The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Paradoxical Thinking and Change in the Frames of Reference
Abstract
Different types of mental frames of reference among employees in a producers' cooperative are described. Characterizing the employee this way produces a pic ture of the way in which each employee processes information that, in a given situation, enables him or her to identify probiems and solutions. These different frames of reference are assumed to have an impact on the actions taken by these individuals. Furthermore, such actions are assumed to be connected with actions in the organization. Some of the employees occasionally display unexpected beha viour that cannot be explained by the way they have previously interpreted their situation. They experience a paradoxical situation in the organization, during which previous frames of references (or parts of them) are 'deframed' and devoid of meaning, because they hecome involved in discussions on a different, unknown level. Some of these employees discover that the new categories are socially constructed, enabling them to pursue new ways of understanding the environ ment, and to act accordingly. This paper describes situations in which this process is likely to take place and how it may or may not facilitate organizational change.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Traditional marketing draws on this line of reasoning by ignoring or suppressing tension and focusing on customer issues as the single most important criterion for solving problems.”
From Stakeholder marketing: theoretical foundations and required capabilities (2015) · cites this paper as Westenholz 1993
Citations
Cites
Organizational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective
Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1997) · Reis · doi:10.2307/40183951 · Cited by 11,113
Paradoxes of group life: Understanding conflict, paralysis, and movement in group dynamics.
Smith, K. K., & Berg, D. N. (1987) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 393
Organizational paradox and transformation.
Cameron, K. S., & Quinn, R. E. (1988) · Cited by 317
Westenholz, A. (1991) · Economic and Industrial Democracy · doi:10.1177/0143831x91122003 · Cited by 8
Self-citationRasmussen, T. A. (2011) · VBN Forskningsportal (Aalborg Universitet) · Cited by 3
Research works printed but not linked: 10
- Bartunek, J.M. 1988 'The dynamics of personal and organizational reframing' in Para-do.r and transformation. Toward a theory of change in organization and management. R. E. Quinn and K. S. Cameron (eds.), 137-62. Cambridge, Mass. Ballinger.
- Christensen, S., 1983, Organisationskulturer
- Jameson, F. 1985 'Postmodernism and consumer society' in Postmodern culture. H. Foster (ed.), 111-125. London and Sydney: Pluto Press.
- March, J.C., 1976, Ambiguity and choice in organization
- Morgan, G., 1986, Images of organization
- Quinn. R.E., 1988, Beyond rutional management. Mastering the paradoxes and competing demands of high performance
- Thyssen, O., 1988, Paradigna, 2, 48
- Van de Ven, A.H., and M. Scott Poole 1988 'Paradoxical requirements for a theory of change' in Paradox and transformation. Toward a theory of change in organization and management. R. E. Quinn and K. S. Cameron (eds.), 19-63. Cambridge, Mass. Ballinger.
- Westenholz, A., 1982, Information. Virksomhedsbcskrivelse nr. 3 fra MAREV-Projcktct. Institute for Organization and Industrial Sociology
- Westenholz, A., Paper presented at the 8th SCOS Conference 'Restructuring Organizational Culture — Concepts, Methods and Data', Copenhagen. 26-28 June, 1991
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Exploring Paradox: Toward a More Comprehensive Guide
Lewis, M. W. (2000) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2000.3707712 · Cited by 2,562
Managerial and Organizational Cognition: Notes from a Trip Down Memory Lane
Walsh, J. P. (1995) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.6.3.280 · Cited by 2,275
Organizational Change and Managerial Sensemaking: Working Through Paradox
Lüscher, L. S., & Lewis, M. W. (2008) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2008.31767217 · Cited by 1,342
Paradox research in management science: Looking back to move forward
