8078 
6894悖论式领导是指领导者采用看似竞争却相互关联的领导行为，旨在同时满足工作中的竞争性需求。这种新型的领导行为是基于中国传统阴阳哲学理论提出的，它突破了权变视角下“二选一”（either-or）的局限性，转向“二者皆”（both-and），通过悖论思维发挥整合矛盾的协同效应。悖论式领导研究已取得了一些进展，但是缺少关于该主题的系统综述。本文通过介绍其概念起源、内涵和测量，进而梳理其前因、结果变量及其作用机制，对已有研究进行了系统的梳理和述评，构建了悖论式领导研究的整体框架并指出未来研究的方向。本文发现，已有研究大多聚焦于探讨东方情境下悖论式领导的作用效果，对其成因以及西方情境下的作用效果关注不足，且存在不一致的研究结论。因此，从概念和测量的完善、悖论思想对已有领导研究的拓展与整合、对悖论领导内在形成机制的挖掘、加强悖论式领导的西方情境及跨文化比较研究、进一步完善和丰富相关研究设计等方面对未来研究进行了展望。本文为深化东西方情境下悖论式领导的研究和实践提供了重要参考。
悖论式领导：研究述评与展望
摘要
参考文献
1 付正茂. 悖论式领导对双元创新能力的影响: 知识共享的中介作用[J]. 兰州财经大学学报,2017, (1): 11-20. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1004-5465.2017.01.002
4 刘善堂, 刘洪. 复杂环境中悖论式领导的应对能力研究[J]. 现代管理科学,2015, (10): 13-15. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1007-368X.2015.10.004
6 罗瑾琏, 花常花, 钟竞. 悖论式领导对知识团队创新的影响及作用机制研究[J]. 科技进步与对策,2015, (11): 121-125. DOI:10.6049/kjjbydc.2015010325
7 罗瑾琏, 赵莉, 韩杨, 等. 双元领导研究进展述评[J]. 管理学报,2016, (12): 1882-1889. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1672-884x.2016.12.018
8 庞大龙, 徐立国, 席酉民. 悖论管理的思想溯源、特征启示与未来前景[J]. 管理学报,2017, (2): 168-175. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1672-884x.2017.02.002
11 苏勇, 雷霆. 悖论式领导对员工创造力的影响: 基于工作激情的中介作用[J]. 技术经济,2018, (9): 10-17. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1002-980X.2018.09.002
16 Balkundi P, Harrison D A. Ties, leaders, and time in teams: Strong inference about network structure’s effects on team viability and performance[J]. Academy of Management Journal,2006, 49(1): 49-68. DOI:10.5465/amj.2006.20785500
17 Berson Y, Waldman D A, Pearce C L. Enhancing our understanding of vision in organizations: Toward an integration of leader and follower processes[J]. Organizational Psychology Review,2016, 6(2): 171-191. DOI:10.1177/2041386615583736
18 Fairhurst G T, Putnam L L. An integrative methodology for organizational oppositions: Aligning grounded theory and discourse analysis[J]. Organizational Research Methods,2019, 22(4): 917-940. DOI:10.1177/1094428118776771
19 Griffin M A, Neal A, Parker S K. A new model of work role performance: Positive behavior in uncertain and interdependent contexts[J]. Academy of Management Journal,2007, 50(2): 327-347. DOI:10.5465/amj.2007.24634438
20 Hiller N J, Sin H P, Ponnapalli A R, et al. Benevolence and authority as WEIRDly unfamiliar: A multi-language meta-analysis of paternalistic leadership behaviors from 152 studies[J]. The Leadership Quarterly,2019, 30(1): 165-184. DOI:10.1016/j.leaqua.2018.11.003
22 Kaiser R B, Craig S B. Building a better mouse Trap: Item characteristics associated with rating discrepancies in 360-degree feedback[J]. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research,2005, 57(4): 235-245. DOI:10.1037/1065-9293.57.4.235
23 Kauppila O P, Tempelaar M P. The social-cognitive underpinnings of employees’ ambidextrous behaviour and the supportive role of group managers’ leadership[J]. Journal of Management Studies,2016, 53(6): 1019-1044. DOI:10.1111/joms.12192
24 Lee A, Willis S, Tian A W. Empowering leadership: A meta-analytic examination of incremental contribution, mediation, and moderation[J]. Journal of Organizational Behavior,2018, 39(3): 306-325. DOI:10.1002/job.2220
25 Lewis M W. Exploring paradox: Toward a more comprehensive guide[J]. Academy of Management Review,2000, 25(4): 760-776. DOI:10.5465/amr.2000.3707712
26 Lewis M W, Andriopoulos C, Smith W K. Paradoxical leadership to enable strategic agility[J]. California Management Review,2014, 56(3): 58-77. DOI:10.1525/cmr.2014.56.3.58
27 Li Q, She Z L, Yang B Y. Promoting innovative performance in multidisciplinary teams: The roles of paradoxical leadership and team perspective taking[J]. Frontiers in Psychology,2018, 9: 1083. DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01083
28 Mammassis C S, Schmid P C. The role of power asymmetry and paradoxical leadership in software development team agility[A]. Sund K, Galavan R, Brusoni S. Cognition and Innovation[M]. UK: Emerald Publishing Limited, 2018.
