Search

This article examines paradoxes, challenges, and opportunities in the context of ethical customer experience management. Central to this discussion are different stakeholders such as firms, customers, policymakers, regulators, and society at large, as well as key issues associated with them. Firms aim to design and manage compelling experiences using customer data but face challenges balancing cost, customization, ethical concerns, and fairness in customer experience management. Customers should be encouraged to reflect on whether to share personal information for customized experiences, as well as on how far their responsibility goes in ensuring critically informed decision‐making. Policymakers and regulators must integrate the views of various stakeholders into policies and guidelines that promote a healthy society. Importantly, the digitization of customer experience has given rise to unprecedented ethical concerns related to the prospect of 'programming' these experiences. The shrinking temporal and spatial distance between stimuli, customer action, data footprint, and tracking poses significant reflections and dilemmas for both customers and firms. In this context, it is essential to determine ethical reflections and guidelines for customer experience design and management. We argue that firms should involve customers in assessing the implications of their experiences, while policymakers should facilitate the involvement of all stakeholders (including firms, customers, regulators, academics, and NGOs) to create an ongoing, healthy dialogue. This dialogue should guide a continuing debate aimed at evaluating the implications of specific actions in customer experience management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this essay, I evaluate the theory that leadership ought to be "paradoxical", meaning that leaders should embrace contradictions and incoherent norms. The idea of a paradoxical practice is trending in both education leadership and policy studies (as well as in business leadership studies), but in fact the literature on education (in Singapore and elsewhere) suggests that this is not helpful for arresting the terrors of performativity, and that there are examples of high performing education systems flourishing better through being consistent with core values. I detail how paradoxical leadership makes it difficult for defending ethical practice and how their rejection and shaming of the Aristotelian principle of non-contradiction risks effecting a woke culture that represses criticality. I argue that all this is part of an ongoing nominalist trend (the bifurcation between nature and thinking) in the history of ideas, only that we are at a philosophical tipping point. I explore the alternative, which takes contradictions seriously and irons out inconsistencies, and pre-empt objections internal to the Aristotelian tradition, and also offer an interpretation of James March's influential theory of leadership to show that if read carefully, the theory does not fit well with the paradoxes approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Gruppe. Interaktion. Organisation: Zeitschrift für Angewandte Organisationspsychologie (GIO) is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Gruppe. Interaktion. Organisation: Zeitschrift für Angewandte Organisationspsychologie (GIO) is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Gruppe. Interaktion. Organisation: Zeitschrift für Angewandte Organisationspsychologie (GIO) is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Gruppe. Interaktion. Organisation: Zeitschrift für Angewandte Organisationspsychologie (GIO) is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Gruppe. Interaktion. Organisation: Zeitschrift für Angewandte Organisationspsychologie (GIO) is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Gruppe. Interaktion. Organisation: Zeitschrift für Angewandte Organisationspsychologie (GIO) is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Gruppe. Interaktion. Organisation: Zeitschrift für Angewandte Organisationspsychologie (GIO) is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Gruppe. Interaktion. Organisation: Zeitschrift für Angewandte Organisationspsychologie (GIO) is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Gruppe. Interaktion. Organisation: Zeitschrift für Angewandte Organisationspsychologie (GIO) is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Recent studies have highlighted the major challenges faced by managers in the higher education sector and shown the contradictory demands which foster paradoxical tensions. Previous works have also underlined some specific tensions and rigidities that business school deans regularly face in their role. Yet, few studies have empirically explored which paradoxical tensions deans face and how they cope with them. Our paper addresses this gap. Using a qualitative study, we explore the simultaneous and interrelated contradictions faced by deans in French business schools and address how they manage the tensions related to these conflictual and complicated situations. Our work reveals five main tensions that deans have to face and two individual categories of responses to these tensions. It underlines two types of cognitive mindsets (paradox mindset and dilemma mindset) adopted by deans to deal with paradoxical tensions and highlights how deans have become academic entrepreneurs with hybrid profiles in a paradoxical system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The college transition is a multifaceted experience. Navigating the unfamiliar terrain of college allows for tremendous growth and self‐discovery while simultaneously evoking fear and uncertainty as students encounter new struggles. How students come to make sense of their transition experiences, especially moments of struggle, informs how they come to define who they are, who they can become, and where they belong. Robust psychological investigation has advanced three motivations for making sense of struggle: the need to understand, the need for self‐integrity, and the need to belong. Scholars target these motivations to design educational interventions and improve outcomes for students from marginalized backgrounds. What is missing is an exploration of how the uncertainty and marginalization arising from negotiating multiple social worlds can incite paradoxical expectations, messages, and cues that shape these three motivations for meaning‐making. In this paper, we aim to nuance these three motivations by attending to paradoxes. Unearthing the paradoxes lurking within each motivation advances a better understanding of what it means to make meaning from the margins and, consequently, offers new directions and possibilities for psychological research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Previous research has identified some tensions that public organizations may encounter during crises. However, there remains a scarcity of research examining how public health care organizations effectively navigate these tensions to reconcile the diverse interests, needs, and demands from various stakeholders. Purposes: The study seeks to shed light on the dynamics underlying the tensions experienced by public hospitals during the COVID-19 pandemic. It illustrates how different hospitals' actors have navigated these tensions, identifying solutions and approaches that fostered collaborative endeavors among internal and external stakeholders. Methodology: The study draws on qualitative analyses of 49 semistructured interviews and the notes from two focus groups involving key informants at one of the largest university hospitals in Italy. We also rely on the verbatim transcripts from meetings involving the members of the temporary emergency team constituting the taskforce. Findings: The results highlight the tensions that emerged throughout the different waves of the COVID-19 pandemic and how various actors have managed them in a way to reconcile opposing forces while unleashing adaptability and creativity. Practice Implications: Hospital managers would benefit from developing a paradoxical mindset for crisis preparedness, allowing them to embrace existing tensions and devise creative solutions to favor resilience and change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Gestion et Management Public is the property of Association Internationale de Recherche en Management Public (AIRMAP) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The German-born American Gunther S. Stent (1924–2008) was a refugee from Nazi Germany. He studied in the United States, was a follower of Max Delbrück, and became a member of the phage group. He researched DNA replication and RNA transcription and translation, and made contributions to neurobiology. He loved paradoxes and was a great communicator and a philosopher of science. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