Schad, J., Lewis, M. W., Raisch, S., & Smith, W. K. (2016) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/19416520.2016.1162422 · Cited by 1,385
Managing Social-Business Tensions: A Review and Research Agenda for Social Enterprise
Smith, W. K., Gonin, M., & Besharov, M. H.-P. (2013) · Business Ethics Quarterly · doi:10.5840/beq201323327 · Cited by 1,010
Contradictions, Dialectics, and Paradoxes in Organizations: A Constitutive Approach
Putnam, L. L., Fairhurst, G. T., & Banghart, S. (2016) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/19416520.2016.1162421 · Cited by 1,116
Microfoundations of Organizational Paradox: The Problem Is How We Think about the Problem
Miron‐Spektor, E., Ingram, A., Keller, J., Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. (2017) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2016.0594 · Cited by 887
Capitalizing on Paradox: The Role of Language in Transforming Organizational Identities
Fiol, C. M. (2002) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.13.6.653.502 · Cited by 505
Complex Thinking, Complex Practice: The Case for a Narrative Approach to Organizational Complexity
Tsoukas, H., & Hatch, M. J. (2001) · Human Relations · doi:10.1177/0018726701548001 · Cited by 489
Participatory Processes/Paradoxical Practices
Stohl, C., & Cheney, G. E. (2001) · Management Communication Quarterly · doi:10.1177/0893318901143001 · Cited by 470
Ambivalence in Organizations: A Multilevel Approach
Ashforth, B. E., Rogers, K. M., Pratt, M. G., & Pradies, C. (2014) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.2014.0909 · Cited by 462
Living With Multiple Paradigms the Case of Paradigm Interplay in Organizational Culture Studies
Schultz, M., & Hatch, M. J. (1996) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1996.9605060221 · Cited by 419
Ashforth, B. E., & Reingen, P. H. (2014) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.1177/0001839214537811 · Cited by 440
A Dynamic Model of Intra-and Interorganizational Learning
Holmqvist, M. (2003) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/0170840603024001684 · Cited by 401
Clegg, S. R., Kornberger, M., & Rhodes, C. (2005) · Organization · doi:10.1177/1350508405051186 · Cited by 322
Integrating Dialectical and Paradox Perspectives on Managing Contradictions in Organizations
Hargrave, T., & de Ven, A. H. V. (2017) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/0170840616640843 · Cited by 287
Iterative triangulation: a theory development process using existing case studies
Lewis, M. W. (1998) · Journal of Operations Management · doi:10.1016/s0272-6963(98)00024-2 · Cited by 264
Transcending Paradox: The Chinese “Middle Way” Perspective
Chen, M.-J. (2002) · Asia Pacific Journal of Management · doi:10.1023/a:1016235517735 · Cited by 265
Stakeholder marketing: theoretical foundations and required capabilities
Hillebrand, B., Driessen, P. H., & Koll, O. (2015) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1007/s11747-015-0424-y · Cited by 257
ORGANIZED DISSONANCE: FEMINIST BUREAUCRACY AS HYBRID FORM.
Ashcraft, K. L. (2001) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/3069402 · Cited by 256
Toward a Process Theory of Making Sustainability Strategies Legitimate in Action
Hengst, I.-A., Jarzabkowski, P. A., Hoegl, M., & Muethel, M. (2019) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2016.0960 · Cited by 233
A paradox view on green human resource management: insights from the Italian context
Guerci, M., Rahimian, M., & Carollo, L. (2015) · The International Journal of Human Resource Management · doi:10.1080/09585192.2015.1033641 · Cited by 274
Irony and the Social Construction of Contradiction in the Humor of a Management Team
Hatch, M. J. (1997) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.8.3.275 · Cited by 226
Jarzabkowski, P. A., & Lê, J. K. (2016) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/0170840616640846 · Cited by 247
Introduction: Organizational Discourse: Exploring the Field
Grant, D., Hardy, C., Oswick, C., & Putnam, L. L. (2004) · SAGE Publications Ltd eBooks · doi:10.4135/9781848608122.n1 · Cited by 212
Democracy in the workplace: Theory and practice from the perspective of communication
