Professional Service
I am actively involved with the business academic community by reviewing papers for highly rated journals and organizing tracks in leading conferences around the world. Please find more information on recent activities below.
|
Editorial Board Member
Long Range Planning Creative Industries Journal International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Creative Industries Journal |
Special Issues
Guest Special Issue Editor for the International Marketing Review: “Special issue on Emerging perspectives in qualitative research in international marketing” (with Dr. Stephanie Slater) Guest Special Issue Editor for the European Journal of Marketing: “Shaping the research agenda for corporate branding” (with Dr. Manto Gotsi and Professor TC Melewar) |
Ad-Hoc Reviewer
Academy of Management Journal American Psychologist British Journal of Management European Journal of Marketing International Small Business Journal Journal of Business Ethics Journal of Management Studies Journal of Product Innovation Management Long Range Planning Strategic Management Journal |
Conference Tracks
AOM 2013
PDW Advancing Paradox Theory: Methods to Empirically Explore Organizational Tensions Co-Organizers: Marianne Lewis, University of Cincinnati Costas Andriopoulos, Cardiff University Wendy Smith, University of Delaware Panelists: Paula Jarzabkowski, Aston University/Cornell University Quy Huy, INSEAD Ella Miron-Spektor, Technion-Israel Institute of Technology Costas Andriopoulos, Cardiff University Discussant: Marianne Lewis, University of Cincinnati Additional Break-Out Table Facilitators Josh Keller, Nanyang Technological University Amy Ingram, Clemson University Luc Audebrand, Laval University Abstract Organization and environments have become more complex, global and hypercompetitive, surfacing a host of paradoxical tensions. Fast-paced environments demand consistent change and renewal, while requiring stability and control. Multiple stakeholder groups in varied regions of the world necessitate attention to divergent interests and beliefs. Complex societal level dynamics require organizations to embed multiple institutional logics with competing goals, values, and practices. Long term success depends on simultaneously embracing to tensions such as exploration and exploitation, stability and change, global opportunities and local needs, long term expectations and short term goals. Yet engaging the tensions is challenging, as these paradoxes cannot be resolved. Rather they require management strategies and practices to attend to these contradictory demands simultaneously. Organizational scholars are increasingly exploring the nature and management of such paradoxical tensions. Yet we still lack adequate methodological and theoretical resources to do so. This PDW seeks to address this challenge. To do so, accomplished scholars will share their experience successfully publishing empirical studies of paradoxes, dualities, and dialectics in leading journals (i.e. ASQ, AMJ, Organization Science). We will then invite participants to engage in interactive, small-group conversations exploring challenges, opportunities, and approaches in their own work. Together, these conversations aim to build a deeper and more varied set of research design and analytical alternatives in this growing field of organization theory. This PDW can appeal to a broad OMT audience, given the range of phenomenon and theoretical lenses associated with paradox studies. Moreover, as paradoxes span disciplines and levels of analysis, this PDW can attract scholars across multiple divisions (i.e. BPS, MOC, OB, and Research Methods). PDW Commuting to Campus: Strategies for Managing Remote Academic careers Co-Organizers: Bernadine Dykes, University of Delaware Wendy Smith, University of Delaware Denise Loyd, MIT Sloan Management Costas Andriopoulos, Cardiff University Abstract Living remotely from campus (i.e., living in a city or town outside of the campus location) has become a more common occurrence in the Academy. Many faculty members live remotely from campus for a variety of reasons. Further, as the internet becomes a more important tool for the delivery of courses and degree programs, even more faculty may live and work remotely from campus. Nonetheless, “remote” faculty members still must maintain a presence on campus to fulfil service and teaching requirements and meet other work expectations. Yet, managing travel to and from campus, “face-time” in the office, research productivity and personal commitments can be challenging. The purpose of this workshop is to discuss how faculty members who live remotely can effectively meet their personal and professional obligations. |
