Ambivalence in Organizations: A Multilevel Approach

By Blake E. Ashforth, Kristie M. Rogers, Michael G. Pratt, Camille Pradies. Organ. Sci., 2014

371 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Strategy and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/fb2a874312ee754f6155d61091143e1ded6d0147

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 Strategy and Management

Citations in the corpus

Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) Ambivalence and Task Performance: The Cross-Domain Buffering Role of Social Support (2019, background): “Ambivalence researchers have highlighted that a critical step for future research is the investigation of the effects of ambivalence on employee behavior (Ashforth et al., 2014; Methot et al., 2017).”
Co-creating Relationship Repair (2015, background): “Executives on this pathway stabilized their identification with BP and resolved their ambivalence by consciously emphasizing positive feelings toward the organization over negative ones (Ashforth et al., 2014).”
Understanding The Dual Nature of Ambivalence: Why and When Ambivalence Leads to Good and Bad Outcomes (2017, positive): “…and particularly from Ashforth and colleagues (2014: 1454), we define ambivalence as the simultaneous experience of opposing orientations 1 towards an object or target, where “orientation refers to the actor’s alignment or position with regard to the object” (Ashforth et al., 2014; p. 1454).”
The Space Between Us: A Social-Functional Emotions View of Ambivalent and Indifferent Workplace Relationships (2017, background): “…2011) through responses including compromise, an ongoing process of mutually accommodating both positive and negative orientations (Pratt & Pradies, 2011), or holism, “the complete, simultaneous, and typically conscious acceptance of both opposing orientations” (Ashforth et al., 2014: 1465).”
Functions of Dysfunction (2014, background): “und drang between Democrats and Republicans in the American political system or between prosecuting and defense attorneys in the legal system, the ultimate ‘‘wisdom’’ of the oscillations appears to be a property of the system more than of the individuals/groups who inhabit it (Bierly, Kessler, and C”
Revisiting the Foundations of Organizational Distrust (2017, positive): “An increasing number of works has identified that norms and roles, individual relationships and differences, and complexity and dynamisms internal and external to organizations are possible triggers of organizational ambivalence (Ashforth et al., 2014; Wang and Pratt, 2008).”
Flexing the Frame: TMT Framing and the Adoption of Non-Incremental Innovations in Incumbent Firms (2017, positive): “Ravasi and Schultz (2006) and Rindova, Dalpiaz and Ravasi (2011) to trigger affective responses related to avoidance (Gavetti & Menon, 2016) and passive-aggressive ambivalence (Ashforth, Rogers, Pratt, & Pradies, 2014).”
Feeling Mixed, Ambivalent, and in Flux: The Social Functions of Emotional Complexity for Leaders (2017, background): “Indeed, individuals who cannot acknowledge their complex emotions or accept the internal conflict they create (for a review see Ashforth et al., 2014) may be denied a significant trigger of flexibility.”