My work shows how few people (or more precisely infrastructures their working lives are spent in and ruled by) are comfy with innovating through paradox
2 examples, both of which are over 12 years old in my peer networks' experience
1 Over 12 years ago in london I started hosting small meetings of sustainability experts in London. Across the meetings 2 conflicfting statistics emerged
a) 85% of sustainabiloity experts believed planet-critical issues were getting worse, exponentially so with 200s or 2010s being potentially the irreversible decades
b) 85% believed in their own expert areas things were getting better
My own response to this was to search through hubs of people for those who agreed with a), disagreed with b) and saw the whole paradox as critical enough that they would share all network relationship permissions with others concerned with this urgent paradox
2 In 1998 I guest-edited a triple issue of journal of marketing management on brand reality - how purposeful organisations identify communal pride and personal passion. When I presented the results of thisi to the marketing faculty at Harvard and Darmouth and Georgetown, I was told the evidence you have journalised on misleading valuation algorithms as they related to branding , intangibles, goodwill, transparency (zero0-conflict mapping), and compound sustainability may be correct but this research subject is absolutely unfundable in USA
My ftiends and I draw quite a lot of practical conclusions on this. They related to forbidden questions of most academia. And also why exploring academic institutions that are capable of innovating beyond other acadmeic institutions matters to my friends and the Norman Macrae Family Association.