Parole chiave
paradoxical tensions
Small and Medium sized Enterprises (SMEs)
Come citare
##plugins.generic.dates.accepted## 2026-05-28
##plugins.generic.dates.published## 2026-10-10
Abstract
Purpose. The transition toward sustainability requires companies to reconcile competing demands across economic, environmental, and social domains, often giving rise to paradoxical tensions. Despite increasing attention to sustainability paradoxes, the context of small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) remains underexplored. This study investigates how SMEs approach corporate sustainability paradoxes across multiple organizational levels, including individual, firm-level, inter-organizational, and systemic dimensions.
Design/methodology/approach . Drawing on existing theoretical and conceptual studies, this research develops a literature-informed framework tailored to SMEs, focusing on the multilevel and multi-process nature of sustainability paradoxes. Empirically, the framework is applied through a single case study of a SME active in the chemical manufacturing sector.
Findings. Sustainability paradoxes span the individual, firm, inter-organizational, and systemic levels. Paradoxes are rarely limited to a single level or process but show characteristics of vertical and horizontal interdependence.
Practical and Social implications. This research offers managerial guidance for SMEs, emphasizing the role of leadership commitment and strategic vision in addressing sustainability challenges and the need for capability development through training and team building.
Originality of the study. The study provides a contextual adaptation of existing paradox frameworks to the underexplored SME context. Through in-depth case analysis, we reveal SME-specific patterns in how sustainability paradoxes manifest and are managed under conditions of resource constraints, informal structures, and concentrated decision-making.
Riferimenti bibliografici
Aguinis, H., & Glavas, A. (2012). What we know and don’t know about corporate social responsibility: A review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 38(4), 932-968. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206311436079
Alosi, A., Annunziata, E., Rizzi, F., & Frey, M. (2023). Conceptualising active management of paradoxical tensions in corporate sustainability: A systematic literature review. Business Strategy and the Environment, 32(6), 3529-3549. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3314
Álvarez Jaramillo, J., Zartha Sossa, J. W., & Orozco Mendoza, G. L. (2019). Barriers to sustainability for small and medium enterprises in the framework of sustainable development—Literature review. Business Strategy and the Environment, 28(4), 512-524. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2261
Aragón-Correa, J. A., Hurtado-Torres, N., Sharma, S., & García-Morales, V. J. (2008). Environmental strategy and performance in small firms: A resource-based perspective. Journal of Environmental Management, 86(1), 88-103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2006.11.022
Argento, D., Broccardo, L., & Truant, E. (2022). The facets of the sustainability paradox. Meditari Accountancy Research, 30(7), 26-48. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-10-2020-1051
Bansal, P. (2005). Evolving sustainably: A longitudinal study of corporate sustainable development. Strategic Management Journal, 26(3), 197-218. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.441
Bechtel, J., Sabini, L., & Kock, A. (2025). When Do Sustainability Tensions Harm or Benefit Innovation Portfolios? A Paradoxical Perspective. Journal of Product Innovation Management, ahead-of-print. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12792
Bengtsson, M., & Raza-Ullah, T. (2025). Paradoxical tensions at multiple levels and top management team cross-level bridging in coopetition: A conceptual model. Strategic Management Review, 6(1-2),107-133. https://doi.org/10.1561/111.00000076
Biondi, V., Iraldo, F., & Meredith, S. (2002). Achieving sustainability through environmental innovation: the role of SMEs. International Journal of Technology Management, 24(5-6), 612-626. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTM.2002.003074
Björklund, M., Forslund, H., & Ülgen, V. S. (2024). The paradoxical nature of greening transportation: an analysis of tensions in buyer–supplier dyads. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 54(6), 532-557. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPDLM-11-2023-0406
Bos-Brouwers, H. E. J. (2010). Corporate sustainability and innovation in SMEs: Evidence of themes and activities in practice. Business Strategy and the Environment, 19(7), 417-435. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.652
Carmine, S., & De Marchi, V. (2023). Reviewing paradox theory in corporate sustainability toward a systems perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 184(1), 139-158. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-022-05112-2
Carmine, S., & De Marchi, V. (2022). Tensions and outcomes in corporate sustainability: the moderating role of paradoxical frame. Journal of Cleaner Production, 380, 134952. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.134952
