Management of paradox: a comparative study of managerial practices in Korean and Japanese firms

Se Joon Yoon · Yeon Joo Chae

30 citations0/0 files storedThe International Journal of Human Resource Management

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Organizational Management and Leadership Management and Organizational Practices Management and Organizational Studies

Abstract

Numerous scholars are recognizing that paradoxes are indigenous to organizational functioning. Managers too are being challenged to do more and spend less, and delegate and know the details. As a corporate objective, neither efficiency nor innovation can be sacrificed. In this paper, we have attempted to capture this emerging trend empirically. Defining management of paradox as ‘managerial practices that realize the simultaneous accomplishment of multiple strategic objectives that are seemingly or actually incompatible,’ this paper explores how organizational capabilities of effectively dealing with paradox can be acquired. Specifically, the paper attempts to address two organizational mechanisms: decision-making structure and human resource practices (HRPs). Propositions deduced from the existing literature were tested with the data collected from 103 Korean firms and 136 Japanese firms. The data indicated that firms have to be multi-talented. It was found that firms that successfully accomplished innovation and efficiency objectives simultaneously were those that were able to mix paradoxical organizational practices: decentralization and control on the one hand and the three HRPs on the other. It was also found that the Japanese corporations were more apt in deploying paradoxical managerial practices than the Korean counterparts. The paper concludes by discussing a few theoretical implications.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 30 citations exist upstream.

References

1991Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning 1995The Knowledge-Creating Company 1980Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors 1997The Knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation 1996Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity 1994The Management of Innovation 2003Exploitation, Exploration, and Process Management: The Productivity Dilemma Revisited 2004THE ANTECEDENTS, CONSEQUENCES, AND MEDIATING ROLE OF ORGANIZATIONAL AMBIDEXTERITY.

Cited by

2016Ambidextrous organizations in the banking sector: an empirical verification of banks’ performance and conceptual development 2016The impact of leadership on organizational ambidexterity and employee psychological safety in the global acquisitions of emerging market multinationals 2017HRM in dynamic environments: Exploitative, exploratory, and ambidextrous HR architectures 2016Who does what in enabling ambidexterity? Individual Actions and HRM practices 2016A cultural inquiry into ambidexterity in supervisor–subordinate relationship

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.