Syntegral inter-bridging

Continuing from this post, recall this paper by Edwards et al. Some excerpts:

"By interpreting the bridge as a relational metaphor, and reflecting an inter-relational ‘space between’ of positions, the paper contributes to a different view of integrating pluralism in organization studies. Following an embodied realism, first bridges and bridging are presented as phenomena, media and metaphors for connecting and separating. Showing their ambivalent character the role of bridges as metaphors and metaphors as bridges are discussed in relation to organisation studies and as transition zones for paradigms. Based on an integrative orientation, mediating qualities of bridges and bridging are outlined for gaining a decentered, but interconnected understanding of organising. The final part discusses some implications for organization studies" (abstract).


"The postmodern distrust of meta-positions is understandable given the problematic assumptions that often accompany such views, but the point put forward by Gioia and Pitrè is different. Their assumptions are of valuing pluralism or taking diverse meta-level positions and of retaining marginal views (Gioia & Pitre, 1990). Questioning the assumption that there are no connections between paradigms can open up researching for multiple overlapping or connecting areas (Gioa and Pitrè 1990, p. 592; Schulz and Hatch, 1996, p. 534). Such approaches would not try to fuse or merge, but to relate and negotiate between conflicting positions […] Concentrating on the permeability of paradigmatic borders and zones of transition can be detected, where different elements might be combined or reconfigured towards rendering novel insights or findings. […] In order to (re-)construct such transitional zones, we propose an integral pluralism framework as a bridging concept. By this we mean, a bridging in which different elements or positions are not reduced or subsumed into each other. Rather, they are a seen as contributing their own insights to a more comprehensive understanding. This integral orientation permits bridging between paradigms as well as between micro-, meso- and macro-levels of analysis and their interplay” (125).