Paradox studies offer vital and timely insights into an array of organizational tensions. Yet this field stands at a critical juncture. Over the past 25 years, management scholars have drawn foundational insights from philosophy and psychology to apply a paradox lens to organizational phenomena. Yet extant studies selectively leverage ancient wisdom, adopting some key insights while abandoning others. Using a structured content analysis to review the burgeoning management literature, we surface six key themes, which represent the building blocks of a meta-theory of paradox. These six themes received varying attention in extant studies: paradox scholars emphasize types of paradoxes, collective approaches, and outcomes, but pay less attention to relationships within paradoxes, individual approaches, and dynamics. As this analysis suggests, management scholars have increasingly simplified the intricate, often messy phenomena of paradox. Greater simplicity renders phenomena understandable and testable, however, oversimplifying complex realities can foster reductionist and incomplete theories. We therefore propose a future research agenda targeted at enriching a meta-theory of paradox by reengaging these less developed themes. Doing so can sharpen the focus of this field, while revisiting its rich conceptual roots to capture the intricacies of paradox. This future research agenda leverages the potential of paradox across diverse streams of management science.

悖论研究提供了对一系列组织紧张局势的重要而及时的见解。然而，这一领域处于关键时刻。在过去的25年中，管理学者从哲学和心理学中汲取了基本见解，以将悖论应用于组织现象。然而，现存的研究有选择地利用了古老的智慧，采纳了一些关键的见解而放弃了其他的见解。使用结构化的内容分析来回顾新兴的管理文献，我们浮出了六个关键主题，这些主题代表了悖论的元理论的组成部分。在现存的研究中，这六个主题受到了不同的关注：悖论学者强调悖论的类型，集体方法和结果，但较少关注悖论，个体方法和动力之间的关系。正如该分析所暗示的那样，管理学者越来越简化了自相矛盾的错综复杂的现象。更大的简单性使现象易于理解和检验，但是，过分简化复杂的现实会导致还原论和不完整的理论。因此，我们提出了一个未来的研究议程，旨在通过重新参与这些较不发达的主题来丰富悖论的元理论。这样做可以加强该领域的重点，同时重新探究其丰富的概念根源，以捕捉到悖论的复杂性。这个未来的研究议程利用了跨管理科学流的悖论潜力。