Carollo, L., & Guerci, M. (2018). ‘Activists in a suit’: Paradoxes and metaphors in sustainability managers’ identity work. Journal of Business Ethics, 148(2), 249-268. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3582-7
Daddi, T., Ceglia, D., Bianchi, G., & de Barcellos, M. D. (2019). Paradoxical tensions and corporate sustainability: A focus on circular economy business cases. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 26(4), 770-780. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1719
Dahlmann, F., & Grosvold, J. (2017). Environmental managers and institutional work: Reconciling tensions of competing institutional logics. Business Ethics Quarterly, 27(2), 263-291. https://doi.org/10.1017/beq.2016.65
Del Brío, J. Á., & Junquera, B. (2003). A review of the literature on environmental innovation management in SMEs: implications for public policies. Technovation, 23(12), 939-948. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4972(02)00036-6
Delbridge, R., Helfen, M., Pekarek, A., Schuessler, E., & Zietsma, C. (2024). Organizing sustainably: Introduction to the special issue. Organization Studies, 45(1), 7-29. https://doi.org/10.1177/01708406231217143
Discua Cruz, A. (2020). There is no need to shout to be heard! The paradoxical nature of corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting in a Latin American family small and medium-sized enterprise (SME). International Small Business Journal, 38(3), 243-267. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242619884852
Eisenhardt, K. M., & Graebner, M. E. (2007). Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 25-32. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2007.24160888
Fitzgerald, M. A., Haynes, G. W., Schrank, H. L., & Danes, S. M. (2010). Socially responsible processes of small family business owners: Exploratory evidence from the national family business survey. Journal of Small Business Management, 48(4), 524-551. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-627X.2010.00307.x
González-González, J. M., Bretones, F. D., González-Martínez, R., & Francés-Gómez, P. (2019). “The future of an illusion”: a paradoxes of CSR. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 32(1), 2-14. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-01-2018-0018
Hahn, T. (2015). Reciprocal stakeholder behavior: A motive-based approach to the implementation of normative stakeholder demands. Business & Society, 54(1), 9-51. https://doi.org/10.1177/0007650312439029
Hahn, T., Figge, F., Pinkse, J., & Preuss, L. (2018). A paradox perspective on corporate sustainability: Descriptive, instrumental, and normative aspects. Journal of Business Ethics, 148, 235-248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3587-2
Hahn, T., Pinkse, J., Preuss, L., & Figge, F. (2015). Tensions in corporate sustainability: Towards an integrative framework. Journal of business ethics, 127, 297-316. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2047-5
Hahn, T., Preuss, L., Pinkse, J., & Figge, F. (2014). Cognitive frames in corporate sustainability: Managerial sensemaking with paradoxical and business case frames. Academy of Management Review, 39(4), 463-487. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2012.0341
Hahn, T., Sharma, G., & Glavas, A. (2024). Employee‐CSR tensions: Drivers of employee (dis) engagement with contested CSR initiatives. Journal of Management Studies, 61(4), 1364-1392. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12923
Heucher, K., Schrage, S., & Abosag, I. (2024). When Global is Not Enough: Applying a Paradox Lens to Sustainability Transitions in Interorganizational Systems. Journal of International Management, 30(5), 101186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intman.2024.101186
Hockerts, K., & Wüstenhagen, R. (2010). Greening Goliaths versus emerging Davids—Theorizing about the role of incumbents and new entrants in sustainable entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 25(5), 481-492. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2009.07.005
Huber, G. P., & Power, D. J. (1985). Retrospective reports of strategic‐level managers: Guidelines for increasing their accuracy. Strategic Management Journal, 6(2), 171-180. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250060206
Hunoldt, M., Oertel, S., & Galander, A. (2020). Being responsible: How managers aim to implement corporate social responsibility. Business & Society, 59(7), 1441-1482. https://doi.org/10.1177/0007650318777738
Huse, M. (1994). Board-management relations in small firms: The paradox of simultaneous independence and interdependence. Small Business Economics, 6(1), 55-72. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01066112
Inigo, E. A., Ritala, P., & Albareda, L. (2020). Networking for sustainability: Alliance capabilities and sustainability-oriented innovation. Industrial Marketing Management, 89, 550-565. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2019.06.010
Jarzabkowski, P., Lê, J. K., & Van de Ven, A. H. (2013). Responding to competing strategic demands: How organizing, belonging, and performing paradoxes coevolve. Strategic Organization, 11(3), 245-280. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476127013481016