29 Meißner M, Oll J. The promise of eye-tracking methodology in organizational research: A taxonomy, review, and future avenues[J]. Organizational Research Methods,2019, 22(2): 590-617. DOI:10.1177/1094428117744882
30 Ng T W H, Feldman D C. Employee voice behavior: A meta-analytic test of the conservation of resources framework[J]. Journal of Organizational Behavior,2012, 33(2): 216-234. DOI:10.1002/job.754
31 Parker S K, Bindl U K, Strauss K. Making things happen: A model of proactive motivation[J]. Journal of Management,2010, 36(4): 827-856. DOI:10.1177/0149206310363732
32 Patel P C, Messersmith J G, Lepak D P. Walking the tightrope: An assessment of the relationship between high-performance work systems and organizational ambidexterity[J]. Academy of Management Journal,2013, 56(5): 1420-1442. DOI:10.5465/amj.2011.0255
33 Pearce C L, Wassenaar C L, Berson Y, et al. Toward a theory of meta-paradoxical leadership[J]. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,2019, 155: 31-41. DOI:10.1016/j.obhdp.2019.03.003
34 Putnam L L, Fairhurst G T, Banghart S. Contradictions, dialectics, and paradoxes in organizations: A constitutive approach[J]. The Academy of Management Annals,2016, 10(1): 65-171. DOI:10.5465/19416520.2016.1162421
35 Rosing K, Frese M, Bausch A. Explaining the heterogeneity of the leadership-innovation relationship: Ambidextrous leadership[J]. The Leadership Quarterly,2011, 22(5): 956-974. DOI:10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.07.014
36 Schad J, Lewis M W, Raisch S, et al. Paradox research in management science: Looking back to move forward[J]. Academy of Management Annals,2016, 10(1): 5-64. DOI:10.5465/19416520.2016.1162422
37 Shao Y, Nijstad B A, Täuber S. Creativity under workload pressure and integrative complexity: The double-edged sword of paradoxical leadership[J]. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,2019, 155: 7-19. DOI:10.1016/j.obhdp.2019.01.008
38 Shin S J, Zhou J. When is educational specialization heterogeneity related to creativity in research and development teams? Transformational leadership as a moderator[J]. Journal of Applied Psychology,2007, 92(6): 1709-1721. DOI:10.1037/0021-9010.92.6.1709
39 Slawinski N, Bansal P. Short on time: Intertemporal tensions in business sustainability[J]. Organization Science,2015, 26(2): 531-549. DOI:10.1287/orsc.2014.0960
41 Smith W K. Dynamic decision making: A model of senior leaders managing strategic paradoxes[J]. Academy of Management Journal,2014, 57(6): 1592-1623. DOI:10.5465/amj.2011.0932
43 Vallerand R J, Paquet Y, Philippe F L, et al. On the role of passion for work in burnout: A process model[J]. Journal of Personality,2010, 78(1): 289-312. DOI:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2009.00616.x
44 Waldman D A, Bowen D E. Learning to be a paradox-savvy leader[J]. Academy of Management Perspectives,2016, 30(3): 316-327. DOI:10.5465/amp.2015.0070
45 Waldman D A, Putnam L L, Miron-Spektor E, et al. The role of paradox theory in decision making and management research[J]. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,2019, 155: 1-6. DOI:10.1016/j.obhdp.2019.04.006
46 Yang Y, Li Z Q, Liang L, et al. Why and when paradoxical leader behavior impact employee creativity: Thriving at work and psychological safety[J]. Current Psychology,2019. DOI:10.1007/s12144-018-0095-1
47 Zhang H Y, Ou A Y, Tsui A S, et al. CEO humility, narcissism and firm innovation: A paradox perspective on CEO traits[J]. The Leadership Quarterly,2017, 28(5): 585-604. DOI:10.1016/j.leaqua.2017.01.003
48 Zhang Y, Han Y L. Paradoxical leader behavior in long-term corporate development: Antecedents and consequences[J]. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,2019, 155: 42-54. DOI:10.1016/j.obhdp.2019.03.007
49 Zhang Y, Waldman D A, Han Y L, et al. Paradoxical leader behaviors in people management: Antecedents and consequences[J]. Academy of Management Journal,2015, 58(2): 538-566. DOI:10.5465/amj.2012.0995
引用本文
谭乐, 蒿坡, 杨晓, 等. 悖论式领导：研究述评与展望[J]. 外国经济与管理, 2020, 42(4): 63-79.
导出参考文献，格式为：