Cheney, G. E. (1995) · Journal of Applied Communication Research · doi:10.1080/00909889509365424 · Cited by 215
A Cognitive Perspective on the Business Case for Corporate Sustainability
Hockerts, K. N. (2014) · Business Strategy and the Environment · doi:10.1002/bse.1813 · Cited by 216
Trethewey, G. E. A., & Ashcraft, K. L. (2004) · Journal of Applied Communication Research · doi:10.1080/0090988042000210007 · Cited by 187
Organizational Ambidexterity Through the Lens of Paradox Theory
Papachroni, A., Heracleous, L., & Paroutis, S. (2014) · The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science · doi:10.1177/0021886314553101 · Cited by 184
Transcending Paradox: The Chinese “Middle Way” Perspective
Chen, M. (2003) · Asia Pacific Journal of Management · doi:10.1023/a:1022024730957 · Cited by 170
Kajzer Mitchell, I., & Walinga, J. (2017) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.09.162 · Cited by 164
The social construction of organizational change paradoxes
Lüscher, L. S., Lewis, M. W., & Ingram, A. (2006) · Journal of Organizational Change Management · doi:10.1108/09534810610676680 · Cited by 157
Álvarez, J. L., Mazza, C., Pedersen, J. S., & Svejenova, S. (2005) · Organization · doi:10.1177/1350508405057474 · Cited by 155
Transcendence through Rhetorical Practices: Responding to Paradox in the Science Sector
Bednarek, R., Paroutis, S., & Sillince, J. A. A. (2016) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/0170840616655486 · Cited by 142
Ropo, A., & Hunt, J. G. (1995) · Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice · doi:10.1177/104225879501900307 · Cited by 122
In search of a creative space: A conceptual framework of synthesizing paradoxical tensions
Gaim, M., & Wåhlin, N. (2015) · Scandinavian Journal of Management · doi:10.1016/j.scaman.2015.12.002 · Cited by 113
Learning through Paradox: A Pedagogical Strategy for Exploring Contradictions and Complexity
Lewis, M. W., & Dehler, G. E. (2000) · Organizational Behavior Teaching Review · doi:10.1177/105256290002400604 · Cited by 106
An organizational learning approach to the learning organization
Huysman, M. (2000) · European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology · doi:10.1080/135943200397905 · Cited by 114
Narratives and Organizational Dynamics
Geiger, D., & Antonacopoulou, E. P. (2009) · The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science · doi:10.1177/0021886309336402 · Cited by 90
Ashcraft, K. L. (2006) · Communication Monographs · doi:10.1080/03637750600557081 · Cited by 87
Schultz, M., & Hatch, M. J. (2005) · Strategic Organization · doi:10.1177/1476127005055795 · Cited by 83
The support paradox: Overcoming dilemmas in gender equality programs
van den Brink, M., & Stobbe, L. (2013) · Scandinavian Journal of Management · doi:10.1016/j.scaman.2013.07.001 · Cited by 82
The paradoxical repertoires of management consultancy
Whittle, A. (2006) · Journal of Organizational Change Management · doi:10.1108/09534810610676635 · Cited by 78
Konventionelles und unkonventionelles Organisationslernen: Literaturreport und Ergänzungsvorschlag
Wiesenthal, H. (1995) · Zeitschrift für Soziologie · doi:10.1515/zfsoz-1995-0204 · Cited by 75
Tuckermann, H. H. (2018) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/0170840618800100 · Cited by 65
An interaction and networks approach to developing sustainable organizations
Ryan, A., Mitchell, I. K., & Daskou, S. (2012) · Journal of Organizational Change Management · doi:10.1108/09534811211239236 · Cited by 65
Managing organizational change: paradoxical problems, solutions, and consequences
Stoltzfus, K., Stohl, C., & Seibold, D. R. (2011) · Journal of Organizational Change Management · doi:10.1108/09534811111132749 · Cited by 65
Audebrand, L. K. (2017) · M n gement · doi:10.3917/mana.204.0368 · Cited by 65
Towards a multi-level servitization framework
Lenka, S., Parida, V., Sjödin, D., & Wincent, J. (2018) · International Journal of Operations & Production Management · doi:10.1108/ijopm-09-2016-0542 · Cited by 63
The Sound of One Hand Clapping
Wendt, R. F. (1998) · Management Communication Quarterly · doi:10.1177/0893318998113001 · Cited by 61
Academics engaging in knowledge transfer and co-creation: Push causation and pull effectuation?
