Navigating the Profit-Sustainability Paradox

Abstract

Firms increasingly face paradoxical tensions between profit imperatives and sustainability ambitions. These tensions are persistent, interdependent, and deeply embedded in organizational life. While paradox theory explains how contradictory demands must be managed rather than resolved, institutional logics highlight the broader cultural frames that shape which tensions matter and how managers interpret them. This thesis investigates how Dutch firms navigate profit–sustainability paradoxes across four domains: performing (goal conflicts), organizing (structures and processes), learning (short-term vs long-term adaptation), and belonging (identity and values). A qualitative multiple-case study of nine Dutch firms provides in-depth insights into how competing institutional logics activate paradoxes and how managers respond. Findings reveal that firms employ a repertoire of navigation strategies—opposition, spatial separation, temporal separation, and synthesis—often in combination, to cope with persistent contradictions. Moreover, actions taken in one paradox domain reverberate into others, underscoring the interdependence of tensions. The study contributes to paradox theory by demonstrating how institutional logics activate and sustain profit–sustainability paradoxes, and to corporate sustainability research by illustrating how Dutch firms craft both/and strategies amid institutional complexity. Managerially, the findings suggest that embracing paradoxical tensions—rather than seeking trade-offs—can foster more resilient, innovative, and purpose-driven organizations.