Governing Within Semirigid Limits: Navigating the Centralization–Decentralization Paradox in Blockchain‐Based Platforms

ABSTRACT Blockchain‐based platforms can facilitate data sharing and coordination in interorganizational ecosystems by enabling secure, tamper‐evident recordkeeping and streamlined, trust‐minimized transactions across organizational boundaries. However, their decentralized architecture may conflict with the centralized control exercised by platform sponsors, giving rise to a centralization–decentralization paradox. This study explores how this paradox unfolds in a large, blockchain‐based logistics platform that was ultimately discontinued. Through an in‐depth, longitudinal case study, we identify three interrelated governance contradictions—regarding ownership, trust, and growth—that triggered destabilizing oscillations between centralized and decentralized governance modes. We introduce the concept of semirigid limits to capture the bounded flexibility within which governance can be made and adapted under such paradoxical conditions. Our findings show that the centralization–decentralization paradox is especially difficult to navigate when strategic boundary conditions—here, industry competition, fragmented coordination, and high interdependencies—are present. Our study contributes to the paradox and governance literature by theorizing how governance contradictions emerge and persist and by identifying the mechanisms that constrain alignment and adaptation. We also offer guidance for managers in regard to addressing the competing demands of centralization and decentralization in interorganizational platforms.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Operations Management
Published
2025-06-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/joom.70001
Citations
9
Primary Topic
Blockchain Technology Applications and Security
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
29.22

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Governing Within Semirigid Limits: Navigating the Centralization–Decentralization Paradox in Blockchain‐Based Platforms

Marvin Hanisch, Curtis Goldsby, Michael Rogerson, Mélissa Fortin
9 citations
Journal of Operations Management
Blockchain Technology Applications and Security
29.22
article

Governing Within Semirigid Limits: Navigating the Centralization–Decentralization Paradox in Blockchain‐Based Platforms

Marvin Hanisch, Curtis Goldsby, Michael Rogerson, Mélissa Fortin
article en
9 citations

Abstract

ABSTRACT Blockchain‐based platforms can facilitate data sharing and coordination in interorganizational ecosystems by enabling secure, tamper‐evident recordkeeping and streamlined, trust‐minimized transactions across organizational boundaries. However, their decentralized architecture may conflict with the centralized control exercised by platform sponsors, giving rise to a centralization–decentralization paradox. This study explores how this paradox unfolds in a large, blockchain‐based logistics platform that was ultimately discontinued. Through an in‐depth, longitudinal case study, we identify three interrelated governance contradictions—regarding ownership, trust, and growth—that triggered destabilizing oscillations between centralized and decentralized governance modes. We introduce the concept of semirigid limits to capture the bounded flexibility within which governance can be made and adapted under such paradoxical conditions. Our findings show that the centralization–decentralization paradox is especially difficult to navigate when strategic boundary conditions—here, industry competition, fragmented coordination, and high interdependencies—are present. Our study contributes to the paradox and governance literature by theorizing how governance contradictions emerge and persist and by identifying the mechanisms that constrain alignment and adaptation. We also offer guidance for managers in regard to addressing the competing demands of centralization and decentralization in interorganizational platforms.

Journal of Operations ManagementVol. 71(7)
Université du Québec à Montréal (CA), University of Sussex (GB), University of Groningen (NL), Erasmus University Rotterdam (NL)
Canadian Academic Accounting Association, Universiteit van Amsterdam, Economic and Social Research Council
Openalex Percentile: Top 0%
Blockchain Technology Applications and Security
29.22
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.