The Paradoxical Fabric of Hope in Academy-Community Partnerships: Challenging Binary Constructions of Conflict-Cooperation

  • Dassi Postan Aizik
  • Roni StrierEmail author
  • Faisal Azaiza
Part of the Quality of Life in Asia book series (QLAS, volume 8)


The global interest in University Community Partnerships (UCP’s) has made the study of these initiatives an important field of research. Studies show that the increased number of UCP’s stems from the fact that both parties see in these shared ventures an opportunity to achieve reciprocal goals. Universities perceive them as a way to show their social commitment to the community, while simultaneously expanding the scope of academic activities and goals. Communities for their part, look at these projects as ways to promote their own social agendas and prioritize critical issues. However, along with these expected mutual gains, studies have also recognized these partnerships as highly complex, often conflictive enterprises, which may generate multiple internal tensions due to competing interests and power disputes. In many cases, the complex nature of these partnerships may severely challenge the chances for their success and sustainability to the extent that studies portray the contested nature of these partnerships as dysfunctional. This chapter challenges this theoretical perspective and offers an alternative theoretical framework to re-examine the binary construction of cooperation-conflict. Using the Organizational Paradox Theory and based on a comprehensive UCP established in the University of Haifa, Israel, this chapter analyses four areas of paradox that illustrate the complexity of UCP. The first part of the chapter will present a review of current research on UCP’s and briefly introduces the Organizational Paradox theoretical framework. The second part describes the methodology of the study. Based on our case study, the third part examines four cases that exemplify paradoxes in UCP. In the discussion section, we elaborate on the contribution of Organizational Paradox Theory to the understanding of academic-community partnerships, culminating with recommendations for both research and practice.


Academy-community partnership Community partnership Social responsibility Organizational Paradox Theory Civic engagement 


