Strategy Shifts, Identity Drifts: Negotiating Alignment Amid Interconnected Paradoxes

This paper investigates how organizations negotiate strategy-identity alignment amid the complexities and constraints of interconnected paradoxes. Drawing on a longitudinal case study of NorthBank–a financial institution undergoing a strategic shift toward sustainability–we examine how such tensions as profitability versus sustainability, short-term versus long-term goals, and belonging versus organizing, interact to shape the alignment process. Rather than viewing misalignment as a temporary disconnection or managerial failure, we conceptualize it as a systemic outcome of dynamic, interrelated paradoxes. Our findings trace three phases in NorthBank’s transition: the initiation of a sustainability-focused strategy, the emergence of internal critique and ambiguity, and the subsequent recalibration of strategic priorities to restore coherence. Across these phases, organizational members engaged in interpretive and adaptive practices that sustained, redefined, or diluted paradoxical commitments. These insights challenge idealized notions of both/and thinking by showing how integration efforts are often partial, provisional, and shaped by contextual constraints. We contribute a process model demonstrating the recursive feedback loops between strategy and identity, offering a more nuanced understanding of how alignment unfolds through continuous negotiation. MAD statement This article seeks to Make a Difference (MAD) by integrating paradox theory with strategy-identity alignment in order to offer a nuanced framework for understanding not only why misalignment occurs, but how it is sustained, recalibrated, or transformed over time due to internal pressures and contextual complexity. For practitioners and policymakers, the study provides actionable insights into managing large-scale shifts such as transitions toward sustainability, by revealing the associated constraints, and encourages a more reflexive approach. That is, one that engages members at all levels, recognizes the provisional nature of coherence, and acknowledges both the value and challenges of embracing identity plurality in the face of persistent paradoxes. By fostering inclusive decision-making processes and engaging organizational members at all levels, this research supports SDG 16 (Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions).