When digital transformation meets organizational reality: measuring and managing paradoxical tensions in a South Asian manufacturer

Purpose Digital transformation rarely unfolds as smoothly as planned. Organizations frequently encounter persistent tensions between workforce autonomy and algorithmic control, despite management’s best efforts. While paradox theory has established that these tensions are inherent organizational features rather than solvable problems (Smith and Lewis, 2011; Lewis, 2000), practitioners still lack concrete tools to measure their severity, anticipate their trajectory or systematically evaluate intervention strategies. This study aims to examine why digital transformation rarely unfolds as smoothly as planned, focusing specifically on the persistent tensions that emerge between workforce autonomy and algorithmic control. Design/methodology/approach The authors integrate paradox theory (Smith and Lewis, 2011; Schad et al., 2016) with mathematical modeling techniques grounded in differential equations and game theory (Friedman, 1991; Weibull, 1995). The framework is applied to Walton Hi-Tech Industries Limited, Bangladesh’s largest electronics manufacturer (annual revenue: 7,512 BDT Crore; 23,298 employees), examining paradoxical tensions across five operational units during company-wide digital transformation. This mixed-methods approach integrates 50 semistructured interviews with survey data from 250 employees, triangulated through observational data and archival records (Jick, 1979). Findings Paradox intensity varies substantially across organizational units, with a 1.7-fold difference between the highest (retail: 0.82) and lowest (R&D: 0.48) scores. The analysis identifies four distinct stable organizational configurations, challenging universal change management approaches (Kotter, 1996; By, 2005). Participatory management strategies demonstrate 40% greater effectiveness than top-down control methods (Spreitzer, 1995; Clegg et al., 2002). Walton’s retail division emerges as the highest-risk unit for potential dysfunction. Research limitations/implications The single-case, cross-sectional design limits the generalizability of the findings (Yin, 2018). Longitudinal research across diverse organizational contexts would strengthen the framework’s external validity (Pettigrew, 1990). Future work should establish predictive relationships between paradox intensity and specific performance outcomes. Practical implications The framework enables managers to: diagnose paradox intensity before implementing new systems; identify vulnerable organizational units; design context-sensitive interventions; and evaluate the long-term sustainability of current configurations. A ready-to-implement diagnostic instrument is provided. Originality/value This research makes three contributions: first, it operationalizes “paradox salience” (Jarzabkowski et al., 2022) as a measurable construct with validated assessment tools; second, it demonstrates the framework’s utility through rigorous empirical application; third, it shows how formal modeling can generate actionable insights for change management practitioners, bridging the theory-practice divide in digital transformation research (Henfridsson and Yoo, 2014; Hinings et al., 2018).