Decision makers inevitably face a variety of tensions when managing strategic change. Research from organization and strategy perspectives, such as paradox and organizational learning, has offered useful but limited insight into the systematic mindset and thinking processes involved in decision making. We draw on theoretical and philosophical foundations of the transparadox perspective and related theories to build a dynamic process cycle of transparadoxical decision making. Three interrelated dimensions make up our model: (1) Transparadox Information Navigation, which includes embracing oppositional tendencies, syncretic focus, and creative transcendence; (2) Transparadox Contextual Consideration, characterized by prudent precision and recognizing the flux of temporality and spatiality; and (3) Transparadox Integration, which comprises design-type integration and exploration-type integration. We then present propositions on the interdependent and reinforcing mechanism among the three dimensions. Our work expands the paradox literature with specific mindset dimensions and constituent elements, connecting paradox research with the cognitive perspective by adding dynamic, cyclical processes to paradox cognition study.

We explore the meaning of parochialism (xiao nong yi shi, 小农意识) to explain certain paradoxical Chinese managerial behaviors. We discuss how cultural, political, and economic traditions in China formed a salient context to cultivate parochialism. Qualitative data from Chinese and American managers reveal that the conceptual framework of parochialism includes a cognitive dimension of closed-mindedness, a behavioral dimension of self-protection, and a relational dimension of in-group focused social relationship. Parochialism hampers effective globalization of Chinese firms because it negatively impacts key facets of organizational culture: employee development, communication, customer orientation, social responsibility, strategic planning, and innovation. The study offers theoretical and practical implications for Chinese management research and the development of global competence.

We investigate how trust reduces the tendency to use deception in negotiations from a culturally contextual perspective. We find culturally divergent patterns across Chinese and American negotiators. Specifically, for Chinese negotiators, cognition-based trust decreases the approval of using negative emotional and informational deception, whereas affect-based trust increases the approval of using informational deception. For American negotiators, affect-based trust decreases the approval of using negative emotional deception. We discuss theoretical and practical implications on the need for culturally specific strategies in managing deceptions in negotiations.

In this study, we examine culture-specific relationships between individual differences and distributive negotiations. We measured individual characteristics and their effects on distributive negotiations in both American and Chinese cultures, using a Western-based scale (the ‘Big Five’) and a Chinese-based scale (CPAI). We found that agreeableness and extraversion (from the ‘Big Five’) affected negotiations for Americans, but not for Chinese. We found that harmony, face and Ren Qing (from the Chinese-based scales) affected negotiations for Chinese, but not for Americans. Specifically, we found that in the American culture, those higher in extraversion and agreeableness achieved lower economic gain, whereas in the Chinese context that those high in harmony, face, and Ren Qing were more likely to be influenced by opening offers and achieve lower economic gain in distributive negotiations. Our study highlights the need to examine negotiations using culturally sensitive constructs and measures.