Johnson, M. P., & Schaltegger, S. (2016). Two decades of sustainability management tools for SMEs: How far have we come? Journal of Small Business Management, 54(2), 481–505. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12154
Jonsen, K., & Jehn, K. A. (2009). Using triangulation to validate themes in qualitative studies. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal, 4(2), 123-150. https://doi.org/10.1108/17465640910978391
Joseph, J., Borland, H., Orlitzky, M., & Lindgreen, A. (2020). Seeing versus doing: How businesses manage tensions in pursuit of sustainability. Journal of Business Ethics, 164(2), 349-370. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-4065-1
Lee, S. Y., & Klassen, R. D. (2008). Drivers and enablers that foster environmental management capabilities in small‐and medium‐sized suppliers in supply chains. Production and Operations management, 17(6), 573-586. https://doi.org/10.3401/poms.1080.0063
Loucks, E. S., Martens, M. L., & Cho, C. H. (2010). Engaging small-and medium-sized businesses in sustainability. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 1(2), 178-200. https://doi.org/10.1108/20408021011089239
Lüscher, L. S., & Lewis, M. W. (2008). Organizational change and managerial sensemaking: Working through paradox. Academy of management Journal, 51(2), 221-240. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2008.31767217
Madrid‐Guijarro, A., & Duréndez, A. (2024). Sustainable development barriers and pressures in SMEs: The mediating effect of management commitment to environmental practices. Business Strategy and the Environment, 33(2), 949-967. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3537
Maxwell, J. A. (2008). Designing a qualitative study. In L. Bickman and D. J. Rog (Eds.) The SAGE handbook of applied social research methods. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications, pp. 214-253.
Patton, M. Q. (1999). Enhancing the quality and credibility of qualitative analysis. Health Services Research, 34(5 Pt 2), 1189.
Piekkari, R., Plakoyiannaki, E., & Welch, C. (2010). ‘Good’ case research in industrial marketing: Insights from research practice. Industrial Marketing Management, 39(1), 109-117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2008.04.017
Poole, M. S., & Van de Ven, A. H. (1989). Using paradox to build management and organization theories. Academy of Management Review, 14, 562–578. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1989.4308389
Poon, T. S. C., & Law, K. K. (2022). Sustainable HRM: An extension of the paradox perspective. Human Resource Management Review, 32(2), 100818. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2020.100818
Putnam, L. L., Fairhurst, G. T., & Banghart, S. (2016). Contradictions, dialectics, and paradoxes in organizations: A constitutive approach. Academy of Management Annals, 10(1), 65-171. https://doi.org/10.5465/19416520.2016.1162421
Schulte, M. N., & Paris, C. M. (2024). Working the system—An empirical analysis of the relationship between systems thinking, paradoxical cognition, and sustainability practices. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 31(5), 4154-4171. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2798
Schulze Brock, P., Katsinis, A., Lagüera-González, J., Di Bella, L., Odenthal, L., Hell, M., Lozar, B., & Secades Casino, B. (2025). Annual Report on European SMEs 2024/2025”, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2025, doi:10.2760/7714438
Shu, E. E. (2022). Paradoxical framing and coping process on sustainable new product development. Technovation, 111, 102392. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2021.102392
Siegner, M., Pinkse, J., & Panwar, R. (2018). Managing tensions in a social enterprise: The complex balancing act to deliver a multi-faceted but coherent social mission. Journal of Cleaner Production, 174, 1314-1324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.11.076
Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. (2011). Toward a theory of paradox: A dynamic equilibrium model of organizing. Academy of management Review, 36(2), 381-403. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2009.0223
Soundararajan, V., Jamali, D., & Spence, L. J. (2018). Small business social responsibility: A critical multilevel review, synthesis and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 20(4), 934-956. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12171
Spence, L. J., & Rutherfoord, R. (2001). Social responsibility, profit maximisation and the small firm owner‐manager. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 8(2), 126-139. https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000006818
Van der Byl, C. A., & Slawinski, N. (2015). Embracing tensions in corporate sustainability: A review of research from win-wins and trade-offs to paradoxes and beyond. Organization & Environment, 28(1), 54-79. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026615575047
Van Gils, A. (2005). Management and governance in Dutch SMEs. European Management Journal, 23(5), 583-589. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2005.09.013
Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (Vol. 5). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
TQuesto lavoro è fornito con la licenza Creative Commons Attribuzione 4.0 Internazionale.
Copyright (c) 2026 Elisa Carloni, Martina Contardi