TY - CHAP
T1 - The historical embeddedness of organizational paradoxes
T2 - risk-related rituals and realities in emergency management
AU - Pierides, Dean
AU - Clegg, Stewart
AU - Cunha, Miguel Pina e
N1 - Funding Information#
The research on which this manuscript is based was initially supported by an Australian Postgraduate Award and has benefited substantially from the careful guidance of Graham Sewell. Subsequent revisions to the manuscript have been further guided by excellent editorial comments from Rebecca Bednarek and Wendy Smith. We have been fortunate to have had their contributions.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 by Emerald Publishing Limited.
Copyright:
Copyright 2021 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2021
Y1 - 2021
N2 - Paradoxes are historically embedded in institutions and organizations. Latent paradoxes pose danger if they become salient; sociological analyses can identify historically embedded latent paradoxes. The emergency management paradox, in which the state invests vast resources, establishing formidable organizational arrangements that rely on knowledge to respond to unanticipated events in advance of their occurrence, even though such events can only ever be known after they occur, is a paradox of this kind. Deploying methodological “dual integrity” we trace through historical description and sociological conceptualization the institutional and organizational history of the emergency management paradox in Australia, where uncontrollable bushfires are becoming increasingly common, before drawing more general conclusions about how a response to grand challenges, such as climate change, demands an interdisciplinary understanding of the rituals and realities of paradoxes that emerge historically from our collective attempts to handle uncertainty via risk. Our research serves as a warning of the grave consequences that can result from ignoring a paradox’s history, whether intentionally or unwittingly.
AB - Paradoxes are historically embedded in institutions and organizations. Latent paradoxes pose danger if they become salient; sociological analyses can identify historically embedded latent paradoxes. The emergency management paradox, in which the state invests vast resources, establishing formidable organizational arrangements that rely on knowledge to respond to unanticipated events in advance of their occurrence, even though such events can only ever be known after they occur, is a paradox of this kind. Deploying methodological “dual integrity” we trace through historical description and sociological conceptualization the institutional and organizational history of the emergency management paradox in Australia, where uncontrollable bushfires are becoming increasingly common, before drawing more general conclusions about how a response to grand challenges, such as climate change, demands an interdisciplinary understanding of the rituals and realities of paradoxes that emerge historically from our collective attempts to handle uncertainty via risk. Our research serves as a warning of the grave consequences that can result from ignoring a paradox’s history, whether intentionally or unwittingly.
KW - Dual integrity
KW - Emergency management
KW - Organizational history
KW - Paradox
KW - Risk and uncertainty
KW - Unexpected events
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85108847105&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1108/S0733-558X2021000073b006
DO - 10.1108/S0733-558X2021000073b006
M3 - Chapter
AN - SCOPUS:85108847105
SN - 978-1-80117-187-8
T3 - Research in the Sociology of Organizations
SP - 65
EP - 85
BT - Interdisciplinary Dialogues on Organizational Paradox
A2 - Bednarek, Rebecca
A2 - Cunha, Miguel Pina e
A2 - Schad, Jonathan
A2 - Smith, Wendy K.
PB - Emerald Group Holdings Ltd.
CY - Bingley
ER -