Paradox as a generative practice

 

Charmaine Williamson, Peet Venter

 

Williamson C., Venter P. 2018. Paradox as a generative practice. Eastern European Business and Economics Journal 4(2): 162-188.

 

Full text

 

Abstract:

The more conscious management of paradoxical situations is gaining currency as practitioners wrestle with so called ‘wicked problems’ within regulated policy environments. Organisations involved with improving lives, through furthering development goals, often advance linear frameworks for such problems, amidst contradictory and political inter-dependencies. The paper challenges prevailing practice perspectives on rational strategy that are both claimed and assumed by the mandates of development. Instead, core practices around incremental action occur, which in effect massage the grand strategy. The findings theoretically anchor these central adaptions through invoking Brunsson’s political qualities of organisations and inserting acquired practices as conduits between his four qualities. In extending the theoretical context of Brunsson’s analysis, the paper argues that practices and practitioners sustain and are the carriers of both politics and action towards a calibration of organisational hypocrisy, equilibrium and strategic survival.

 

Keywords:

Strategy Activities and practices (SAP); organisational hypocrisy; nano narratives; development

 

JEL classification:

M1, 02, 03

 

Language:

English

 

References:

Abbas, H., & Niyiragira,Y. (Eds). (2009). Aid to Africa: Redeemer or Coloniser. Cape Town, Dakar, Nairobi and Oxford: Pambazuka Press.
Abulof, U. (2015). The malpractice of ‘rationality’ in international relations. Rationality and Society, 27(3), 358–384.
Alden, C., & Schoeman, M. (2013). South Africa in the company of giants: the search for leadership in a transforming global order. International Affairs, 89, 111–129.
Amin, A., & Howell, P. (2016). Thinking the Commons. In Amin, A., & Howell, P. (Eds). Releasing the Commons: Rethinking the Future of the Commons. London: Routledge.
Bowen, G. A. ( 2008). Naturalistic inquiry and the saturation concept: a research note. Qualitative research, 8(1), 137–152.
Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method.Qualitative research journal, 9, (2), 27–40.
Brunsson, N. (1986). Organization of inconsistencies: On organizational conflict, depression and hypocrisy as substitutes for action. Scandinavian Journal of Management Studies, 2(3-4), 165–185.
Brunsson, N. (1993). The necessary hypocrisy. The International Executive, 35 (1), 1–9.
Brunsson, N. (1995). Ideas and Actions: Justification and hypocrisy as alternatives to control. In Bacharach, S., Gagliardi, P., & Mundell, B. (Eds). Studies of Organizations: The European Tradition. Greenwich, UK: JAI Press.
Brunsson, N. (2002). Organized Hypocrisy. In Czarniawska, B., & Sevón, G. (Eds). Northern Lights. Oslo: Liber Abstrakt.
Brunsson, N. (2006). The organization of hypocrisy: Talk, decisions and actions in organisation (2nd edition). Malmö: Liber AB.
Busan Fourth High Level Forum. (2011). Fourth High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness: Outcomes document. Retrieved  August 20, 2018, from http://www.oecd.org/development/effectiveness/busanpartnership.htm
Center for Global Development. (2014). An introduction to Cash on Delivery Aid for Funders. CGD Notes, Washington.  Retrieved  January 14, 2015, from http://www.cgdev.org/section/publications?f%5B0%5D=field_document_type%3A2066
Centre for Policy Studies. (2001). Shifting sands: The relationship between foreign donors and South African civil society during and after apartheid. Research report no. 86 Social Policy Series, Centre for Policy Studies, Johannesburg.
Chia, R., & Holt, R. (2006). Strategy as practical coping: A Heideggerian perspective. Organization Studies, 27, 635–655.
Chia, R., & Mackay, B. (2007). Post processual challenges for emerging strategy-as-practice perspective. Human Relations, 60, 217–242.
Collier, P., & Dollar, D. (2004). Development effectiveness: what have we learnt?. The Economic Journal, 114 (496), F244-F271.
Cracknell, B. (1989). Evaluating the effectiveness of the Logical Framework system in practice. Project Appraisal, 4(3), 163-167.
Earle, L. (2003). Lost in the matrix: The logframe and the local picture. Paper presented at INTRAC's 5th Evaluation Conference: Measurement, Management and Accountability?. The Netherlands, INTRAC: 1-17. Retrieved August, 20, 2018, from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267363032_Lost_in_the_Matrix_The_Logframe_and_the_Local_Picture?ev=auth_pub
Easterly, W. (2002). The cartel of good intentions: the problem of bureaucracy in foreign aid’. The Journal of Policy Reform, 5(4), 223-250.
