Management of paradox: a comparative study of managerial practices in Korean and Japanese firms

• Published in: International journal of human resource management Vol. 23; no. 17; pp. 3501 - 3521
• Main Authors: Yoon, Se Joon, Chae, Yeon Joo
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: London Taylor & Francis Group 01.10.2012; Taylor & Francis LLC
• Subjects: ambidexterity; Comparative analysis; Comparative studies; Corporate objectives; Decentralization; Decision making; Human resource management; human resource practices; Human resources; Innovation; Innovations; International comparisons; Japan; Korea; Management theory; Organizational goals; paradox; South Korea; Japan
• ISSN: 0958-5192; 1466-4399
• DOI: 10.1080/09585192.2011.560885

Numerous scholars are recognizing that paradoxes are indigenous to organizational functioning. Managers too are being challenged to do more and spend less, and delegate and know the details. As a corporate objective, neither efficiency nor innovation can be sacrificed. In this paper, we have attempted to capture this emerging trend empirically. Defining management of paradox as 'managerial practices that realize the simultaneous accomplishment of multiple strategic objectives that are seemingly or actually incompatible,' this paper explores how organizational capabilities of effectively dealing with paradox can be acquired. Specifically, the paper attempts to address two organizational mechanisms: decision-making structure and human resource practices (HRPs). Propositions deduced from the existing literature were tested with the data collected from 103 Korean firms and 136 Japanese firms. The data indicated that firms have to be multi-talented. It was found that firms that successfully accomplished innovation and efficiency objectives simultaneously were those that were able to mix paradoxical organizational practices: decentralization and control on the one hand and the three HRPs on the other. It was also found that the Japanese corporations were more apt in deploying paradoxical managerial practices than the Korean counterparts. The paper concludes by discussing a few theoretical implications.