Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Human Relations
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Beech, N.
Right arrow Articles by MacLean, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Paradox as invitation to act in problematic change situations

Nic Beech

Graduate School of Business, Strathclyde University, beech{at}gsb.strath.ac.uk

Harry Burns

Greater Glasgow NHS Board, Harry.Burns{at}GGHB.Scot.nhs.uk

Linda de Caestecker

Greater Glasgow NHS Board and Women and Children’s Unit of the Health Department, linda.decaestecker{at}scotland.gsi.gov.uk

Robert MacIntosh

Graduate School of Business, University of Strathclyde, robert{at}gsb.strath.ac.uk

Donald MacLean

University of Glasgow, D.MacLean{at}gla.ac.uk

It has been argued that organizational life typically contains paradoxical situations such as efforts to manage change which nonetheless seem to reinforce inertia. Four logical options for coping with paradox have been explicated, three of which seek resolution and one of which ‘keeps the paradox open’. The purpose of this article is to explore the potential for managerial action where the paradox is held open through the use of theory on ‘serious playfulness’. Our argument is that paradoxes, as intrinsic features in organizational life, cannot always be resolved through cognitive processes. What may be possible, however, is that such paradoxes are transformed, or ‘moved on’ through action and as a result the overall change effort need not be stalled by the existence of embedded paradoxes.

Key Words: action research • mode 2 • paradox • serious playfulness

Human Relations, Vol. 57, No. 10, 1313-1332 (2004)
DOI: 10.1177/0018726704048357
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?