Search results

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the process of how paradoxical leadership cultivates subordinates' paradox mindset.

This study used the grounded theory approach. Data collection included semi-structured interviews and observations from eleven top managers and their six subordinates in five Chinese organizations. Managers and their subordinates were asked how they perceived and dealt with tensions in the workplace.

Paradoxical leadership promotes subordinates' paradox mindset by helping them learn to face, cope, and live with tensions. First, paradoxical leaders acted as role models for their subordinates and directly influenced followers' attitudes, motivation, and positive psychological states towards tensions. Moreover, when managers help their subordinates reduce stress and anxiety and build confidence, followers learn to cope with tensions. Consequently, subordinates' capacity to live with tensions is increased and they develop the paradox mindset.

The results imply that reducing subordinates' stress and anxiety and building their confidence can be integrated into work practices and training, which provide insights for managers to cultivate their subordinates' paradox mindset.

This paper investigates how paradoxical leadership impacts and cultivates subordinates' paradox mindset in a tension-setting work environment. The findings not only provide fresh insights into the detailed process of developing employees' paradox mindset but also deepen the understanding of the leader–follower relationship.

Why did some individuals have relatively little trouble balancing work and home demands during the COVID-19 lockdown, while others felt overwhelmed? Although ample studies have recently been generated regarding COVID-19 employment challenges, this question has not yet received sufficient scholarly attention. This research integrates work–home conflict theories with the paradox-mindset framework, in order to suggest a new theoretical approach for understanding individual differences in addressing work–home conflict.

During the first two weeks of the COVID-19 epidemic in Israel, the author gathered 117 completed questionnaires from their colleagues in the Israeli higher-education system, who were working remotely and teaching online during the lockdown imposed to control the epidemic. Based on a path-model analysis, the author examined whether their experiences of strain and tension in the work domain might be indirectly and positively associated with workplace outcomes via positive associations between these experiences and paradox mindset, as well as negative associations between paradox mindset and work-to-home conflict (WTH) and home-to-work (HTW) conflict.

The study findings highlight the beneficial effect of paradox mindset on the experience of work–home conflict and its outcomes. Although working remotely has great potential to increase the strain and tension experienced by employees, applying a paradox mindset reduces the experience of work–home conflict and is positively associated with certain work outcomes.

This research integrates work–home conflict theories with the paradox-mindset framework. The beneficial effects of a paradox mindset on the experience of work–home conflict and its outcomes are highlighted.

In this study the authors investigate the relationship of both social (SLMX) and economic (ELMX) leader–member exchange with innovative work behaviour (IWB) and the potential moderating effect of having a paradox mindset. A paradox mindset facilitates the recognition of tensions and the integration of competing demands and goals, which may fuel IWB.

At two points in time the authors gathered survey data from employees working in the mid and back office of a Dutch bank.

SLMX associates with innovative behaviour, whilst ELMX does not. However, when paradox mindset is included as a moderator, the authors find negative interaction effects of paradox mindset with both ELMX and SLMX.

The findings indicate that management should be aware of the impact that having a paradox mindset has on the innovative work behaviour of employees. Managers are well advised to assess the extent to which an employee entertains a paradox mindset and adjust the type of leadership appropriate to the situation, and in particular adjust the intensity of their exchange relationship with these employees.

Paradox mindset acts as a substitute for an employee's social relationship with the leader, as paradox mindset captures most of the variation in IWB, thereby drawing influence away from SLMX. This finding complements studies showing that a person's mindset can greatly influence innovative work behaviour.

This study aims to investigate the relationship between mentors’ paradox mindset and career mentoring directly and indirectly through self-efficacy and work engagement, drawing insights from attachment theory.

A serial mediation model was tested using survey data from 297 employees working in a bank company in China.

Paradox mindset had a significant indirect effect on career mentoring through self-efficacy and work engagement, self-efficacy had a significant indirect effect on career mentoring through work engagement, and paradox mindset had a significant indirect effect on career mentoring through self-efficacy and work engagement.

