Paradox theory offers a unique approach through which the complex and often conflicting aspects of corporate sustainability (CS) can be addressed. Although a growing body of literature has focused on the organizational-level outcomes of a paradox approach to sustainability, we know less about how such an approach creates business contributions to sustainable development beyond the organization (societal sustainability). The present study addresses this gap in research through a qualitative meta-analysis of 32 empirical case studies. While the analyzed studies confirmed the (...) effectiveness of a paradox approach to managing CS tensions from an organizational perspective, indications of contributions to societal sustainability were ambiguous. This finding led to the creation of a typology of response–outcome pathways. These pathways illustrate variations in the societal sustainability outcomes of CS paradox responses based on the moderating effects of three factors: level of commitment to sustainability, the approach to stakeholder engagement, and the level of strategy–practice alignment. This analysis contributes to the CS paradox perspective by offering important boundary conditions to the commonly held assumption that a paradox approach leads to superior business contributions to sustainability and highlights the need for research that examines outcomes of extant CS approaches beyond the organization. (shrink)

In the context of increasingly frequent climate-related disasters, this article examines whether and how private sector actors can participate in disaster response and work closely with established authorities. We adopt the concept of territoriality from human geography to explain why actors in authoritative positions may exclude others from participation even when they present a clear value proposition. Grounded in an in-depth case study of a local private sector organization in Vanuatu, we identify three relational dynamics between a private sector organization (...) and sovereign authorities in disaster response. We observe that mutually defined collaboration fosters pragmatic legitimacy for private actors. Private actors’ unilateral role expansion in search of moral legitimacy, however, threatens sovereign authorities. This threat leads to a collaboration deadlock as sovereign actors reinforce a traditional division of labor between sectors and delegitimize the private actor’s participation. Our study contributes to the literature on cross-sector social interactions (CSSI) by explaining how authority constrains cross-sector collaboration and how private actors can gain and lose legitimacy for such collaborations. We further explore the tensions that arise when private actors use crises as windows of opportunity for showcasing the societal value of their participation. We conclude by offering practical recommendations for enhancing private sector participation in disaster response. (shrink)

This article investigates how firms address the stability-change paradox inherent in sustainability transitions through the maintenance and utilization of a portfolio of sustainability-oriented partnerships. Drawing on a retrospective case study of Dong/Ørsted, a Danish energy company, we demonstrate the varying manifestations of the stability-change paradox during different phases of the company’s transition, influenced by both exogenous and endogenous factors. Furthermore, our findings reveal how Dong/Ørsted employed their partnership portfolio to implement diverse responses to manage the paradox. Based on these findings, (...) we argue that partnership portfolios can serve as spatiotemporal pockets, enabling organizations to effectively address and leverage the temporal and spatial aspects inherent in sustainability paradoxes. In addition, we highlight how partnership portfolios facilitate sustainability transitions by creating and leveraging different forms of collaborative value. (shrink)

Extant studies on stakeholder engagement have noted the inherent tensions arising from participation efforts, giving rise to the dark side of engagement. However, few studies have focused on organizational power relations that provide specific conditions for engagement and the related paradox that control represents. Drawing on strategy discourse and paradox as theoretical lenses, we examine engagement as a nexus of observed societal expectations, subjectivities provided by the strategy discourse, and the subject positions adopted by the individuals, giving rise to a (...) contradiction between openness and control. As a result, we present three modes of participation: inclusion, admittance, and quasi-participation. We contribute to stakeholder engagement and paradox literature by outlining the “engagement-control paradox” and showing how the prevailing strategy discourse may drive the use of participation as a form of control. Maintaining different modes of participation introduces inadvertent closure for participation and hinders strategy-making and the development of the organization. (shrink)

Organizational ambidexterity (OA)—the simultaneous pursuit of explorative and exploitative innovations—engenders nested (paradoxes manifesting across organizational levels) and knotted paradoxes (intertwined co-occurring paradoxes at the same or across organizational levels). Both nested and knotted paradoxes are managed by internal stakeholders using approaches that are socially constructed by influences emanating from within and beyond an organization. External stakeholders also help shape organizational innovations but their influence on the management of paradoxes has largely been overlooked. In this study, we collected and analyzed data (...) from internal ( n = 19) and external stakeholders ( n = 18) in organizations pursuing explorative and exploitative clean energy transitions at nine Canadian energy utilities. We find that the external stakeholders engage with knotted inclusivity–efficiency and existing–emerging needs paradoxes. Our findings add to OA and business and society literature by revealing how the approaches that internal and external stakeholders adopt for paradox management have implications for each other, and thus OA. We also provide practical insight into how external stakeholder paradoxes can be managed through stakeholder inclusivity and enhanced transparency of innovation plans, with positive implications for OA. (shrink)