EGOS 2012
Theme: Exploring the Paradoxes of Organizations and Organizing
(Wendy Smith, Marianne Lewis, Costas Andriopoulos) Designing organizations raises multiple, interwoven tensions. By defining who we are, what we do, and how we do it, we inherently imply the opposite forces (Clegg, 2002; Ford & Backoff, 1988), resulting in such tensions as exploring vs. exploiting, centralization vs. decentralization, stability vs. flexibility, and control vs. freedom. Such opposing elements emerge in the nature of our organizations, as well as in our processes of organizing (Weick, 1979). Traditionally, theorists have responded to organizational tensions via a contingency approach. Asking “under what conditions should we engage A or B?”, contingency theory emphasizes either/or tradeoffs. For example, Lawrence and Lorsch (1967) identified structural distinctions of when to differentiate or integrate, whereas Tushman and Romanelli (1985) highlighted time periods to more effectively explore or exploit. An alternative, paradoxical approach asks how organizations can sustain competing demands simultaneously. According to paradox theory, underlying tensions are inherent within organizations, and attending to these competing demands simultaneously enables long-run organizational success (Smith & Lewis, 2011). Rather than explore either/or tradeoffs, a paradox perspectives identifies both/and opportunities. By recognizing the ongoing persistence of underlying tensions, paradox theory points to the need for dynamic, adaptive organizations, and flexible, improvising routines (Clegg, Cuhna, & Cuhna, 2002; Smith & Lewis, 2011)}. Increasingly research has adopted a paradox perspective, pointing to underlying tensions in the design of organizations and in the process of organizing, as well as exploring how to use design to effectively engage competing tensions simultaneously. For example, research on ambidexterity identifies how design features such as the organizations structure (O’Reilly & Tushman, 2008) and context (Gibson & Birkinshaw, 2004) can more effectively support tensions. Others have reflexively recognized the role of engaging competing demands to drive greater creativity and innovation into the design process (Andriopoulos & Lewis, 2009; Rothenberg, 1979). For example, paradox underlies the principles and process that enables the management of self-managed teams at LEGO (Luscher & Lewis, 2008). In this subtheme, we seek to explore how paradox theory might shift our understanding of design. Specifically, we invite papers that explore some of the following, illustrative questions:
Works Cited Andriopoulos, C., & Lewis, M. W. 2009. Exploitation-Exploration Tensions and Organizational Ambidexterity: Managing Paradoxes of Innovation.Organization Science, 20(4): 696-717. Clegg, S. R. 2002. General Introduction In S. R. Clegg (Ed.), Management and Organization Paradoxes: 1-10. Amsterdam: John Benjamins B.V. Clegg, S. R., Cuhna, J. V., & Cuhna, M. P. 2002. Management Paradoxes: A Relational View. Human Relations, 55(5): 483-503. Ford, J., & Backoff, R. 1988. Organizational Change In and Out of Dualities and Paradox. In R. Quinn, & K. Cameron (Eds.), Paradox and Transformation: Toward a Theory of Change in Organization and Management: 81-121. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger. Gibson, C. B., & Birkinshaw, J. 2004. The Antecedents, Consequences and Mediating Role of Organizational Ambidexterity. Academy of Management Journal, 47(2): 209-226. Lawrence, P., & Lorsch, J. 1967. Organizations and Environment: Managing Differentiation and Integration. Homewood, IL: Irwin. Luscher, L., & Lewis, M. 2008. Organizational Change and Managerial Sensemaking: Working Through Paradox. Academy of Management Journal, 51(2): 221-240. O’Reilly, C., & Tushman, M. 2008. Ambidexterity as a Dynamic Capability: Resolving the Innovator’s Dilemma. In A. P. Brief, & B. M. Staw (Eds.),Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 28: 185-206: Elsevier. Rothenberg, A. 1979. The Emerging Goddess. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. 2011. Toward a Theory of Paradox: A Dynamic Equilibrium Model of Organizing. Academy of Management Review, 36(2). Tushman, M., & Romanelli, E. 1985. Organizational Evolution: A Metamorphosis Model of Convergence and Reorientation. In B. M. Staw, & L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 7: 171-222. Greenwich: JAI Press. Weick, K. 1979. The Social Psychology of Organizing. New York: McGraw Hill. |