  1. Altman, D. (2005). Communities, governments and AIDS: Making partnerships work. In P. Aggleton, P. Davies, & G. Hart (Eds.), Aids: Safety, sexuality and risk (pp. 109–117). London: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  2. Amey, M. J., & Brown, D. F. (2005). Interdisciplinary collaboration and academic work: A case study of a university–community partnership. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 102, 23–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Andriopoulos, C., & Lewis, M. W. (2009). Exploitation-exploration tensions and organizational ambidexterity: Managing paradoxes of innovation. Organization Science, 20(4), 696–717.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Arches, J., & Apontes-Pares, L. (2005). Dilemmas for university–community partnerships and service learning. Humanity & Society, 29, 209–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barnes, J. V., Altimare, E. L., Farrell, P. A., Brown, R. E., Burnett, C. R, I. I. I., Gamble, L., et al. (2009). Creating and sustaining authentic partnerships with community in a systemic model. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 13, 15–29.Google Scholar
  6. Baum, H. S. (2000). Fantasies and realities in university–community partnerships. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 20, 234–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bhabha, H. K. (1994). The location of culture. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  8. Boyer, E. L. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professorate. New Jersey: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.Google Scholar
  9. Boyer, E. L. (1996). The scholarship of engagement. Bulletin of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 49, 18–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brown-Luthango, M. (2013). Community-university engagement: The Philippi CityLab in Cape Town and the challenge of collaboration across boundaries. Higher Education, 6, 309–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Butcher, J., Bezzina, M., & Moran, W. (2011). Transformational partnerships: A new agenda for higher education. Innovative Higher Education, 36, 29–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Buys, N., & Bursnall, S. (2007). Establishing university–community partnerships: Processes and benefits. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 29, 73–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Carlton, E. L., Whiting, J. B., Bradford, K., Dyk, P. H., & Vail, A. (2009). Defining factors of successful university–community collaborations: An exploration of one healthy marriage project. Family Relations: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Applied Family Studies, 58, 28–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cherry, D. J., & Shefner, J. (2004). Addressing barriers to university–community collaboration: Organizing by experts or organizing the experts? Journal of Community Practice, 12, 219–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cobb, P. D., & Rubin, B. A. (2006). Contradictory interests, tangled power and disorganized organization. Administration and Society, 38, 79–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cox, D. N. (2000). Developing a framework for understanding university community partnerships. Cityscape: A Journal of Policy Development and Research, 5, 9–26.Google Scholar
  17. D’Augelli, A. R. (2006). Coming out, visibility, and creating change: Empowering lesbian, gay, and bisexual people in a rural university community. American Journal of Community Psychology, 37, 203–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dantnow, A. (1998). The gender politics of educational change. London: Falmer.Google Scholar
  19. Davies, B., Edwards, J., Gannon, S., & Laws, C. (2007). Neo-liberal subjectivities and the limits of social change in university–community partnerships. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 35, 27–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dayan, Y. (2003). Methodology of qualitative research. Case Study. Bamichlala, 11, 79–96. (In Hebrew).Google Scholar
  21. Desivilla, H., & Palgi, M. (2011). The paradox in partnership: The role of conflict in partnership building. Miami, FL: Bentham Books.Google Scholar
  22. Dulmus, C. N., & Cristalli, M. E. (2012). A university–community partnership to advance research in practice settings: The HUB research model. Research on Social Work Practice, 22, 195–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Farquhar, S. A., & Dobson, N. (2004). Community and university participation in disaster-relief policy and practices: An example from eastern North Carolina. Journal of Community Practice, 12, 203–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Feagan, R., & Rossiter, K. (2011). University–community engagement: A case study using popular theatre. Education and Training, 53, 140–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Feagin, J. R., Orum, A. M., & Sjoberg, G. (Eds.). (1991). A case for the case study. Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North Carolina Press.‏Google Scholar
  26. Fisher, R., Fabricant, M., & Simmons, L. (2005). Understanding contemporary university–community connections. Journal of Community Practice, 12, 13–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Flyvbjerg, B. (2006). Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12, 219–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gray, B. (2003). Framing of environmental disputes. In R. Lewicki, B. Gray, & M. Elliott (Eds.), Making sense of intractable environmental conflicts: Concepts and cases (pp. 11–34). Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  29. Gray, B. (2004). Strong opposition: Frame-based resistance to collaboration. Journal of Community & Applied Psychology, 14, 166–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Gronski, R., & Pigg, K. (2000). University and community collaboration. American Behavioral Scientist, 43, 781–793.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Huxham, C., & Vangen, S. (2000). What makes partnerships work? In S. P. Osborne (Ed.), Public-private partnerships: Theory and practice in international perspective (pp. 293–310). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  32. Ikas, K., & Wagner, G. (2009). Communicating in the third space. London: Taylor & Frances.Google Scholar