Silva, M. D., Al‐Tabbaa, O., & Pinto, J. (2022) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2022.104668 · Cited by 60
Unpacking Continuity and Change as a Process of Organizational Transformation
Malhotra, N., & Hinings, C. R. (2013) · Long Range Planning · doi:10.1016/j.lrp.2013.08.012 · Cited by 67
Kuhn, T. R., & Corman, S. R. (2003) · Communication Monographs · doi:10.1080/0363775032000167406 · Cited by 58
Do we really understand business marketing? Getting beyond the RM and BM matrimony
Pels, J., Möller, K., & Saren, M. (2009) · Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing · doi:10.1108/08858620910966219 · Cited by 57
Vial, G. (2023) · Information and Organization · doi:10.1016/j.infoandorg.2023.100450 · Cited by 57
Cognition in strategic decision making
McKenzie, J., Woolf, N., Winkelen, C. V., & Morgan, C. (2009) · Management Decision · doi:10.1108/00251740910938885 · Cited by 51
Gaim, M., Clegg, S. R., Cunha, M. P. E., & Berti, M. (2022) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781009128155 · Cited by 54
Paradox resolution: A means to achieve strategic innovation
Tse, T. C. M. (2013) · European Management Journal · doi:10.1016/j.emj.2013.05.001 · Cited by 51
Learning in times of dynamic complexity through balancing phenomenal qualities of sensemaking
Guiette, A., & Vandenbempt, K. (2015) · Management Learning · doi:10.1177/1350507615592112 · Cited by 50
The Undecidability of DecisionPreprint
Andersen, N. Å. (2001) · RePEc: Research Papers in Economics · Cited by 46
Whittle, A., Mueller, F. U., & Mangan, A. (2008) · Management Communication Quarterly · doi:10.1177/0893318908318515 · Cited by 44
Analyzing competing demands in organizations: a systematic comparison
Gaim, M., Wåhlin, N., Cunha, M. P. E., & Clegg, S. R. (2018) · Journal of Organization Design · doi:10.1186/s41469-018-0030-9 · Cited by 44
Transcending Organizational Compassion Paradoxes by Enacting Wise Compassion Courageously
Simpson, A. V., & Berti, M. (2019) · Journal of Management Inquiry · doi:10.1177/1056492618821188 · Cited by 45
Dovetailing talent management and diversity management: the exclusion-inclusion paradox
Daubner-Siva, D., Vinkenburg, C. J., & Jansen, P. G. W. (2017) · Journal of Organizational Effectiveness People and Performance · doi:10.1108/joepp-02-2017-0019 · Cited by 41
van Neerijnen, P., Tempelaar, M. P., & van de Vrande, V. (2021) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/01708406211058640 · Cited by 40
The talent paradox: talent management as a mixed blessing
Daubner-Siva, D., Ybema, S. B., Vinkenburg, C. J., & Beech, N. (2018) · Journal of Organizational Ethnography · doi:10.1108/joe-01-2017-0002 · Cited by 39
Young, J. E. (2002) · The International Journal of Organizational Analysis · doi:10.1108/eb028943 · Cited by 37
Redefining managerial work: smart politics
Butcher, D., & Clarke, M. (2003) · Management Decision · doi:10.1108/00251740310479322 · Cited by 34
Foldy, E. G. (2006) · The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science · doi:10.1177/0021886306290309 · Cited by 32
Can specialists be general managers?
Clarke, M. (1998) · Journal of Management Development · doi:10.1108/02621719810210730 · Cited by 32
Keyser, B. D., Guiette, A., & Vandenbempt, K. (2019) · International Journal of Management Reviews · doi:10.1111/ijmr.12201 · Cited by 34
Jaumier, S., Daudigeos, T., & de Lautour, V. J. (2017) · Research in the sociology of organizations · doi:10.1108/s0733-558x20170000052003 · Cited by 32
Nakagawa, Y. (2020) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su12031000 · Cited by 31
Managing Social-Business Tensions: A Review and Research Agenda for Social Enterprises
Gonin, M., Besharov, M. H.-P., & Smith, W. K. (2013) · Academy of Management Proceedings · doi:10.5465/ambpp.2013.187 · Cited by 29
Organizations and unusual routines a systems analysis of dysfunctional feedback processes
Rice, R. E., & Cooper, S. D. (2010) · Cited by 27
Toward a System Theory of Corporate Sustainability: An Interim Struggle
Kantabutra, S. (2022) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su142315931 · Cited by 38
THINKING ABOUT ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE: TOWARDS TWO KINDS OF PROCESS INTERVENTION
Cock, C. J. L. D., & Richards, T. (1996) · The International Journal of Organizational Analysis · doi:10.1108/eb028850 · Cited by 26
Crazy, stupid, disobedience: The dark side of paradoxical leadership
Julmi, C. (2021) · Leadership · doi:10.1177/17427150211040693 · Cited by 25
The Impact and Source of Mental Frames in Socially Responsible Investing
