterns midwives use in attempting to navigate the triple bind, highlighting both the importance and limits of interpersonal support and gendered role negotiations. Our work advances understanding of paradox as a non-rational, embodied phenomenon, the navigation of which may require radical systemic change.

Abstract This article in “Gruppe. Interaktion. Organisation. (GIO)” introduces the TENSE leadership model. It starts from the premise that managers are increasingly confronted with paradoxical tensions in a dynamic and contradictory world of work. Drawing on a qualitative study with three expert groups, the paper confirms established paradoxical tensions and identifies new ones, including control vs. empowerment, harmony vs. conflict, structure vs. flexibility, and internal vs. external focus. Together with five competence areas for dealing with paradoxes, these tensions form the TENSE leadership model. The model integrates structural and personal requirements and thus provides a practice-oriented framework for leadership development, training, and organizational interventions. It advances paradox research by expanding existing models and simultaneously offers concrete approaches to fostering key competencies such as ambiguity tolerance, reflection, emotion regulation, and situational navigation in leadership practice.

Purpose This study aims to investigate how sustainability paradoxes emerge and evolve within organizations, addressing the question of how latent tensions become salient, intertwined and persistent. The objective is to offer a new theoretical lens to analyze paradox dynamics and provide practical guidance for sustainability management. Design/methodology/approach Following an abductive research design, this study uses the Quantum Approach (QA) to conduct a qualitative multicase analysis of three major Brazilian pulp and paper companies. The analysis focuses on how paradoxical tensions manifest in the states of latency, salience and persistence within the socio-material context of each company. Findings The results demonstrate that latent tensions, inherent in the socio-material context of each organization, give rise to salient paradoxes, which in turn intertwine and persist across multiple levels. The cross-case analysis reveals that common sectoral tensions (such as those related to water and emissions) coexist with unique tensions shaped by each company’s trajectory and governance. Research limitations/implications The research is limited to three companies within a single sector, which may constrain the direct generalization to other industries. In addition, the reliance on sustainability reports as the primary data source may introduce bias, since these documents undergo a process of curation. Future studies could mitigate these limitations by expanding the sample and employing more robust data triangulation, including interviews with organizational actors to deepen the understanding of paradoxes. Practical implications The findings provide actionable insights for managers, suggesting that effective management of paradoxes does not require eliminating tensions but rather embracing them and using tools such as context mapping, measurement and stakeholder engagement to transform tensions into opportunities for innovation and resilience. Social implications The research highlights that corporate reporting can mask deep socio-environmental tradeoffs. By fostering transparency and embracing paradoxical tensions, companies can move toward more inclusive decision-making and genuine accountability with local communities and stakeholders. Originality/value This study is among the first to apply the QA to analyze the dynamics of sustainability paradoxes in corporate reporting. In doing so, it contributes theoretically by expanding the understanding of dynamic states of paradox (latency, salience and persistence). The research also engages with the literature on reports as strategic artifacts for managing tensions.

Responding to literature calls to advance theoretical knowledge of the importance of space in entrepreneurship research, we develop ‘Triadic Spatial Paradox’ as a conceptual model emanating from the creative experiences of entrepreneurs operating home-based businesses (HBBs). Providing a theorised, nuanced unpacking of hybrid entrepreneurial home/workspace experiences, we contribute to entrepreneurship literature by enhancing empirically informed knowledge of neglected space-contexts where paradoxical tensions pervade the lived home/workspace experiences and perceptions of entrepreneurs. The conceptual model emerged from analysing in-depth evidence from entrepreneurs who intentionally set up hybrid home/workspaces. We extend paradox theory whilst embracing Lefebvre’s triadic frame (spatial practice; representations of space; spaces of representation), and advance knowledge about the multifaceted paradoxical experiences of self-regulating, autonomous, home-based entrepreneurs in their HBB hybrid workspace. Using their first-hand accounts and lived experiences of their relationship with their diverse HBBs, we reveal how imaginative engagement with their hybrid workspaces intersects with their perceived, conceived and lived everyday homespaces.

