The Sasin Research Seminar series continues with a fascinating talk on Conflict Management and Buddhism by Hee-Chan Song, Ph.D. The lecture, from Rethinking Paradox from a Buddhist Perspective, looks at the intersection of paradox theory and Eastern thought. The lecture began with Dr. Hee-Chan Song discussing the locations of his fieldwork and establishing that this was a purely ethnographic study of Buddhist culture. He then explained the different types of data he was collecting, including observations, conversations and interviews, and ordination diaries. The research began by looking at Buddhist philosophy and management theory. However, while doing fieldwork in the temples, Dr. Hee-Chan became interested in the relationship between religion and sustainability issues. This led to looking at temples’ strategies and organization – the focus of this talk. The lecture looked at the phenomenon of Shaolin Temples preparing for an IPO, temples offering a monk delivery service on Amazon, and the reactions to these kinds of activities in different countries. Dr. Hee-Chan looked at the potential contradictions that resulted from this. Looking at the example of religions in Korea, he looked at the decline in the importance of different faiths to individual believers from 1984 to 2014. Compared to Catholicism and Protestantism, Buddhism had dropped the most in importance for individuals. This resulted in fewer donations to temples. To explore this further, Dr. Hee-Chan conducted fieldwork at K-Temple to see how they operate. At K-Temple, he found there was a role separation with some working as (according to his designation) Business Monks and others as Meditation Monks. To see how this contradiction was dealt with, he then showed the organizational chart of the K-Temple and the different tasks and roles of the two types of monks. He also noted that living spaces had been separate since the financial crisis in 1998, with some parts of the temple accessible only to Meditation Monks. This separation also applied to the philosophical motto of the two groups. The mindset of Business Monks was that Buddhism wasn’t just about meditation – it was also about helping society and the poor and having an open-door policy. Conversely, the Meditation Monks believed that the core point of the temple was about meditation and the search for value in life. As a result, these monks followed an isolation policy and focused on religious achievement, not making the temple bigger. These differing philosophies and mindsets were then discussed in relation to Theravada and Mahayana Buddhism. Dr. Hee-Chan felt that the differences weren’t so much regional but were more individual. This raises the question of how to create harmony between the two types of monks – business and meditation – in a temple. In K-Temple, this was done by separation, with a balance maker, or negotiator, working between the two groups. Unfortunately, the different groups experienced some identity issues. This was especially the case with the business monks, who often felt too much like businessmen. Dr. Hee-Chan then looked at his findings from the data he had collected to see how the monks dealt with the identity conflict and explained the tactics they used. First, he suggested that the monks framed their identities in linguistically opposite terms, such as business being dirty, low, and secular, versus religion being pure, high, and sacred. This was followed by separation work, as the boundaries were removed and the concepts reframed. This was followed by a brief overview and discussion of other concepts and findings that resulted from studies at other temples. These topics included interviews that looked at issues like sustainability, age, meaning, and values. Next was the Theory stage and four ways of dealing with tensions: choice, integration, dialectic, and paradox. He also explained findings on how the six individual tactics tied in with organizational approaches of K-Temple. This included concepts of building and deconstructing boundaries. Theory development, implications, and paradoxes were also briefly introduced, as was the idea that categorization can stifle innovation. The talk was followed by a Q&A session that looked at the research framework, identity issues, and the concept and problems of paradox theory.