2022
DOI: 10.1111/joms.12792
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Paradoxical Leadership, Subjective Ambivalence, and Employee Creativity: Effects of Employee Holistic Thinking

Abstract: Drawing from meaning maintenance theory, the authors posit that paradoxical leader behaviour causes some employees to feel subjectively ambivalent, depending on holistic thinking styles. Employees who feel ambivalent will then show greater creativity as they search for ways to alleviate discomfort, again depending on thinking styles. Two field studies, one using cross-sectional and one using panel data, confirm the hypotheses. For low (high) holistic thinkers, paradoxical leadership is more (less) positively a… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
23
0
1

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 41 publications
(24 citation statements)
references
References 82 publications
0
23
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…First, as stated, there is abundant research that has looked at the positive side of paradoxical leadership (Chen et al , 2021; Li et al , 2018; Sparr et al , 2022; Zhang et al , 2021; Zhang and Han, 2019; Zheng et al , 2018). Similarly, some recent research also looks at the drawbacks of the paradoxical leadership on the leader (Bashir, 2021; Julmi, 2021; Shao et al , 2019) as well as the followers (Ishaq et al , 2021; She et al , 2020; Yang et al , 2021; Zhang et al , 2022). However, research has rarely looked at the contingencies or the underlying mechanisms (Sparr et al , 2022) that explain the effects of paradoxical leader behavior.…”
Section: Discussion Implications and Future Researchmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…First, as stated, there is abundant research that has looked at the positive side of paradoxical leadership (Chen et al , 2021; Li et al , 2018; Sparr et al , 2022; Zhang et al , 2021; Zhang and Han, 2019; Zheng et al , 2018). Similarly, some recent research also looks at the drawbacks of the paradoxical leadership on the leader (Bashir, 2021; Julmi, 2021; Shao et al , 2019) as well as the followers (Ishaq et al , 2021; She et al , 2020; Yang et al , 2021; Zhang et al , 2022). However, research has rarely looked at the contingencies or the underlying mechanisms (Sparr et al , 2022) that explain the effects of paradoxical leader behavior.…”
Section: Discussion Implications and Future Researchmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Referring to the practice of previous related studies, we controlled for the demographic variables that may affect the innovative behavior of postgraduate students, including gender, grade, type of master's degree, type of degree and supervisor's title, and used these basic information as the control variables of this study [33][34][35]. The distribution is relatively uniform and the sample is well represented.…”
Section: Control Variablesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Creative behaviors are linked to the development of novel ideas about products, practices, services or procedures, and personality, and they are potentially useful to an organization’s competitive advantage [ 22 , [40] , [41] , [42] ]. Organizations could motivate employees’ creative ideas to meet market variations [ 41 ] because creative ideas can combine internal motivations and divergent thinking [ 7 ].…”
Section: Literature Review and Hypothesesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These behaviors involve employees’ abilities to use creative concepts and ideas to perform their work at a high level [ 22 ]. Further, employees need creative actions that help them navigate the dynamic contexts in the workplace [ 42 ]. For example, creative behaviors include new ideas to improve performance, and employees could search for new technologies, processes, skills, or ways to finish their work and solve problems [ 43 ].…”
Section: Literature Review and Hypothesesmentioning
confidence: 99%