Understanding paradoxical tensions and coping strategies in platform-based servitization

While most studies examine the implementation of digital technologies, this research investigates paradoxical tensions between workers and technology during the design stage and how acceptance strategies can support a smart working environment. We conducted a one-year longitudinal case study in a high-end furniture company, drawing on interviews, participant observations, and document analysis. Guided by paradox theory, we identified eight tensions and four acceptance strategies that help organizations navigate these contradictions. Besides identifying specific tensions at this stage, our study shows—through comparison with prior research—that some paradoxical categories are more pronounced and distinct during the technological design stage, while others persist throughout the entire digital transformation journey, spanning both technological design and implementation. This study expands understandings of paradoxical tensions in digital transformation by focusing on the technology design stage which is largely underexplored in literature. It also offers practical guidance for aligning technology planning with Industry 5.0 principles.

Abstract Through a series of visual provocations from Star Wars’ Episode III – Revenge of the Sith , this article contemplates the allure and danger of a singular truth. Anakin Skywalker’s transition from Jedi to Sith Lord, Darth Vader, amplifies and breaks down notions of truth and lies, posing seductive simplicities and paradoxical tensions. These come to the fore in the battle which marks Anakin’s final transition from Jedi to Sith, with his former Master Obi-Wan Kenobi’s ironic, absolutist declaration “only a Sith deals in absolutes” (Lucas, 2005). This article explores how these scenes seduce viewers with the clarity of absolute thinking and undermine it through dialogic contradiction, signalling the allure and dangers of simplistic, idealised, certainty.

Global supply chains face unprecedented complexity as organizations must simultaneously achieve sustainability objectives and operational resilience amid evolving risk landscapes. Despite extensive research, the absence of systematic knowledge synthesis has limited understanding of how these dual imperatives intersect. This study conducts the first comprehensive scientometric analysis of global supply chain risk management research, examining 1228 peer-reviewed articles from major databases published from 2016 to June 2025. The study employed co-occurrence analysis, temporal burst detection, and network visualization to map the intellectual structure and evolutionary dynamics of this field. Our study reveals four distinct research clusters: risk factor identification (traditional and unconventional threats), environmental and social sustainability integration, technology-driven challenges, and innovative risk management methodologies. Temporal analysis demonstrates significant research acceleration post-2020, driven by pandemic disruptions, with emerging focus on cyberattacks, geopolitical conflicts, and ESG compliance challenges. The findings reveal critical gaps at the sustainability-resilience intersection, particularly paradoxical tensions where short-term resilience measures may compromise long-term sustainability goals. We propose four priority research directions: digital transformation frameworks balancing sustainability-resilience trade-offs, ESG-integrated early warning systems, adaptive governance mechanisms for unconventional risks, and policy frameworks addressing regulatory complexity. This systematic knowledge mapping provides theoretical foundations for future research and practical guidance for supply chain managers navigating dual sustainability-resilience objectives in an uncertain global environment.

This study undertakes a philosophical examination of the intersection of international criminal law and human rights law, revealing the paradoxical tensions between the pursuit of justice and the protection of human rights. Through a critical analysis of the normative foundations of these two fields, this research discloses the differing ontological and epistemological assumptions underlying international criminal law and human rights law. Employing a qualitative research methodology, this study conducts an in-depth examination of the major international criminal law and human rights law instruments, including the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Additionally, this research undertakes a critical discourse analysis of the jurisprudence of international criminal law and human rights law institutions, including the International Criminal Court and the European Court of Human Rights. This study argues that the paradox of justice at the intersection of international criminal law and human rights law stems from the differing conceptions of justice and human rights that underlie these two fields. While international criminal law prioritizes retributive justice and the punishment of perpetrators, human rights law emphasizes restorative justice and the protection of human dignity. To reconcile this paradox, this research proposes a philosophical framework that integrates the insights of both fields. Drawing on the concepts of "justice as recognition" and "human rights as capabilities," this study develops a novel approach to understanding the intersection of international criminal law and human rights law. The findings of this study contribute to a deeper understanding of the complex relationships between justice, human rights, and international law. This research informs strategies for enhanced cooperation and accountability between international criminal law and human rights law institutions, ultimately promoting a more just and equitable international legal order. This study employs a qualitative research methodology, including critical discourse analysis and philosophical inquiry. The research questions guiding this study include: What are the differing ontological and epistemological assumptions underlying international criminal law and human rights law? How do these differing assumptions give rise to the paradox of justice at the intersection of international criminal law and human rights law? How can a philosophical framework that integrates the insights of both fields reconcile this paradox?. The study's findings suggest that a philosophical framework that integrates the insights of both fields is necessary to reconcile the paradox of justice. The research also highlights the importance of enhanced cooperation and accountability between international criminal law and human rights law institutions in promoting a more just and equitable international legal order. The key lessons from this study include the importance of understanding the complex relationships between justice, human rights, and international law, and the need for a philosophical framework that integrates the insights of both fields. The study also emphasizes the importance of enhanced cooperation and accountability between international criminal law and human rights law institutions.