AbstractThis paper centers on the challenges posed by the pandemic crisis, examining the crucial organizational and strategic alignments, as well as the inherent paradoxes that are pivotal in nurturing competitiveness within the changed post-pandemic business landscape for small and medium-sized firms (SMEs). Encompassing nearly 90% of all global businesses, SMEs have a central role in driving social advance, fostering entrepreneurship, innovation, and facilitating sustainable economic development within their communities. As the recent COVID-19 pandemic crisis conveyed demanding challenges for businesses, understanding its complete impact requires a thorough appreciation of the adaptive measures and organizational changes in the new post-crisis landscape. To this end, we have conducted a systematic literature review by examining 88 published articles, proposing a tri-dimensional categorization of SME practices and behaviors based on the existing body of knowledge. The study highlights the inherent challenges erupted from the pandemic driven VUCA environment, stressing the importance of adaptability and innovation within SMEs. Effective leadership and adaptability are deemed vital for steering SMEs through external contingencies, as well as embracing digitalization, technology advancements, and governmental support. Nonetheless, further research is warranted to grasp SMEs adaptability on the post-pandemic normality, urging policymakers to prioritize innovation, networking, and international expansion.

Purpose: Since the 1980's, diversity management (DM) has been regarded as a relevant scholarly and practical endeavour laden with different and often contrasting rationales and conceptualisations. In this regard, the current literature on DM largely differentiates between two overarching approaches – the instrumental and the critical approach with varying conceptualisations and underlying understandings of DM. The purpose of this paper is to discuss how a paradox lens can be utilised to bridge existing understandings of diversity management. Design/methodology/approach: The authors aim to discuss the current state of DM literature and reconceptualise DM from a paradox lens. Findings: The authors argue that the use of a paradox lens on DM allows for challenges to be brought forward instead of ignored or hidden away by illuminating and actively acknowledging both the liberating but also the challenging and oftentimes constraining experiences for the actors involved. Thus, a Paradox lens offers space for embracing and utilising paradoxes when working with diversity. Originality/value: Diversity management is no new concept in the field of human resource management and several scholars argue that the longstanding divide between the instrumental and critical approach remains problematic and limiting for the practice of DM. Hence, the value of reconceptualising DM from a paradox lens lies in bridging the two approaches in order to give way to viewing DM as a nuanced, dynamic and multifaceted practice that can accommodate complexity and contradictions in new and potentially beneficial manners. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Gedrag & Organisatie is the property of Amsterdam University Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Religación: Revista de Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades is the property of Religacion: Revista de Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