Glac, K. (2012) · Journal of Behavioral Finance · doi:10.1080/15427560.2012.707716 · Cited by 31
Surfacing and responding paradoxes in megascale projects
Wiewiora, A. M., & Desouza, K. C. (2022) · International Journal of Project Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2022.01.009 · Cited by 24
How (and why) to avoid making rational decisions: embracing paradox in school leadership
Watson, C. (2012) · School Leadership and Management · doi:10.1080/13632434.2012.723614 · Cited by 24
The Making of Strategic Realities An Application of the Social Systems Theory of Niklas Luhmann
Vos, J. J.-P. (2002) · TU/e Research Portal · doi:10.13140/rg.2.2.23714.94402 · Cited by 21
Learning from a fool: Searching for the ‘unmanaged’ context for radical learning
Izák, M. (2013) · Management Learning · doi:10.1177/1350507613486426 · Cited by 19
Sendjaya, S. (2015) · Management for professionals · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-16196-9_2 · Cited by 26
Audebrand, L. K., Camus, A., & Michaud, V. (2016) · Organizational Behavior Teaching Review · doi:10.1177/1052562916682552 · Cited by 19
Valette, A., Diochon, P. F., & Burellier, F. (2018) · Revue française de gestion · doi:10.3166/rfg.2017.00169 · Cited by 17
Battisti, C., Dodaro, G., & Fanelli, G. (2017) · Environmental Development · doi:10.1016/j.envdev.2017.05.003 · Cited by 17
Individuals’ Responses to Change: The Relationship Between Learning and Knowledge
Antonacopoulou, E. P. (1999) · Creativity and Innovation Management · doi:10.1111/1467-8691.00127 · Cited by 17
Women in positions of service: The politicized body
Wendt, R. F. (1995) · Communication Studies · doi:10.1080/10510979509368457 · Cited by 16
Addressing the Flexible Use of Cognitive Flexibility Constructs: Toward a Multifaceted Approach
Patil, S. V., Srinivas, S. B., Tussing, D. V., & Rhee, J. (2024) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/annals.2023.0078 · Cited by 16
Knowledge networks: Dilemmas and paradoxes
Johnson, J. D. (2011) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2011.11.014 · Cited by 15
“This Is What We're All About”: The (Re)Construction of an Oppressive Organizational Structure
Jenkins, J. J., & Dillon, P. (2012) · Southern Communication Journal · doi:10.1080/1041794x.2012.672538 · Cited by 14
Araújo, M. L., Simpson, A. V., Marujo, H. Á., & Lopes, M. P. (2019) · Journal of Political Power · doi:10.1080/2158379x.2019.1573611 · Cited by 16
Undisciplining Organizational Studies
O'Connor, E. S., Hatch, M. J., White, H. V., & Zald, M. N. (1995) · Journal of Management Inquiry · doi:10.1177/105649269542002 · Cited by 15
A typology of systems paradoxes
Baldwin, W. C., Sauser, B. J., Boardman, J., & John, L. (2010) · Information Knowledge Systems Management · doi:10.3233/iks-2010-0130 · Cited by 12
Galuppo, L., Gorli, M., Alexander, B. N., & Scaratti, G. (2019) · Emerald Group Publishing Limited eBooks · doi:10.1108/s0897-301620190000027010 · Cited by 12
What’s Love Got to Do with It? Religion and the Multiple Logic Tensions of Social Enterprise
Borquist, B. R. (2021) · Religions · doi:10.3390/rel12080655 · Cited by 12
Schulte, L. (2021) · Management Review Quarterly · doi:10.1007/s11301-021-00225-w · Cited by 14
Cultural Competence and Institutional Contradictions: The Hydropower Referendum
Johansson, C., & Stohl, C. (2012) · Journal of Applied Communication Research · doi:10.1080/00909882.2012.720379 · Cited by 10
Employee Engagement and Organizational Change
Georgiades, S. (2015) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-16217-1_2 · Cited by 9
Metadata
- Authors
- Westenholz, A.
- Affiliations
- University of Copenhagen (DK)
- Corresponding author
- Westenholz, Ann
- Venue
- Organization Studies
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1993-01
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 37-58
- ISSN
- 0170-8406 (ISSN-L)
- 1741-3044
- OpenAlex
- W2159415906
- Cited by
- 175
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 8
- FWCI
- 5.93
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Organization Studies (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Management and Organizational Studies
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Organizational Change and Leadership
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Organizational Management and Change
- Keywords
- paradoxical thinking, organizational change, employee behavior, social construction of categories, information processing
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review