We adopt a paradox theory's lens to discuss “Objectives and Key Results” (OKRs), a third generation of goal-directed, management-byobjectives systems, which was preceded by “management by objectives” and “goal setting.” We not only explore both the similarities and the differences between OKRs and alternative systems, but also assert that in combination with “Key Performance Indicators” (KPIs), OKRs can compose a dual system to simultaneously consider strategy and execution with a focus on both stability and change. Using vignettes from practice, we argue that the combined adoption of KPIs and OKRs (KPI–OKR) allows managers to invest in the pursuit of current objectives while simultaneously promoting new strategic objectives. In this way, the KPI–OKR combination may constitute a (new) form that promotes ambidexterity through a paradoxical approach to organizational goals. We locate the difference brought by the OKR system in this potential to articulate paradoxical demands.

Resolving paradoxical tensions during business model innovation for sustainability in retailing: The role of the ecosystem

This study has a twofold purpose. First, it examines the paradoxical tensions fashion brands face when navigating overlapping environmental, social and economic issues. Second, it investigates whether, how and to what extent these brands manage such complexities. Using paradox theory, the research adopts an exploratory multiple case study approach, encompassing nine sneaker companies aiming to reduce virgin plastic use. The analysis identifies eleven tensions clustered into five categories: resource and product availability, process feasibility, product functionality, resource and product affordability, and product fashionability. The study then shows how these tensions can be reframed into operational responses, identifying fourteen actions that help mitigate paradoxical pressures linked to the urgent plastic challenge. This advances understanding in sustainable production and operations management and provides actionable insights for firms whose business models require addressing such grand challenges. While drawn from sneaker companies, these practices are transferable to other areas of the fashion industry.

The literature on organizational paradoxes emphasizes the importance of both/and thinking and action. Yet, while often treated as a unitary concept, both/and has been interpreted and operationalized in diverse ways—such as ambidexterity, transcendence, Yin-Yang balancing, and Zhong-Yong middle way. To enhance conceptual clarity and coherence, this paper decomposes the notion of both/and and identifies generic strategies for simultaneously engaging paradoxical opposites. I begin by reviewing individual responses and prior classifications of responses to paradoxical tensions, which reveals five distinct responses beyond either/or logics. Building on these, I develop a typology that specifies and relates five variants of both/and thinking. These are organized into five ideal types—superficial Either-And, multiversal Both-Or, ambivalent Both-And, reconciliatory Both-Nor, and transcendent Neither-And—collectively forming the acronym SMART. I illustrate the application of the SMART framework by analyzing how organizations navigate the profitability versus responsibility tension, a paradox central to modern business practice. I conclude the paper by identifying the limitations of the present study and avenues for future research.

This article examines the philosophical reappraisal of vulnerability through the lens of John Zizioulas’s theological anthropology. While Western thought, shaped by libertarian ideals, has habitually framed vulnerability as weakness, recent philosophers—especially Judith Butler and Erinn Gilson—have recast the concept as an openness to affect that enables both flourishing and harm. Yet, Butler and Gilson remain constrained by empiricism, and as such, struggle to reconcile human vulnerability with agency. Zizioulas’s anthropological hermeneutic provides a way forward by interpreting vulnerability in light of his trinitarian theology. Specifically, his account of the monarchy of the Father as “inconceivable” without the Son and the Spirit provides a divine model for human vulnerability as both interdependent and free. In light of this model, Zizioulas reframes Butler and Gilson’s reappraisal of vulnerability as a paradoxical tension between the “biological hypostasis” (the tragic inability to transcend our created nature subject to death), and free, loving interdependence with God in Christ through the eucharistic communion of the Church (the “ecclesial hypostasis” or “communion in otherness”). Zizioulas’s account also addresses the question of agency in vulnerability by proposing kenosis as a continual ascetic self-denial to receive the other and let the other truly be other.

