Search results

Organizational pursuit of sustainability in multi-tier supply chain systems operating in unpredictable environments is often associated with the emergence of paradoxical tensions. This study aims to summarize and synthesize existing literature on managing various paradoxical tensions in supply chains (i.e. sourcing, making, delivering and reverse logistics) as organizations pursue sustainability transformation. It also strives to motivate new academic research inquiry into developing responses to sustainability paradoxes.

The study draws on a systematic literature review of 73 papers from the Web of Science database selected at the intersection of paradox, sustainability and logistics/ supply chain management (SCM). Applying paradox theory as a guiding lens, we investigate organizational strategies, practices and capabilities described in the literature to navigate sustainability paradoxes in supply chains.

The results assert that the success of sustainability transformation will depend on an organizational ability to recognize, accept and navigate paradoxical tensions in one's supply chain. This requires developing the dynamic capabilities of paradoxical leadership, strategic agility, innovativeness, collaboration with contextualization and governance. Successful sustainability transformation is not reliant on finding an optimal, final design but rather the continuous balancing of tensions inherent within or across the organizations that make up one's supply chain.

The research offers an integrative conceptual framework to guide organizations in navigating sustainability paradoxes in supply chains, embracing strategic, practice and capability levels. It also outlines opportunities for future research inquiries connected to this framework that are needed to build additional insight for addressing paradoxical tensions related to the pursuit of sustainable supply chain management.

This study takes a dynamic capabilities approach to navigating paradoxical tensions in pursuit of sustainable supply chain management.

This study seeks to illuminate the managerial tensions inherent in implementing scaled agile (on the organizational, top management, middle management and team levels) and to frame these challenges within the broader context of project management.

The study adopts a grounded theory approach and delves into a qualitative dataset sourced from 34 interviews with subject matter experts actively engaged in scaling agile initiatives within large organizations spanning various industries. Additionally, the data have been enriched through a comprehensive literature review of the existing body of knowledge on scaling agile.

As a result of our investigation, we propose a framework of managerial tensions in scaling agile in large corporate settings and a series of research propositions and questions that may contribute significantly to the body of knowledge surrounding the phenomenon of “deprojectification” and propose agenda for the future studies in the field of project management.

The study also carries significant managerial implications. Firstly, based on the insights from the practice of scaling agile in large corporate setting, management can build awareness of the challenges inherent of transitioning to agile practices. This may help to anticipate the possible problems and proactively develop strategies how to address them. Secondly, management can be instructed about contingencies inherent in scaling agile, along with the potential disfunctions and side effects (unintended outcomes) that may emerge during the transition process. Thirdly, project management practitioners can gain insights on how scaling agile may cause shifts in the approach to managing projects, project team management and competencies that need to be developed to cope with environments where various approaches to managing projects coexist.

These insights can aid in the agile transition process, beginning with directing managerial attention toward contextual factors and progressing through potential challenges at the organizational, top management, middle management and team levels. Furthermore, the study highlights possible dysfunctionalities and side effects of scaling agile, shedding light on the “dark side” of agile.

The study contributes to the expansion of the empirical database on the implementation of agile practices in large organizational settings. It plays a role in defining and delineating the phenomenon of scaling agile within the context of project management and outlines a research agenda for future project management studies. Additionally, our study adds to the ongoing discourse surrounding the “deprojectification” effect that can occur during the scaling of agile. Lastly, it establishes connections between project management and software development literature regarding the implementation of agile at scale.