Organizational Resilience: A Paradox-Based Conceptualization

D.R. Karunaratne
{"title":"Organizational Resilience: A Paradox-Based Conceptualization","authors":"D.R. Karunaratne","doi":"10.31357/vjm.v8ii.5606","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The concept of resilience has recently gained significant popularity in organizational research. It is considered to be a very promising concept for explaining how businesses can survive and develop in the face of adversity or instability.  Past literature focuses on various perspectives of organizational resilience and frameworks mainly based on processes, resources and capabilities. However, a significant amount of these studies have focused on polarized attributes resulting in contradiction of studies which blurs the conceptualization of organizational resilience. The purpose of this study is to address this gap by critically evaluating the phases or dimensions of the organizational resilience process and its contradictions in order to improve the understanding of this complex and embedded construct. Findings in the study reveal that the contradictions which are encountered in different phases of the organizational resilience process are paradoxical tensions.  Paradoxical thinking refers to opposite demands that are contradictory or polarized but are interconnected and such tensions should be managed by both/and approach instead of either/or approach. The anticipation phase consists of opposite tensions of opportunities or threats, the concurrent phase consists of tensions of stability or adaptability, and finally, the reactive phase consists of tensions of growth or performance. Therefore the new framework conceptualizes organizational resilience dimensions to be managed as a paradox to enhance the understanding of the concept of organizational resilience and thereby facilitate its operationalization. The proposed conceptual framework configuration can add to the business and management literature by enhancing the comprehensive conceptualization of organizational resilience. \nKeywords: Conceptualization, Dynamic capabilities, Organizational resilience, Paradoxical thinking, Resilience process","PeriodicalId":301618,"journal":{"name":"Vidyodaya Journal of Management","volume":"183 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vidyodaya Journal of Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31357/vjm.v8ii.5606","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

The concept of resilience has recently gained significant popularity in organizational research. It is considered to be a very promising concept for explaining how businesses can survive and develop in the face of adversity or instability.  Past literature focuses on various perspectives of organizational resilience and frameworks mainly based on processes, resources and capabilities. However, a significant amount of these studies have focused on polarized attributes resulting in contradiction of studies which blurs the conceptualization of organizational resilience. The purpose of this study is to address this gap by critically evaluating the phases or dimensions of the organizational resilience process and its contradictions in order to improve the understanding of this complex and embedded construct. Findings in the study reveal that the contradictions which are encountered in different phases of the organizational resilience process are paradoxical tensions.  Paradoxical thinking refers to opposite demands that are contradictory or polarized but are interconnected and such tensions should be managed by both/and approach instead of either/or approach. The anticipation phase consists of opposite tensions of opportunities or threats, the concurrent phase consists of tensions of stability or adaptability, and finally, the reactive phase consists of tensions of growth or performance. Therefore the new framework conceptualizes organizational resilience dimensions to be managed as a paradox to enhance the understanding of the concept of organizational resilience and thereby facilitate its operationalization. The proposed conceptual framework configuration can add to the business and management literature by enhancing the comprehensive conceptualization of organizational resilience. Keywords: Conceptualization, Dynamic capabilities, Organizational resilience, Paradoxical thinking, Resilience process
组织弹性:一个基于悖论的概念化
弹性的概念最近在组织研究中得到了显著的普及。它被认为是一个非常有前途的概念,可以解释企业如何在逆境或不稳定的情况下生存和发展。过去的文献侧重于组织弹性和框架的各种观点,主要基于过程、资源和能力。然而,这些研究大多集中在极化属性上,导致研究矛盾,模糊了组织弹性的概念。本研究的目的是通过批判性地评估组织弹性过程的阶段或维度及其矛盾来解决这一差距,以提高对这一复杂和嵌入式结构的理解。研究发现,在组织弹性过程的不同阶段所遇到的矛盾是矛盾的张力。矛盾思维指的是相互矛盾或两极化但又相互联系的相反需求,这种紧张关系应该通过两者/和方法来处理,而不是采用非此即彼的方法。预期阶段包括机会或威胁的对立紧张,并发阶段包括稳定性或适应性的紧张,最后,反应阶段包括成长或表现的紧张。因此,新框架将需要管理的组织弹性维度概念化为一个悖论,以增强对组织弹性概念的理解,从而促进其可操作性。提出的概念框架配置可以通过增强组织弹性的全面概念化来增加商业和管理文献。关键词:概念化、动态能力、组织弹性、悖论思维、弹性过程
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信