Paradoxes of Management and Organization: Short cases for pedagogical use

The world is rich in paradox, tension and contradiction (Jarzabkowski, Lê, & Van de Ven, 2013). For this reason, the capacity to handle paradox is being presented as an important management competence. With this series, the European Forum on Paradox and Plurality aims to contribute to the development of paradox management competences by producing teaching materials on management tension and paradox. In this short introductory note we define basic concepts for the beginner. The management of paradox, defined as the persistent interplay of mutually defining opposites (Smith & Lewis, 2011), such as stability and change or exploration and exploitation, constitutes a managerial imperative. Managers as well as organizational members in general, may assume or ignore the paradox lens but tensions and contradictions are unavoidable in complex systems. The exploration of the role of tensions, contradictions and paradoxes in organizations has now produced a rich bibliography (Putnam et al., 2016; Schad et al., 2016). For readers new to the theory of organizational paradox we present a brief introductory bibliography (see Box 1). For this reason, organizations are in some cases trying to develop ways of dealing with challenges such as when they have to maintain resilience in face of crisis (Giustiniano et al., 2020), cultivate ambidexterity (Raisch & Birkinshaw, 2008) or try to go agile while maintaining robust routines (Rigby et al., 2020). When successfully balanced, the articulation of opposite demands may constitute a source of advantage. But their articulation is difficult and success in tackling opposition cannot be guaranteed, as some tensions cannot be integrated and their ongoing articulation is difficult. As Cunha and Putnam (2019) have pointed out, paradox cannot be tamed

Eudaimonic well-being: Its importance and relevance to occupational therapy for humanity

Contemporary critique of the philosophy and theory of occupational therapy has asserted that the mainstream of the profession holds a westernized view of the world and that occupational therapy has been shackled to notions of health/illness and the medical establishment for too long, hampering movement into social and political spheres. Strategies and developments have been proposed to combat these biases, which have included increased cultural relativism and a re-focus on the subjective experience of occupation. The value placed on "being" in occupational therapy philosophy is described alongside the related terms of occupational integrity and spirituality. Drawing on theory and research from psychology, this paper proposes the construct of eudaimonic well-being as both relevant and valuable to occupational therapy in re-conceptualizing the profession, countering some of the central tensions in the identity of the profession and re-asserting that well-being through occupation is for all and for humanity. Finally, the paper proposes that well-being, in a eudaimonic sense, should be advertised and evidenced as a routine outcome of occupational therapy and consolidated into occupational therapy models as a relevant and meaningful concept