TY - JOUR
T1 - Visibilizing and managing paradox
T2 - Redefining the role of non-executive directors
AU - Cunha, Miguel Pina e
AU - Leite, António Nogueira
AU - Rego, Arménio
AU - Hernández-Linares, Remedios
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2024, Emerald Publishing Limited.
PY - 2024/8
Y1 - 2024/8
N2 - Purpose: This paper aims to discuss the work of non-executive directors (NEDs) as inherently paradoxical. Paradox refers to the presence of persistent contradictions between interdependent forces. Those persistent tensions are explored, and approaches are indicated to stimulate the adaptive use of paradoxes as forces of innovation and renewal. Design/methodology/approach: This conceptual approach can be read as an invitation for corporate governance scholars to embrace the logic of paradox to expand the understanding of this topic. Paradox is not conceptualized as an alternative to dominant structural views, including board composition, but as a complementary conceptual perspective, a meta-theoretical lens to shed light on the tensions inherent to governance. Findings: The authors propose that paradox theory offers a fresh conceptual lens to study the role of NEDs. This approach may help NEDs to turn tensions and paradoxes visible to develop a rich understanding of their work, as well as helping them navigate the complexities of organizing, a process rich in inherent paradoxicality. Originality/value: Organizational paradox theory is a bourgeoning field of study, but the conceptual lens of paradox has still been underexplored in the study of corporate governance.
AB - Purpose: This paper aims to discuss the work of non-executive directors (NEDs) as inherently paradoxical. Paradox refers to the presence of persistent contradictions between interdependent forces. Those persistent tensions are explored, and approaches are indicated to stimulate the adaptive use of paradoxes as forces of innovation and renewal. Design/methodology/approach: This conceptual approach can be read as an invitation for corporate governance scholars to embrace the logic of paradox to expand the understanding of this topic. Paradox is not conceptualized as an alternative to dominant structural views, including board composition, but as a complementary conceptual perspective, a meta-theoretical lens to shed light on the tensions inherent to governance. Findings: The authors propose that paradox theory offers a fresh conceptual lens to study the role of NEDs. This approach may help NEDs to turn tensions and paradoxes visible to develop a rich understanding of their work, as well as helping them navigate the complexities of organizing, a process rich in inherent paradoxicality. Originality/value: Organizational paradox theory is a bourgeoning field of study, but the conceptual lens of paradox has still been underexplored in the study of corporate governance.
KW - Contradiction
KW - Corporate governance
KW - Paradox
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85182992590&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1108/CG-01-2023-0038
DO - 10.1108/CG-01-2023-0038
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85182992590
SN - 1472-0701
VL - 24
SP - 1156
EP - 1170
JO - Corporate Governance (Bingley)
JF - Corporate Governance (Bingley)
IS - 5
ER -