How desire is not simply a life force but an effect of language. We will try to follow its logical and disharmonious path [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The relationship between brand activism and other forms of activism, as well as the potential paradoxes that may arise from practicing brand activism, has not been fully addressed in the burgeoning brand activism literature. However, these questions are valid, given the growing interest in brands and activism in both research and practice. This article presents an overview of the ecosystem of organisation-related activisms surrounding brand activism and provides some insights into how brand activism can act as a bridge between them through different response processes within this ecosystem. Additionally, it discusses the relationship between corporate and brand activism, arguing that they are inextricably intertwined through the notion of organisational authenticity. Furthermore, the article uses the paradox wheel to illustrate some of the paradoxes of brand activism that should be considered in practice and as a basis for expanding research in the field. Finally, this article introduces a collection of articles in this special issue that has brought together a group of scholars researching brand activism from different perspectives, each of which offers grounds for a critical evaluation of what activism brings to brands, and what brand activism and branding bring to activism itself. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This essay examines why it is appealing to locate solutions to world problems in small places like community gardens or ecovillages, describe them as islands or niches and associate them with the utopian, especially to transformative research in the context of sustainability. To this end, the essay returns to Thomas More’s Utopia and focuses on its built-in paradoxes, paying special attention to the fact that the island of Utopia was artificially created by means of a channel. Employing Niklas Luhmann’s notes on utopias, the essay then traces what function the distancing of utopias from the real world has. Finally, drawing on Luhmann’s systems theory, it is shown what view these islands and niches allow, and to what one is necessarily blind to from there.

The open strategy approach advocates the inclusion of external agents, partners, and employees working at different levels in the strategy construction process. This movement toward openness and inclusion has also advanced in the public sector through collaborative governance. This development is due to changes in understanding the state’s role as a promoter of interaction between public and private actors. The central argument of this essay is that there are paradoxes inherent in the use of open strategy in the public sector that need to be managed in order to avoid or minimize damaging tensions between those involved. The essay adopts a reflexive and inductive approach based on the theoretical perspectives of both open strategy and collaborative governance. As a result, it contributes to the field of public management studies and presents theoretical and practical propositions that indicate ways of managing open strategy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Emerging adults, who are late millennials and Gen Z members, question the worth of higher education, especially in preparation for volatile labor markets, careers, and other precarities. We analyzed emerging adults' sensemaking about this education–career–precarity mix through the constitutive lens of paradox using the applied tensional approach. We identified two main paradoxes centering around feelings of education and career security and vulnerability: (a) students' beliefs about educational attainment as leading directly to career success (golden ticket) that coexist with understandings that there are no guarantees; and (b) feelings of isolation in the self-managed career ("it's all up to me") that share space with desires for social networks but as educational products established by others and consistent with student-as-consumer and neoliberal ideologies. In demystifying these paradoxes, we advocate more-than approaches that position tensions as opportunities, incorporate both career development and critical communication pedagogy, and transcend through quality control interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Substructural logics and their application to logical and semantic paradoxes have been extensively studied. In the paper, we study theories of naïve consequence and truth based on a non-reflexive logic. We start by investigating the semantics and the proof-theory of a system based on schematic rules for object-linguistic consequence. We then develop a fully compositional theory of truth and consequence in our non-reflexive framework. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present paper addresses some intriguing conceptual and historical implications of the notion of border arising from ontology, mereology, topology, and logic. On such seemingly abstract bases, it proceeds to presenting some philosophical reflections on the ethical and political dimensions of the same notion, fostering the idea that extant national and international institutions, and human rights law in particular, ought to be utilised to their full extent in order to deal with global migration-related challenges.

