Exploring Paradoxical Leadership in Firms: An Evidence from Pakistan.

Abstract

Despite of burgeoning attention the paradox theory of leadership has gained; our understanding of how paradoxical leaders deal with paradoxes remains limited. Research has increasingly labeled paradoxes and paradoxical behavior as a double-edged sword, yielding positive as well as negative outcomes, causing positive energy as well as draining leader’s mental capabilities, however, the research merely adds to the conundrum, enhancing ambiguity on how and when paradoxical leader’s mental capabilities are influenced. Moreover, burgeoning literature merely keeps stressing on positive side of paradoxical behavior, neglecting the potential downsides of paradoxical behavior. To these ends, the study purports to develop an understanding of how corporate leaders of telecom organizations exhibit paradoxical behavior according to situational requirements and the mechanisms they use to deal with organizational paradoxes. Also, the study aimed to explore how paradoxical leaders’ cognitive resources are influenced while dealing with paradoxes, how they self-regulate their resources, and the downsides associated with acting paradoxically. To achieve this, an interpretive phenomenological analysis, a qualitative approach, was used. Semi-structured interviews were conducted to collect the data from 38 corporate executives, heading innovation, research, and development departments of large-sized telecom organizations working in Pakistan. Interpretive phenomenological analysis framework, consisting of six steps, guided the data analysis. The key findings of the study unveiled three paradoxes that leaders experience. These paradoxes were embedded in leader behavior and emerged from followers, organization as well as external factors. It was found that leaders used multiple and multi-level mechanisms to deal with these paradoxical situations. Mechanisms leaders adopted were not only limited to his/her behavior but also vi consisted of strategies leaders implemented on followers and the whole organizational system. Findings revealed that leaders’ cognitive resources were being reinforced while dealing with paradoxes compared to the depletion. Leaders shared that personal, psychosocial, and organizational factors motivated them to regain energy and self-regulate their cognitive resources when depleted. In terms of the downsides of paradoxical behavior, leaders experienced job strain, disengagement, psychological distress, and unrealistic goal setting. The study offers several strong theoretical contributions to paradox theory, leadership literature, cognitive resource theory, and self-regulation models. First, the study contributes to the paradox theory of leadership by presenting the first-ever multi-level model depicting the role of multiple organizational actors in dealing with paradoxes. Second, study findings extend cognitive resource theory by affirming and deviating from its assumptions on how and in which situations leaders’ cognitive resources are reinforced and depleted. Third, our findings add to the self–regulation models by unveiling the personal and psychosocial factors that motivate leaders to regain energy and regulate their resources. Fourth, the study adds to paradox theory by identifying a set of common patterns paradoxical behavior causes. The study provides diverse and multi-level strategies unveiled in the study as a guide to those responsible for leadership development. Top management can benefit from study findings by exposing all organizational actors to stressful situations and engaging all those assuming multiple managerial levels to deal with paradoxes. Moreover, downsides the study unveiled caution top management to refrain from certain factors such as overburdening them to utilize leaders’ capabilities more productively. Study findings offer useful insights to the practitioners and top management to practice, implement, and enable a flexible and agile workplace to vii facilitate efficient management of paradoxes to find opportunities embedded in apparent tensions. This study’s inability to collect data from female leaders counts as one of the limitations of the study.