Purpose This study examines the paradoxical tensions faced by human resource (HR) managers, focusing on the interplay of contextual factors and strategic responses. It explores how contextual factors influence HR managers’ responses to paradoxical tensions. Design/methodology/approach Informed by Smith and Lewis’s (2011) dynamic equilibrium model of paradox, this study adopts a qualitative approach. Data were collected through 83 interviews with HR and line managers across eight banks in Pakistan, providing insights into the contextual dynamics and strategic responses to paradoxes. Findings The findings reveal three key paradoxes facing HR managers: long-term versus short-term orientation, transformation versus transaction and centralization versus decentralization. Contextual factors, including organizational size, ownership structure, sociocultural norms and technological infrastructure, shape the navigation of these paradoxes. Banks with a balanced approach to centralized oversight and decentralized decision-making exhibit greater capacity to implement hybrid HR structures that align strategy while adapting to local needs, while others face challenges due to resource constraints such as limited budgets, outdated technological infrastructure and limited skilled HR personnel coupled with hierarchical decision-making cultures. Practical implications This research suggests customizing HR strategies to address resource limitations and developing hybrid structures to balance operational and strategic priorities. Originality/value This study contributes to paradox theory by highlighting how contextual factors influence HR managers’ strategies in navigating paradoxical tensions. It underscores the importance of contextual adaptation in HR practices.

ABSTRACT Purchasing and Supply Management (PSM) inherently operates as a critical source of paradoxical tension, driven by its mandate to reconcile the often-divergent objectives, identities, and organizational structures of internal and external supply chain actors. The strategic function of PSM requires simultaneously managing contradictory demands, necessitating a shift from simple trade-offs to a deeper understanding of inherent conflict. This article addresses a fundamental research gap by developing a comprehensive, theory-building framework of PSM paradoxes essential for reducing operational failures and enhancing supply chain resilience and sustainability. By providing a structured typology, this research allows practitioners to proactively diagnose and manage these underlying conflicts instead of merely reacting to emergent crises. Adopting a rigorous, systematic literature review focused on conflicting goals and trade-offs, we mapped tensions across four core managerial categories—Learning, Belonging, Organizing, and Performing—and their pairwise intersections. This exploration of 105 academic articles yielded a classification of 100 distinct paradoxes within 20 comprehensive categories. Our analysis reveals a significant prevalence of interorganizational over intraorganizational tensions, predominantly concentrated in the Organizing and Performing spheres. Fundamentally, these paradoxes crystallize PSM’s grand challenges, with 25% relating to collaboration, 10% to innovation, and 10% to Corporate Social Responsibility, alongside digitalization and change management.

Tourism’s workforce resilience remains vitally important as the industry continues to build capacity in its long recovery from recurring global crises. Resilience is hindered by persistent structural issues that obstruct recovery efforts. Adopting and extending a novel paradox dynamics model , this research holistically considers employees, operators, and stakeholders, by modeling the process across four dimensions of unresolved paradoxical tensions. Based on qualitative data engaging multiple stakeholders in impacted regional tourism destinations, the results reveal a “vicious-virtuous” process in explaining workforce resilience building from a shifting paradox dynamics view. Theoretically, we augment the shifting paradox dynamics by recognizing the complexity of multiple tourism workforce actors, the diffused nature of organizational agency, and the lack of a central orchestrator. We augment the model to accommodate these empirical insights. Practically, the study identifies resolutions to further deep structural issues that obstruct resilience and recovery.

Managing paradoxical tensions between Corporate Social Responsibility and Automation: How organizations reach sustainability and digital transformation

Realising human-robot collaboration in manufacturing? A journey towards industry 5.0 amid organisational paradoxical tensions