Responsible Management-as-Process of Smoothing–Striating: Transcending Freedom or Control Contingencies.
Saved in:
| Title: | Responsible Management-as-Process of Smoothing–Striating: Transcending Freedom or Control Contingencies. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Laasch, Oliver1,2 (AUTHOR) olaasch@escp.eu, McLean, Christine3 (AUTHOR) christine.mclean@manchester.ac.uk, Aroles, Jeremy4 (AUTHOR) jeremy.aroles@york.ac.uk |
| Source: | Journal of Business Ethics. Oct2025, Vol. 201 Issue 2, p491-516. 26p. |
| Subject Terms: | Management ethics, Social responsibility of business, Control (Psychology), Organizational behavior, Paradox |
| Abstract: | Enactment of responsible management (RM) can be fostered by giving actors discretionary freedom to act responsibly and/or by controlling them to act responsibly. RM research has dominantly taken a contingency approach that focuses on conditions under which actors should choose either freedom or control. However, this approach does not offer insights into entangled freedom and control dynamics and is a poor fit for the inherently processual RM phenomenon. We propose a paradox process alternative, mobilizing the lens of smoothing–striating dynamics, which we apply to the Becoming Responsible Initiative (BRI) case. Smoothing fosters creativity, discretion, and lines of flight. It is dynamically entangled with striating, which fosters standardization, strictures, and the direction of enactment. We present a rhizomatic process model based on a thematic template analysis of 104 interviews, observations over 30 months, and documentary evidence. The model explains how a tension spring of over/under smoothing–striating drives RM enactment in four modes: pervasive smoothing, selective smoothing, rigid striating, and flexible striating. Each mode involves dynamics between smoothing–striating unfolding in distributed RM encounters. We contribute to the RM literature by presenting a framework explaining the paradoxical-processual dynamics of RM enactment. Our framework also transcends the freedom or control contingency approach, and adds an intricate methodology for processual analysis to the paradox discussion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Journal of Business Ethics is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Education Research Complete |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| FullText | Links: – Type: pdflink Text: Availability: 1 |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: ehh DbLabel: Education Research Complete An: 188949488 AccessLevel: 6 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: Responsible Management-as-Process of Smoothing–Striating: Transcending Freedom or Control Contingencies. – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Laasch%2C+Oliver%22">Laasch, Oliver</searchLink><relatesTo>1,2</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<i> olaasch@escp.eu</i><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22McLean%2C+Christine%22">McLean, Christine</searchLink><relatesTo>3</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<i> christine.mclean@manchester.ac.uk</i><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Aroles%2C+Jeremy%22">Aroles, Jeremy</searchLink><relatesTo>4</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<i> jeremy.aroles@york.ac.uk</i> – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22Journal+of+Business+Ethics%22">Journal of Business Ethics</searchLink>. Oct2025, Vol. 201 Issue 2, p491-516. 26p. – Name: Subject Label: Subject Terms Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Management+ethics%22">Management ethics</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Social+responsibility+of+business%22">Social responsibility of business</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Control+%28Psychology%29%22">Control (Psychology)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Organizational+behavior%22">Organizational behavior</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Paradox%22">Paradox</searchLink> – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: Enactment of responsible management (RM) can be fostered by giving actors discretionary freedom to act responsibly and/or by controlling them to act responsibly. RM research has dominantly taken a contingency approach that focuses on conditions under which actors should choose either freedom or control. However, this approach does not offer insights into entangled freedom and control dynamics and is a poor fit for the inherently processual RM phenomenon. We propose a paradox process alternative, mobilizing the lens of smoothing–striating dynamics, which we apply to the Becoming Responsible Initiative (BRI) case. Smoothing fosters creativity, discretion, and lines of flight. It is dynamically entangled with striating, which fosters standardization, strictures, and the direction of enactment. We present a rhizomatic process model based on a thematic template analysis of 104 interviews, observations over 30 months, and documentary evidence. The model explains how a tension spring of over/under smoothing–striating drives RM enactment in four modes: pervasive smoothing, selective smoothing, rigid striating, and flexible striating. Each mode involves dynamics between smoothing–striating unfolding in distributed RM encounters. We contribute to the RM literature by presenting a framework explaining the paradoxical-processual dynamics of RM enactment. Our framework also transcends the freedom or control contingency approach, and adds an intricate methodology for processual analysis to the paradox discussion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] – Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright Label: Group: Ab Data: <i>Copyright of Journal of Business Ethics is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=ehh&AN=188949488 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Identifiers: – Type: doi Value: 10.1007/s10551-024-05893-8 Languages: – Code: eng Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 26 StartPage: 491 Subjects: – SubjectFull: Management ethics Type: general – SubjectFull: Social responsibility of business Type: general – SubjectFull: Control (Psychology) Type: general – SubjectFull: Organizational behavior Type: general – SubjectFull: Paradox Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: Responsible Management-as-Process of Smoothing–Striating: Transcending Freedom or Control Contingencies. Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Laasch, Oliver – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: McLean, Christine – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Aroles, Jeremy IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 11 M: 10 Text: Oct2025 Type: published Y: 2025 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 01674544 Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 201 – Type: issue Value: 2 Titles: – TitleFull: Journal of Business Ethics Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