The results offer practical insights for human resource managers by investigating how mentors’ mindsets affect their psychological states and behaviors. By training and developing mentors’ paradox mindset, mentors can better deal with tensions with a high level of self-efficacy and work engagement in the increasingly changing and demanding work environment and foster functional mentoring relationships.

Findings of this study provide fresh insights into the relationship between individual differences and mentoring relationships by uncovering the critical role of paradox mindset in enhancing self-efficacy and work engagement. Moreover, the interaction of mentors’ paradox mindset and self-efficacy advances previous studies on attachment theory by investigating the underlying mechanisms of mentoring relationships involving affectionate or emotional factors.

This paper addresses decision-making for commercial real estate (CRE) firms and professionals within the context of rapid technological innovations capable of business model disruption. It considers the paradoxical notion of the need for CRE firms to become ambidextrous by simultaneously exploiting their existing business model and exploring possible opportunities and threats. The paper develops a practical approach, the paradox map, for dealing with this paradoxical problem.

This qualitative research draws on work from organizational management, leadership, social sciences and technology. This research frames the definition and development of an ambidextrous mindset and its components. Paradox management is explored as a possible source of useful tools.

The ambidextrous mindset is a paradox in that exploit and explore are ongoing interrelated opposing forces. Further, the mindset is the product of a number of sub-paradoxes that act as levers for its development and adjustment. The paradox map is developed to facilitate dealing with numerous paradoxes.

The paradox map is a useful tool for commercial real-estate firms to understand and develop an ambidextrous mindset.

Commercial real estate is experiencing a wave of substantive technological disruption in the proptech marketplace and beyond. This paper attempts to clarify the paradox of innovation and its underlying sub-paradoxes to help professionals navigate the interrelated landscape of exploiting past products and exploring innovations.

Women leaders struggle with the persistent paradoxical expectations. Literature suggests that a paradox mindset helps to leverage these tensions. This study aims to understand the nexus between the microfoundations of individual women leaders’ experiences, their responses and the organisational context, which enables or hinders their paradox mindset.

This study adopted a qualitative approach by conducting semistructured interviews with 14 women, all senior leaders in corporate South Africa.

The results reveal the interaction in the nexus between, firstly, women leaders’ authenticity and awareness as key anchors that enable them to adopt a paradox mindset and, secondly, the organisation’s role in creating hindrances or opportunities to leverage tensions. Women leaders in our sample applied one of two strategies: they either adapted to the environment or curated a subenvironment. This study shows that, if done authentically, through her own agency, a woman can influence interactions that make it easier to manage tensions within her environment, especially those created by negative performance evaluation because of unconscious institutional gender bias.

The extent to which the findings of this research can be generalised is constrained by the selected research context.

This research contributes to the literature on paradox theory by revealing organisational contextual influencers, such as institutional bias in negative performance evaluation, which hinders a woman leader’s opportunity to be hired or promoted. These organisational influences also interact with women leaders’ ability to embrace paradox and internally leverage agentic and communal tensions.

Since the 1980's, diversity management (DM) has been regarded as a relevant scholarly and practical endeavour laden with different and often contrasting rationales and conceptualisations. In this regard, the current literature on DM largely differentiates between two overarching approaches – the instrumental and the critical approach with varying conceptualisations and underlying understandings of DM. The purpose of this paper is to discuss how a paradox lens can be utilised to bridge existing understandings of diversity management.

The authors aim to discuss the current state of DM literature and reconceptualise DM from a paradox lens.

The authors argue that the use of a paradox lens on DM allows for challenges to be brought forward instead of ignored or hidden away by illuminating and actively acknowledging both the liberating but also the challenging and oftentimes constraining experiences for the actors involved. Thus, a Paradox lens offers space for embracing and utilising paradoxes when working with diversity.

