Leading through paradox: Navigating tensions in transformative networks
University of Colorado Boulder
How they used Delve
Researchers at the University of Colorado Boulder and Boston College uploaded twelve 90-minute dialogues with veteran network leaders into Delve for coding and constant comparative analysis, building an account of the paradoxes that leaders of transformative environmental networks have to hold at once.
“The sessions were recorded, transcribed, and uploaded to Delve content analysis software (https://delvetool.com/) for coding and analysis.”
- Field
- Environmental governance / network leadership and social-ecological transformation
- Data
- Twelve 90-minute conversational, reflective dialogues with four US-based netweavers, each with over a decade leading translocal networks on renewable energy transitions, wildfire restoration, food security and equity, and bioregional regeneration
- Approach
- Constant comparative analysis in the grounded theory tradition (Charmaz; Glaser & Strauss), with emerging themes continuously compared against new data; validity supported by co-interpretation — initial interpretations were shared with participants and their feedback folded back in — plus documented analytical decisions and reflexive practice
- Data types
- Interviews
Abstract
Abstract Managing multiple paradoxes is critical to transformative systems leadership, particularly in the context of translocal networks. In this paper, we explore a novel aspect of Earth Stewardship: how leaders of these networks harness paradox management to generate and scale innovative sustainability solutions. By integrating seemingly contradictory forces, such as harmony and disruption, cohesion and autonomy, and reflection and action, leaders foster dynamic environments conducive to both innovation and transformative learning. We identify three key paradoxes: (1) the embrace of harmony and disruption, fostering transformative learning; (2) the tension between cohesion and autonomy, which promotes innovation by scaling solutions within diverse contexts; and (3) the interplay between reflection and action, which enhances metis, a crucial strategy for navigating the uncertainties of transitioning systems. These paradoxes, when embraced rather than resolved, enable translocal networks to catalyze systemic changes. This paper explores how these leadership practices drive sustainability solutions, an essential yet underexamined aspect of Earth Stewardship.
Citation
Bruce Evan Goldstein, Sandra Waddock (2025). Leading through paradox: Navigating tensions in transformative networks. Earth Stewardship. https://doi.org/10.1002/eas2.70013