Scholarlink

<p>Paradox has long occupied a central place in management scholarship, yet it remains conceptually elusive. Ambiguously articulated foundations have created confusion around paradoxical constructs and their interrelationships, generating persistent theoretical and practical challenges. This study addresses these issues by returning to the philosophical roots of paradox, emphasizing its subjective existential grounding and intersubjective expression. Drawing on Heidegger’s existential ontology and Wittgenstein’s notion of family resemblance, it introduces the concepts of existential paradox and paradoxical semantic clusters to show how shifting constellations of managerial paradoxes expand and contract through semantic relations while remaining rooted in their existential origins as dynamic wholes. The analysis develops two interwoven existential paradoxes—(1) structural versus destructive thinking and (2) calculative versus meditative thinking—and proposes a relational approach to conceptualizing and analyzing paradoxical phenomena through semantic interconnections and existential foundations. Their interplay illustrates how patterns of thought and behavior emerge, evolve, and become embedded in individual and collective life, simultaneously enabling and constraining practice while shaping conflicting yet complementary understandings of management. By revealing common existential foundations across paradoxical constructs, the study offers a more integrated understanding of paradoxes and reduces complexity in paradox research. The findings further demonstrate how subjective existential experiences become socially shared and institutionalized through semantic clusters, while also showing how these collective meanings shape human experience in return. Moreover, the dominance of calculative thinking frames managerial perceptions, whereas meditative thinking discloses a latent capacity to cultivate ethically attuned, meaning-generating practice. Collectively, the findings contribute an alternative ontological and epistemological framework for understanding the origins, interrelationships, and evolution of paradoxical phenomena in management and organizational research.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Paradox and Meaning in Management: An Existential Perspective

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年7月24日

查看全文
  • Mehrdad Sarhadi

摘要

Paradox has long occupied a central place in management scholarship, yet it remains conceptually elusive. Ambiguously articulated foundations have created confusion around paradoxical constructs and their interrelationships, generating persistent theoretical and practical challenges. This study addresses these issues by returning to the philosophical roots of paradox, emphasizing its subjective existential grounding and intersubjective expression. Drawing on Heidegger’s existential ontology and Wittgenstein’s notion of family resemblance, it introduces the concepts of existential paradox and paradoxical semantic clusters to show how shifting constellations of managerial paradoxes expand and contract through semantic relations while remaining rooted in their existential origins as dynamic wholes. The analysis develops two interwoven existential paradoxes—(1) structural versus destructive thinking and (2) calculative versus meditative thinking—and proposes a relational approach to conceptualizing and analyzing paradoxical phenomena through semantic interconnections and existential foundations. Their interplay illustrates how patterns of thought and behavior emerge, evolve, and become embedded in individual and collective life, simultaneously enabling and constraining practice while shaping conflicting yet complementary understandings of management. By revealing common existential foundations across paradoxical constructs, the study offers a more integrated understanding of paradoxes and reduces complexity in paradox research. The findings further demonstrate how subjective existential experiences become socially shared and institutionalized through semantic clusters, while also showing how these collective meanings shape human experience in return. Moreover, the dominance of calculative thinking frames managerial perceptions, whereas meditative thinking discloses a latent capacity to cultivate ethically attuned, meaning-generating practice. Collectively, the findings contribute an alternative ontological and epistemological framework for understanding the origins, interrelationships, and evolution of paradoxical phenomena in management and organizational research.