Diversity management is no new concept in the field of human resource management and several scholars argue that the longstanding divide between the instrumental and critical approach remains problematic and limiting for the practice of DM. Hence, the value of reconceptualising DM from a paradox lens lies in bridging the two approaches in order to give way to viewing DM as a nuanced, dynamic and multifaceted practice that can accommodate complexity and contradictions in new and potentially beneficial manners.

The purpose of this paper is to exemplify how Mr Surya Kant, President of North American, UK and European Operations in Tata Consultancy Services (TCS), leads and grows a complex global company by adopting and operationalizing a global mindset.

This paper applies a social constructionist interview method, which focuses upon the reflectivity of the research in critically constructing meaning from qualitative data collected through personal interviews. The paper links information gleaned from a semi‐structured interview with Mr Kant to a theoretical discussion of the construct of global mindset. In so doing, it demonstrates the paradox of complexity in global leadership and illustrates the applicability of theory in global leadership practice.

This paper aids in making the case for the application of an inductive qualitative methodology by showing that inductive approaches to business research have, as their base, the lived experiences of people operating in a business context. The paper found a close link among the theoretical constructs of global mindset, paradox theory, complexity, leadership and global business, and their use and applicability in driving a global corporation.

In making explicit the links between theory and practice, this paper illuminates the practical application of academic literature and theoretical constructs in the arena of global business and global leadership, thereby bridging the oft‐cited theoretician‐practitioner‐bifurcation in business research.

Globalization introduces new challenges related to increased levels of diversity and complexity that organizations cannot meet without capable global leaders. Such leaders are currently lacking, so a theory-based approach to global leader development is needed. A critical intermediary outcome that enables competent global leadership performance is global leader self-complexity, defined by the number of unique leader identities contained within a leader's self-concept (self-differentiation) and the extent to which the identities are integrated with the leader's sense of self (self-integration). This research aims to generate and test a theory of the development of global leader self-complexity through identity construction during international experiences. In Study 1, I gathered qualitative data through retrospectively interviewing 27 global leaders about identity-related changes following their international experiences. Using a grounded theory approach, I developed a theoretical model of global leader identity construction during international experiences, which I empirically tested using quantitative data in Study 2. Specifically, I tested the hypothesized relationships through structural equation modeling with cross-sectional survey data from a sample of 610 global leaders. Findings from both studies indicate global leader identity construction during international experiences primarily occurs through interacting with locals and local culture over a sustained period, motivated by appreciation of cultural differences and resulting in increased global leader self-complexity. These results advance understanding of the global leader self-complexity construct (i.e., what develops) and global leader development processes (i.e., how it develops). Additionally, the findings have practical implications for global leader development initiatives.

The purpose of this study is to examine the impact of paradoxical leader behavior (PLB) on leader effectiveness (LE). The authors propose an underlying mechanism of this relationship and examine if the stated relationship is moderated by job-related and structural uncertainty in the organization.

The authors draw on survey data from 127 employees working in public and privately owned organizations and analyze data using AMOS and SPSS.

Results offer partial support to the authors’ hypotheses indicating that paradoxical leader behavior is positively associated to LE. As expected, the relationship is negatively moderated by structural uncertainty indicating that LE is weakened where there is structural uncertainty in the organization. However, in contrast to our other assumption, the authors find a positive (rather than negative) moderating role of job-related uncertainty in the PLB–LE relationship.

Paradoxes are everywhere and inherently embedded in complex and dynamic organizational systems. To deal with paradoxes, organizational leaders often seek to act paradoxically. However, not every leader has a paradoxical mindset, and where a leader has such, it remains unclear if they will prove to be effective leaders. What can further influence the effectiveness of such leaders is the uncertainty that organizations face in the today’s dynamic environments. In this study, the authors contribute to paradox theory and the paradoxical leadership literature by unfolding the boundary conditions which can influence paradoxical leader’s effectiveness.