  33. Jarvis-Selinger, S., Ho, K., Novak Lauscher, H., Liman, Y., Stacy, E., Woollard, R., et al. (2008). Social accountability in action: University-community collaboration in the development of an inter-professional aboriginal health elective. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 22, 61–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Johnson Butterfield, A. K., & Soska, T. (Eds.). (2005). University–community partnerships: Universities in civic engagement. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  35. Jules, C., & Good, D. (2014). Introduction to special issue on paradox in context: Advances in theory and practice.‏ Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 50(2), 123–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kaufman, R. (2004). A university–community partnership to change public policy: Pre-conditions and processes. Journal of Community Practice, 12, 163–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lewis, M. W. (2000). Exploring paradox: Toward a more comprehensive guide. The Academy of Management Review, 25, 760–776.Google Scholar
  38. Luscher, L., & Lewis, M. W. (2008). Organizational change and managerial sense making: Working through paradox. Academy of Management Journal, 51, 221–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Luscher, L., Lewis, M. W., & Ingram, A. (2006). The social construction of organizational change paradoxes. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 19, 491–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Maginn, P. J. (2007). Towards more effective community participation in urban regeneration: The potential of collaborative planning and applied ethnography. Qualitative Research, 7, 25–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Maurrasse, D. J. (2002). Higher education-community partnerships: Assessing progress in the field. Nonprofit & Volunteer Quarterly, 31, 131–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Mulroy, E. A. (2004). University civic engagement with community-based organizations: Dispersed or coordinated models? Journal of Community Practice, 12, 35–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Mulroy, E. A. (2008). University community partnerships that promote evidence-based macro practice. Journal of Evidence-Based Social Work, 5, 497–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Nation, M., Bess, K., Voight, A., Perkins, D. D., & Juarez, P. (2011). Levels of community engagement in youth violence prevention: The role of power in sustaining successful university–community partnerships. American Journal of Community Psychology, 48, 89–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Nocon, H., Nilsson, M., & Cole, M. (2004). Spiders, fire souls, and little fingers: Necessary magic in university–community collaboration. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 35, 368–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Ostrander, N., & Chapin-Hogue, S. (2011). Learning from our mistakes: An autopsy of an unsuccessful university–community collaboration. Social Work Education, 30, 454–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Perkins, D. D., Crim, B., Silberman, P., & Brown, B. B. (2004). Community adversity and community development: Ecological and strengths-based theory, research and policies. In K. Maton, B. Ledbeater, C. Schellenberg, & A. Solarz (Eds.), Investing in children, youth, families and communities: Strengths based research and policy (pp. 321–340). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Putnam, L., Fairhurst, G., & Banghart, S. (2016). Contradictions, dialectics, and paradoxes in organizations: A constitutive approach. The Academy of Management Annals, 10(1), 65–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Richardson, V. (1994). Conducting research on practice. Educational Researcher, 23(5), 5–10.‏Google Scholar
  50. Rogge, M. E., & Rocha, C. J. (2004). University–community partnership centers: An important link for social work education. Journal of Community Practice, 12, 103–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Russell, J. F., & Flynn, R. B. (2001). Setting the stage for collaboration. Peabody Journal of Education, 75, 1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Sabar, N. (Ed). (2001). Qualitative research: Genres and traditions in qualitative research Tel Aviv: Zmora Bitan. (in Hebrew).Google Scholar
  53. Sandy, M., & Holland, B. A. (2006). Different worlds and common ground: Community partner perspectives on campus-community partnerships. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 13, 30–43.Google Scholar
  54. Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. (2011). Toward a theory of paradox: A dynamic equilibrium model of organizing. Academy of Management Review, 36, 381–403.Google Scholar
  55. Stake, R. E., & Savolainen, R. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage publications.‏Google Scholar
  56. Stewart, T., & Alrutz, M. (2012). Meaningful relationships: Cruxes of university-community partnerships for sustainable and happy engagement. Journal of Community Engagement and Scholarship, 5, 44–55.Google Scholar
  57. Strand, K., Marullo, S., Cutforth, N., Stoecker, R., & Donohue, P. (2003). Principles of best practice for community-based research. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 9, 5–15.Google Scholar
  58. Strier, R. (2011). The construction of university-community partnerships: Entangled perspectives. Higher Education, 62, 81–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Strier, R. (2013). Responding to the global economic crisis: Inclusive social work practice. Social Work, 58(4), 344–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Strier, R. (2014). University-community partnerships: Fields of paradox. Higher Education, 68, 155–165.Google Scholar
  61. Suarez-Balcazar, Y., & Kinney, L. (2006). Realities and myths of safety issues for community researchers working in a marginalized African American community. American Journal of Community Psychology, 37, 303–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Taylor, R. R., Braveman, B., & Hammel, J. (2004). Developing and evaluating community services through participatory action research: Two case examples. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 58, 73–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Werkmeister Rozas, L., & Negroni, L. (2008). University/community partnership: Promoting anti-oppressive action on behalf of Latino youth. Journal of Community Practice, 16, 441–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Wiewel, W., & Lieber, M. (1998). Goal achievement, relationship building, and incrementalism: The challenges of university–community partnerships. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 17, 291–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Yin, R. K. (2013). Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dassi Postan Aizik
    • 1
  • Roni Strier
    • 1
    Email author
  • Faisal Azaiza
    • 1
  1. 1.University of HaifaHaifaIsrael

Personalised recommendations