Toggle Main Menu Toggle Search

Open Access padlockePrints

The Newcastle University research output collection, currently available on ePrints, will shortly be moving to a new open repository platform, Figshare. To prepare for the data migration we have paused adding new content to ePrints, and will resume once the new repository is launched. During this time you will continue to have access to ePrints (but no new content will appear). We will share updates here when available.

The Neither-And thinking: Understanding James March’s unique solution to paradox

Lookup NU author(s): Dr Xin LiORCiD

Downloads

Full text for this publication is not currently held within this repository. Alternative links are provided below where available.

Abstract

In this paper, I propose a typology of thinking pattern that helps us understand the variants of the so-called ‘both/and thinking’ shared by many organizational paradox scholars in the West and China. The variants are distinguished by the ‘primary thinking-secondary thinking’ structure between the combined elementary thinking. One of the variants, i.e., the Neither-And thinking, is associated with James March’s discussion of logic of consequences and logic of appropriateness. An examination of March’s writings reveals an additional ‘principle-practice’ structure underlining March’s unique solution to paradox. Incorporating the ‘principle-practice’ structure into the proposed typology in turn helps us better understand the other variants of ‘the both/and thinking’ such as ambidexterity, contingency and Zhong-Yong. The typology shows March’s Neither-And solution is unique because it embraces a primary neither/nor thinking while all the other variants do not. To demonstrate the value of March’s unique solution, I apply the Neither-And thinkingcharacterized by the ‘principle-practice’ relationship to paradoxes outside organization studies, e.g., in Deconstruction, Buddhism, and quantum physics. The wide application of the Neither-And thinking implies that James March’s unique solution to organizational paradox may have provided a key to understanding paradox in general.

Publication metadata

Author(s): Li X

Publication type: Article

Publication status: Published

Journal: Management and Organization Review

Year: 2021

Volume: 17

Issue: 4

Pages: 755 - 776

Print publication date: 01/10/2021

Online publication date: 15/04/2021

Acceptance date: 10/09/2020

ISSN (print): 1740-8776

ISSN (electronic): 1740-8784

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

URL: https://doi.org/10.1017/mor.2020.74

DOI: 10.1017/mor.2020.74

Altmetrics

Altmetrics provided by Altmetric

Share