ABSTRACT Using the organizational paradox perspective, the study discusses how a context of national emergency modifies the propensity for transparency in tender waivers in municipalities. The empirical analysis indicates that there are tensions in the transparency of the public procurement process and that the public control literature should consider emergency and normal contexts differently. Emergency situations, in which budgetary funds are urgently allocated to emergency contracts, require greater transparency and control to reduce the risk of misuse of funds. Paradoxically, there is a reduction in transparency and a weakening of social control. The level of transparency of local governments under the same legislation varies according to the political support and understanding of the authorities in different legislatures and mandates, and between periods of emergency and normality. It is desirable for supervisory agencies and civil society to be aware of possible regressions in transparency practices in times of emergency, even for municipalities that are examples of transparency in times of normality. A content analysis was conducted on 1,528 tender waivers in 32 small municipalities in São Paulo State from 2019 to 2020. The level of transparency of the tenders was compared before and during the first year of the pandemic. Interviews were then conducted with public officials with experience in transparency practices in these municipalities, as well as with journalists and leaders of non-governmental organizations (NGOs), to validate the analysis on the transparency of the procurement process during the pandemic. Emergency situations can alter practices related to fiscal transparency in local governments when national authorities relax procurement rules. The study shows that the COVID-19 pandemic emergency led to reduced transparency in the procurement of supplies in some municipalities, particularly in contracts for supplies and services to cope with the pandemic crisis.

Many semantic theories become trivial when extended with a naïve validity predicate due to the validity paradoxes. The non-classical semantic theories are the ones that allegedly preserve the naïveté of the validity predicate while being capable of avoiding the validity paradoxes. This blocking, on the other hand, usually comes at a high cost. In this paper, we argue that the pre-theoretical notion of validity that the naïve validity predicate intends to capture is unattainable.

In this article, I will examine the question why it is so difficult to understand madness. First, I will examine what the third-person approach of psychosis or madness has to offer, and where its limitations lie with respect to its proper understanding. Next I will examine if and how the first-person perspective on madness contributes to our understanding. I will demonstrate that there is a stalemate between third- and first-person perspectives, which on the one hand hinders a free sight on madness, but which is on the other hand exemplary of the problem that is presented by madness. This turns out to be a paradox that haunts both the concept and experience of madness itself, as well as those who try to understand it. In the fourth section, I will unpack some of the operations of the paradox as it is found both in philosophy and madness, both by their producers as by their consumers. In the fifth section, I will tentatively sketch (im)possibilities of escaping paradoxes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Norway exemplifies a number of paradoxes in relation to the just transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy provision. We investigate these paradoxes by focusing on key controversies from the oil and gas sector and onshore wind power. Despite the widespread interest in avoiding conflict and increasing public acceptance, this article sees controversies as useful sites for uncovering justice issues in possible transition pathways. The controversies reveal competing interpretations of just transition amidst an inadequate cross-cutting policy response. Conventional solutions for restructuring petro-maritime industries involve taking controversies out of sight from the public and internalizing the issue of just transition to the sector's needs. This achieves only shallow engagement with broader society regarding the scope of societal transition needed to meet climate policies. Controversies around onshore wind installations are on the doorsteps of communities themselves and call attention to the difficult social aspects of transition that require a much broader public debate and policy response. We conclude that just transition should not be interpreted sectorally in competing energy futures but rather should infiltrate both the fossil and renewables sides of the Norwegian energy provision paradox. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose The presence of multiple and diverse stakeholders is a common feature of public sector governance. This study focused on the process of stakeholder participation, aiming to define stakeholders' expectations of a regional spatial plan and then uncover paradoxes in these expectations. Sensemaking and sensegiving were used as a theoretical lens to explore reasons for the paradoxical expectations. Design/methodology/approach A Swedish case was used to qualitatively explore the initial stage of a stakeholder participation process regarding strategic spatial planning. The main empirical material comprised observations and interviews. Findings Diverse stakeholders' expectations were captured through the identification of four paradoxes, relating to the level of guidance, prioritization of stakeholders, ambition, and time horizon. With sensemaking theory as a theoretical lens, the paradoxes could be understood through mental models, emotions, narratives, and social factors. The findings show the importance of creating a shared understanding among stakeholders, with sensegiving standing out as especially important. Originality The idea of stakeholder participation and consensus building is a debated topic. The current study contributes to this field by focusing on the process and on stakeholders' diverse expectations, using paradox theory to identify and define expectations and sensemaking theory to explore why these paradoxes exist. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Shaping and researching the circular economy involves multiple paradoxes and challenges hardly manageable by a single researcher or practitioner. This perspective argues for taking a more systemic viewpoint and multiple level perspective in order to better interlock skills. A systemic design of circular economy research requires multi-stakeholder collaboration and new opportunities for intervention.