Paradoxical Leader Behaviors in People Management: Antecedents and Consequences

By Yan Zhang, David A. Waldman, Yu-Lan Han, Xiao-Bei Li. 2015

615 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Safety Research, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/7c30918eb6a5f9eb6614680efc718aa297b7e195

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

In Safety Research

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Effects of different leadership styles on hospitality workers (2019, methodology): “Followers might therefore be more likely to be adaptive and proactive, and to work proficiently, exploring new ways to fulfill their daily job requirements (Zhang et al., 2015) and thus coming to feel more capable and enthusiastic at work.”
Benevolence and authority as WEIRDly unfamiliar: A multi-language meta-analysis of paternalistic leadership behaviors from 152 studies (2019, background): “Such seeming or at least potential para-doxes in leader behavior, while less commonly represented in the English-speaking countries of Western industrialized nations, are more common in parts of Asia (Zhang, Waldman, Han, & Li, 2015).”
Creativity under workload pressure and integrative complexity: The double-edged sword of paradoxical leadership (2019, background): “When leaders behave paradoxically and deal with tensions and paradoxes at work constructively, they provide employees with the chance to observe, make sense of, and reflect on their own handling of tensions at work (Zhang et al., 2015).”
Pandemics: Implications for research and practice in industrial and organizational psychology (2020, background): “Thus, researchers could test whether “paradoxical leadership” is particularly effective in the current crisis (Zhang et al., 2015).”
Microfoundations of Organizational Paradox: The Problem Is How We Think about the Problem (2017, background): “…constructs more often associated with Eastern thinking, including tolerance of contradictions (Spencer-Rodgers et al., 2001), attitude toward contradictions (Choi et al., 2007), and a self-rated version of the paradoxical leadership scale developed among Chinese participants (Zhang et al., 2015).”
Theoretical Development and Empirical Examination of a Three-Roles Model of Responsible Leadership (2019, positive): “Such leaders would not choose either/or solutions that prioritize some stakeholder demands over others but would be able to develop both/and solutions to conflicting demands (Denison et al. 1995; Zhang et al. 2015).”