Easterly, W. 2006. Planners versus Searchers in Foreign Aid.  Asian Development Review, 23(1), 1−35.
Easterly, W., & Williamson, C. (2011). Rhetoric versus reality: the best and worst of aid agency practices. MPRA Paper No.39139.  Retrieved November, 4, 2015, from http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/39139/
Ewing, D., &  Guliwe, T. (2008). Foreign Donor Funding since 1994. In Habib, A., & Mahraj, B. (Eds). Giving and solidarity. Cape Town: HSRC Press.
Eyben, R. (2006a). Introduction. In Eyben, R. (Ed). Relationships for aid. London: Earthscan.
Eyben, R. (2006b). Making relationships matter for aid bureaucracies. In Eyben, R. (Ed). Relationships for aid. London: Earthscan.
Fioramonti, L. 2004. The European Union promoting democracy in South Africa: Strengths and weaknesses. European Development Study Group Discussions Papers, No 30, May 2004. SSRN.  Retrieved, June, 12, 2010, from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2099122
Gaim, M., & Wåhlin, N. (2016). In search of a creative space: A conceptual framework of synthesizing paradoxical tensions. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 32(1), 33–44.
Galle, P (2011). Foundational and Institutional Design Theory. Design Issues, 27, 81–94.
Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field methods, 18, 159-182.
Hatton, M., & Schroeder, K. (2007). Result based management: Friend or foe?. Development in Practice, 17, 426–432.
Haug, F. (1997). Memory-work as a method of social science research: A detailed rendering of memory-work method. Research Guide. Retrieved October, 5, 2016, from http://www.friggahaug.inkrit.de/documents/memorywork-researchguidei7.pdf
Holzapfel, S. (2016). Boosting or hindering aid effectiveness? An assessment of systems for measuring donor agency results. Public Administration and Development, 36(1), 3–19.
Jarzabkwoski., P., & Spee, A. P. (2009). Strategy-as-practice: A review and future directions for the field. International Journal of Management Reviews, 11, 69–95.
Jarzabkowski., P., & Whittington, R. (2008). A strategy-as-practice approach to strategy research and education. Journal of Management Inquiry, 17,  282–286.
Johnson., G., Melin., L., & Whittington, R. (2003). Micro strategy and strategizing: Towards an activity based view?. Journal of Management Studies, 40(1), 3–22.
Johnson., G., Melin., L., & Whittington, R. (2003). Micro strategy and strategizing: Towards an activity based view?. Journal of Management Studies, 40(1), 3–22.
Linnerud, K., & Holden, E. (2016). Five criteria for global sustainable development. International Journal of Global Environmental Issues, 15(4), 300–314.
Lowe, T. (2013). New development: The paradox of outcomes—the more we measure, the less we understand. Public Money & Management, 33(3), 213-216.
Mawdsley, E, Savage, L., & Kim, S.M., (2014). A ‘post‐aid world'? Paradigm shift in foreign aid and development cooperation at the 2011 Busan High Level Forum. The Geographical Journal, 180(1), 27-38.
Moyo, D. (2009). Dead aid: Why aid is not working and how there is another way for Africa. London: Penguin.
Nicolini, D. (2013). Practice theory, work & organisation: An introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
OECD-DAC. (2013). Aid statistics. Aid at a glance, by donor, recipient, region. South Africa. OECD-Development Assistance Committee, Paris.  Retrieved February, 12, 2016, from http://www.oecd.org/dac/stats/ZAF.gif  
OECD, 2017. Development Co-operation Report: Data for Development. OECD Publishing, Paris. Retrieved January 5, 2018, from http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/dcr-2017-en
Paroutis, S., & Heracleous, L. (2013). Discourse revisited: Dimensions and employment of first‐order strategy discourse during institutional adoption. Strategic Management Journal, 34(8), 935-956
Quadir, R. (2013). Rising Donors and the New Narrative of ‘South–South’ Cooperation: what prospects for changing the landscape of development assistance programmes?. Third World Quarterly, 34, 321–338.
Radcliffe, S.A. (2016). The shrinking commons and uneven geographies of development. In Amin, A., & Howell, P. (Eds). Releasing the Commons: Rethinking the Futures of the Commons. London: Routledge.
Ramalingam, B. (2013). Aid on the Edge of Chaos. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ramalingam, B., Laric, M., & Primrose, J. (2014). From best practice to best fit. Working Paper, Overseas Development Institute, London. Retrieved August, 20, 2017 from https://www.odi.org/publications/8571-best-practice-best-fit-understanding-and-navigating-wicked-problems-international-development
