The paradigm of self-organization (SO) provides an attractive chance for the development of new ideas in management theory and practice. Thus, the current management debate is driven by at least two, partially contradicting, approaches to handle the 'phenomenon' of SO:SO seen as an empirical (and 'practical') phenomenon.In this case SO indicates the 'self-steering' potential of organizations. From this point of view, the management task can be defined as 'controlling' this potential. Facing turbulent environments, this position may lead to new 'balances' between formal structuring and self-organizing.SO seen as a (not very 'practical') scientific paradigm.The question here is: Can we explore the above mentioned problems by using SO theories and do they give us some help to find 'best balances'? No, they do not! From the paradigmatic point of view SO shows 'the way how organizations work'. There is neither a balance nor a contradiction between 'self' and 'formal'. The system is 'self', and therefore 'formal' has to be something different. The paradigm does not address our problems.Consequently, we have three options: re-defining our problem, looking for a 'better' paradigm or trying to find a 'third way'.Current management approaches seem to be undecided between option one and option three.Our article outlines some recommendations for this decision by addressing the following focal points:Clearing the 'positions' within the current management debate on SO.Exemplifying problems that could occur when applying the SO paradigm in a strict sense to management theory.Attributing these problems to 'principles' to construct a theory in management.Sketching proposals for a 'partial inclusion' of management and SO
