CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,116Management and Organizational StudiesManagement Theory and PracticeChaos, Complexity, and Education

Contradictions, Dialectics, and Paradoxes in Organizations: A Constitutive Approach

Putnam, Linda L., Fairhurst, Gail T., Banghart, Scott·2016·Academy of Management Annals
DOI 10.5465/19416520.2016.1162421
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This article presents a constitutive approach to the study of organizational contradictions, dialectics, paradoxes, and tensions. In particular, it highlights five constitutive dimensions (i.e., discourse, developmental actions, socio-historical conditions, presence in multiples, and praxis) that appear across the literature in five metatheoretical traditions—process-based systems, structuration, critical, postmodern, and relational dialectics. In exploring these dimensions, it defines and distinguishes among key constructs, links research to process outcomes, and sets forth a typology of alternative ways of responding to organizational tensions. It concludes by challenging researchers to sharpen their focus on time in process studies, privilege emotion in relation to rationality, and explore the dialectic between order and disorder.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5465/19416520.2016.1162421

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Paradoxes have been described as being managed by three response strategies: either-or, both-and, and more-than.

    “Paradoxes have been described as being managed by three response strategies: First, ‘either-or’ approaches consider the elements of the paradox to be independent of each other and try to resolve the tension by favouring one element over the other”

    From Content Creators Between Platform Control and User Autonomy: The Role of Algorithms and Revenue Sharing (2023) · cites this paper as Putnam et al. 2016

  • The measures are assigned to either-or, both-and and more-than responses.

    “Additionally, they are assigned to either-or, both-and and more-than responses (Putnam et al. 2016).”

    From Content Creators Between Platform Control and User Autonomy: The Role of Algorithms and Revenue Sharing (2023) · cites this paper as Putnam et al. 2016

  • These measures do not always have to be effective, but they are coping mechanisms for content creators to counteract the powerlessness caused by the paradoxical tensions of algorithmic control and incentivisation.

    “These measures do not always have to be effective, but they are coping mechanisms (cf. Putnam et al. 2016) for content creators to counteract the powerlessness caused by the paradoxical tensions of algorithmic control and incentivisation.”

    From Content Creators Between Platform Control and User Autonomy: The Role of Algorithms and Revenue Sharing (2023) · cites this paper as Putnam et al. 2016

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Putnam, L. L., Fairhurst, G. T., & Banghart, S.
Affiliations
University of California, Santa Barbara (US)
ORCID
Venue
Academy of Management Annals
Publisher
Academy of Management
Published
2016-01
Volume
10
Issue
1
Pages
65-171
ISSN
  • 1941-6067 (ISSN-L)
  • 1941-6520
DOI
10.5465/19416520.2016.1162421
OpenAlex
W2341022915
Cited by
1,116
References
8
Citations by year
2026: 151 · 2025: 144 · 2024: 125 · 2023: 123 · 2022: 110 · 2021: 126 · 2020: 100 · 2019: 93 · 2018: 69 · 2017: 56 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 2
FWCI
133.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Academy of Management Annals (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 › Management Theory and Practice
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Chaos, Complexity, and Education
Keywords
organizational contradictions, dialectics, paradox, organizational tensions, constitutive approach, structuration theory, critical theory, postmodernism, relational dialectics, metatheory, reason and emotion, order and disorder

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