Ramalingam, B., Hernandez, K., Prieto M, P., & Faith, B. 2016. Ten Frontier Technologies for international development. Institute for Development Studies and Evidence on Demand, United Kingdom. Retrieved August, 20, 2018 from https://www.gla.ac.uk/media/media_524607_en.pdf
Saldaña, J. (2015). The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers.2nd Edition. London, Thousand Oaks, CA, New Delhi, Singapore: Sage.
Schatzki, T. R. (2002). The site of the social: A philosophical exploration of the constitution of social life and change. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.
Schatzki, T. R. (2006). The time of activity. Continental Philosophy Review, 39, 155–182.
Schultz, M., & Hatch, M. J. (1996). Living with multiple paradigms the case of paradigm interplay in organizational culture studies. Academy of management review, 21(2), 529–557.
Seidl, D., & Whittington, R. (2014). Enlarging the Strategy-as-Practice Agenda: towards Taller and Flatter ontologies. Organization Studies. 35 (10), 1407-1421.
Shuman, A. (2015). Story Ownership and Entitlement. In De Fina, A., & Georgakopoulou, A. (Eds.). The Handbook of Narrative Analysis. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc.  
Silver, C., & Lewins, A. (2014). Using Software in Qualitative Research: a step-by-step guide. 2nd Edition. Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore, Washington DC: SAGE.
South Africa. 2003. National Treasury: International Development Co-operation unit. In Policy framework and procedural guidelines for the management of Official Development Assistance (ODA). (1st edition). Pretoria: National Treasury of South Africa.
South Africa. 2013. National Treasury: International Development Co-operation unit: Information System. Retrieved December 21, 2016, from http://www.dcis.gov.za
Spee, P., & Jarzabkowski, P. (2017). Agreeing on what? creating joint accounts of strategic change. Organization Science, 28(1), 152-176.
Stacey, R. D. 1995. The science of complexity: An alternative perspective for strategic change processes. Strategic Management Journal, 16, 477–495.
Stacey., R.D., & Griffin, D. ( 2006). Introduction. In Stacey, R.D., & Griffin, D. (Eds). Complexity and the Experience of Managing in Public Sector Organisations. London and New York: Routledge.
Stacey, R.D. (2006). Ways of thinking about public sector governance. In Stacey, R.D., & Griffin, D.  (Eds). Complexity and the Experience of Managing in Public Sector Organisations. London and New York: Routledge.
Stacey, R.D. 2012. Tools and Techniques of leadership and management. Meeting the challenge of complexity. London and New York: Routledge.
Suddaby, R., Seidle, D., & Lê, J. K. 2013. Strategy-as-practice meets neo-institutional theory. Strategic Organization, 11,  329–344.
Tracy, S.J.( 2013). Qualitative research methods. Collecting evidence, crafting analysis, communicating impact. Chichester, West Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.
Vaara, E., & Whittington, R. 2012. Strategy-as-Practice: Taking social practices seriously. The Academy of Management Annals, 6(1), 285-336.
Vähämäki., J, Schmidt., M., & Molander, J. 2011. Review: Results Based Management in Development Cooperation. Riksbankens Jubileumsfond, Sweden. Retrieved May, 10, 2012, from http://www.rj.se/english
Vickers, B. (2012). Towards a new aid paradigm: South Africa as African development partner. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 25,  535–556.
Wang., H., Luo., G., & Hong, H. 2016. Beyond Socio-Materiality and Sense-Making: Planting Symbolic Power and Critical Realism into Strategy-As-Practice Logic. Open Journal of Business and Management, 4(02) 177-187.
Wiggins., S., & Shields, D. 1995. Clarifying the ‘logical framework as a tool for planning and managing development projects. Project Appraisal, 10(1), 2-12.
Williamson, C. 2013. Views from a Scholarly Journey: into official development strategic practices. SAFPI Foreign Policy Brief, No 42, SAFPI, South Africa. Retrieved December, 4, 2013, from http://www.safpi.org/publications/views-scholarly-journey-official-development-assistance-strategic-practices  
Whittington, R. (1996). Strategy as practice. Long Range Planning, 29, 731–735.
Whittington, R. (2003). The work of strategizing and organization: For a practice perspective. Strategic Organization, 1, 117–125.
Whittington, R. (2006). Completing the practice turn in strategy research. Organization Studies, 27, 513–634.
WYG International. (2011). Phase Two evaluation of the implementation of the Paris Declaration and Accra Agenda for Action in South Africa: Final country evaluation report. London. WYG International.

www.000webhost.com