Academic Publications

Academic publications

Surfacing and responding paradoxes in mega scale projects by Anna Wiewiora, Kevin Desouza

Summary:

Employing a systematic literature review, this paper elicits and catalogues paradoxical tensions in megaprojects and outlines approaches to manage these tensions discussed in the existing literature. The paper further offers insights into the role that project stakeholders play in surfacing and navigating paradoxes. Stakeholders in megaprojects involve diverse groups including multiple partners, suppliers, contractors, citizens, communities, governments and others. Paradoxes surface when different stakeholder groups display preferences towards opposing aspects of the tension. A future research agenda for studying paradoxical tensions in megaprojects is discussed.

Reference:

Wiewiora, A., & Desouza, K. C. (2022). Surfacing and responding paradoxes in mega scale projects. International Journal of Project Management, 40(3), 235-250. Read publication here

 

Identifying and managing persisting tensions affecting strategic learning from projects by Anna Wiewiora

Summary:

The paper identifies three persisting tensions affecting learning in the context of a multinational project-based organisation: project/organisational identity, short-/long-term-orientation and standardisation/flexibility. The paper found that project- and organisational-level actors navigate competing demands of their roles, which in turn affect the way they engage in learning processes. The paper discusses how these actors can work together to navigate paradoxical tensions to achieve desirable project learning outcomes. The paper offers seven strategies that can be applied to manage persisting tensions and achieve strategic learning from projects.

Reference:

Wiewiora, A. (2022). Identifying and managing persisting tensions affecting strategic learning from projects. Long Range Planning, 102267. Read publication here

 

You can have your cake and eat it too: Embracing paradox of safety as source of progress in safety science, by Xiaowen Hu, Tristan Casey, Mark Griffin

Summary:

Workplace health and safety faces challenges due to automation, increased use of data and instant communication, as well as the rise of the gig economy. This paper aims to raise awareness of the paradoxical nature of workplace safety and to explore how paradoxical insights might advance safety research and practices. Drawing from organisational paradox and safety literature the paper explores the nature of safety paradoxes, including emerging safety paradoxes resulting from digitisation, diversification, and increasing complexity. The paper offers recommendations for organisations to manage safety paradoxes.

Reference:

Hu, X., Casey, T., & Griffin, M. (2020). You can have your cake and eat it too: Embracing paradox of safety as source of progress in safety science. Safety Science, 130, 104824. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2020.104824   Read publication here

 

Customer heterogeneity and innovation-based competitive strategy: A review, synthesis, and research agenda by Amali Wijekoon, Sandeep Salunke, Gerard A. Athaide

Summary:

This paper is based upon a systematic review of the literature linking customer heterogeneity (CH) with innovation-based competitive advantage. Among findings, paradoxical tensions were found to be associated with each CH dimension,  and the paper draws from the dynamic capabilities literature to suggest how these tensions can be effectively managed. The study offers a propositional model of how CH can be managed for innovation-based competitive advantage.

Reference:

Wijekoon, A., Salunke, S., Athaide, G. A., & Cui, A. (2021). Customer heterogeneity and innovation‐based competitive strategy: A review, synthesis, and research agenda. The Journal of Product Innovation Management, 38(3), 315–333. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12576 Read publication here

 

Complex Adaptive Systems Theory in Information Systems Research- A Systematic Literature Review by Mohammad F.A Onix, Erwin Fielt, Guy G. Gable

Summary:

Complex adaptive systems (CAS) is a way of thinking about systems of interacting agents and how order emerges in systems from the interactions of agents. The paper conducts a systematic literature review of CAS studies within the Information Systems (IS) discipline, particularly focusing on how CAS concepts are used for theorizing complex phenomena and the context of the use.   The review suggests that CAS has attracted limited research interest within IS due to a number of factors including lack of clarity around central concepts, inherent complexities and possible ontological and epistemological issues with knowledge accumulation. The paper identifies IS research areas that can be studied using CAS and proposes guidelines for future researchers.

Reference:

Onix, M. F. A., Fielt, E., & Gable, G. (2017). Complex adaptive systems theory in information systems research: A systematic literature review. Association for Information Systems (AIS).  Read publication here

 

Generativity and the paradox of stability and flexibility in a platform architecture: A case of the Oracle Cloud Platform by Ruonan Sun, Shirley Gregor and Erwin Fielt 

Summary:

Drawing on a case study of the Oracle Cloud Platform, this paper uses the paradox of stability and flexibility to highlight how generativity emerges in a platform’s architectural components. Platforms are important technologies that embrace generativity. The study proposes that generativity arises from a platform’s three architectural components: the base, the interface, and the add-ons. Findings also reveal that standardization navigates this paradox by coordinating the dependencies between stability and flexibility across heterogeneous stakeholders.

Reference:

Sun, R., Gregor, S., & Fielt, E. (2021). Generativity and the paradox of stability and flexibility in a platform architecture: A case of the Oracle Cloud Platform. Information & Management, 58(8), 103548–. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2021.103548

Read publication here   https://eprints.qut.edu.au/227145/

 

Design Trade-offs for Electronic Intermediaries by Erwin Fielt, Wil Janssen, Edward Faber and Rene Wagenaar

Summary:

The design of e-commerce exchanges is a complex undertaking due to the sometimes conflicting interests between design options and the interests of customers, suppliers and intermediaries.

Based upon four in-depth case studies this research provides constructive support for balancing interests beyond simple prescriptions like ‘creating win-win situations.’ An exchange design model is offered alongside patterns focusing on trade-offs for electronic intermediaries.  The model offers a systematic insight into themes that are relevant to the interests of customers, suppliers, and the intermediary itself: the role of the intermediary, the linkages between intermediary and customers and suppliers, transparency for customers and suppliers, and the novelty of the intermediary. The patterns discuss specific trade-offs with respect to one or more themes. The combination of a model and patterns for intermediaries that focus attention to design trade-offs is new, and can support intermediaries in balanced design of exchanges with a positive net effect for all actors with less unanticipated side-effects.

Reference:

Fielt, E., Janssen, W., Faber, E., & Wagenaar, R. (2008). Design Trade-offs for Electronic Intermediaries. Electronic Markets, 18(4), 362–374.

Read publication here  https://doi.org/10.1080/10196780802420760

 

 

The business model portfolio as a strategic tool for value creation and business performance by Peter Westerveld, Erwin Fielt, Kevin C Desouza and Guy Gable

Summary:

Operating multiple business models can be complex as they often need to be harmonised within a broader portfolio due to their interdependencies. This paper examines the growing body of literature on business model portfolios revealing that they are evolving into a strategic tool for value creation and business performance. Using systematic literature review, the paper explores strategic intent, value opportunities and paradoxes when managing business model portfolios. In particular, the paper uncovered a range of paradoxical tensions affecting business models, grouped into three main categories: value proposition paradoxes, (2) value architecture paradoxes, and (3) functional architecture and financial and stakeholder sustainability paradoxes.

Forthcoming in Journal of Strategic Information Systems