Reacting to paradoxes in organizations

Mayr, Katja Kristin (2024): Reacting to paradoxes in organizations: an empirical investigation on followers’ complex thinking and leaders’ complex behavior in the context of paradoxes. Dissertation, LMU München: Fakultät für Psychologie und Pädagogik

Abstract

My thesis presents three empirical studies, which address one basic research question: How can followers and leaders react to paradoxes in organizations, so that they promote positive outcomes and mitigate negative ones? Paradoxes (i.e., competing, yet interrelated elements) are inherent in organizations and can lead to positive outcomes such as innovation and sustainable work performance, but also to negative outcomes such as experiences of tension and organizational decline. Theory on paradoxes emphasizes that how individuals experience and react to paradoxes determines whether outcomes will be positive or negative. Nonetheless, individual experiences of and reactions to paradoxes were rarely studied empirically. I argue in my dissertation, that followers and leaders can react constructively to paradoxes by thinking complexly and behaving complexly, which should promote positive outcomes (e.g., followers’ performance) and mitigate negative ones (e.g., followers’ experienced tension). In three empirical studies I investigated constructive individual reactions in two regards: a) complex thinking to make sense of paradoxes, as characterized by differentiation and integration and as influenced by cultural factors, and b) complex behavior leaders exhibit to meet paradoxical demands (i.e., paradoxical leader behavior). Study 1 is an online experiment investigating whether individuals experience paradoxical task demands negatively. Results showed that individuals working on paradoxical task demands experience tension. They were able to reduce their experienced tension by thinking complexly about the paradoxical demands and, if they did so, they also reported less negative affect and less stress. Study 2 is a field study investigating whether paradoxical leader behavior is associated with lower negative experiences of followers. Results showed that this was the case, and the negative association was even stronger when followers made sense of paradoxical leader behavior by thinking complexly about it. Study 3 is a meta-analysis investigating how paradoxical leader behavior is related to a variety of follower outcomes. Results showed that paradoxical leader behavior is positively related to followers’ performance (i.e., task performance, organizational citizenship behavior, creative and innovative performance) and well-being (i.e., hedonic and eudaimonic well-being). A non-significant relationship to followers’ negative well-being was moderated by cultural influences on how complexly individuals think about paradoxes. Taken together, the findings support the central assumptions of paradox research that the positive and negative outcomes of organizational paradoxes depend on both the way followers think and the way leaders behave in response to paradoxes. Finally, I discuss theoretical implications, limitations, as well as practical implications, for example, how followers and leaders can treat paradoxes constructively in order to promote positive outcomes and mitigate negative ones.

• Dokumententyp: Dissertationen (Dissertation, LMU München)
• Keywords: Paradox, leadership, behavioral complexity, integrative complexity, meta-analysis
• Themengebiete: 100 Philosophie und Psychologie ; 100 Philosophie und Psychologie > 150 Psychologie
• Fakultäten: Fakultät für Psychologie und Pädagogik
• Sprache der Hochschulschrift: Englisch
• Datum der mündlichen Prüfung: 17. Oktober 2024
• 1. Bericht­erstatter:in: Brodbeck, Felix