A Review of Paradoxical Leadership Behavior: Definition, Measurement, Antecedent and Effect

Qirui Huang

doi:10.54254/2754-1169/2025.LD29912

Advances in Economics, Management and Political SciencesOpen access

A Review of Paradoxical Leadership Behavior: Definition, Measurement, Antecedent and Effect

Research Article

Open Access

A Review of Paradoxical Leadership Behavior: Definition, Measurement, Antecedent and Effect

Qirui Huang ^1*

¹ University of Newcastle (Singapore)

^*Corresponding author: hqr257014@gmail.com

Published on 26 November 2025

AEMPS Vol.244

ISSN (Print): 2754-1177

ISSN (Online): 2754-1169

ISBN (Print): 978-1-80590-563-9

ISBN (Online): 978-1-80590-564-6

Download Cover

Abstract

As the organizational environment becomes increasingly complex, leaders often need to deal with paradoxical demands in their management practices. Paradoxical leadership behavior (PLB) is a new type of leadership behavior that aims to enhance leadership effectiveness by simultaneously resolving and integrating the paradoxical demands of the organization and its employees. This study conducted a systematic review and synthesis of the relevant research on PLB. First, this study reviewed the definition and measurement scales of PLB. Second, this study has systematically reviewed the main theoretical perspectives of the PLB research. Furthermore, this study has reviewed the research results on the antecedents and the impacts of PLB. The research on the impacts of PLB covers the impacts at the individual, team and organizational levels. Finally, this study has proposed the future directions for the PLB research, such as further exploring its antecedent variables, investigating the impacts of PLB at the team and organizational levels, and exploring its influence on leaders themselves.

Keywords:

Paradoxical leadership behavior, Paradox theory, Employee creativity, Performance

View PDF

References

[1]. Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. (2011). Toward a theory of paradox: A dynamic equilibrium model of organizing. Academy of Management Review, 36(2), 381-403. https: //doi.org/10.5465/amr.2009.0223

[2]. Zhang, Y., Zhang, Y., Law, K. S., & Zhou, J. (2022). Paradoxical leadership, subjective ambivalence, and employee creativity: Effects of employee holistic thinking. Journal of Management Studies, 59(3), 695-723. https: //doi.org/10.1111/joms.12792

[3]. Zhang, Y., Waldman, D. A., Han, Y.-L., & Li, X.-B. (2015). Paradoxical leader behaviors in people management: Antecedents and consequences. Academy of Management Journal, 58(2), 538-566. https: //doi.org/10.5465/amj.2012.0995

[4]. Ishaq, E., Bashir, S., & Khan, A. K. (2021). Paradoxical leader behaviors: Leader personality and follower outcomes. Applied Psychology, 70(1), 342-357. https: //doi.org/10.1111/apps.12233

[5]. Yang, N., Chen, H., & Wang, X.-H. (2024). Paradoxical leadership behavior and employee creative deviance: The role of paradox mindset and leader-member exchange. Journal of Business and Psychology, 39, 697-713. https: //doi.org/10.1007/s10869-023-09902-x

[6]. Kamil, N. L. M., Zhao, K., Nordin, W. N. A. W. M., & Idris, M. A. (2025). Leading with paradox: Promoting self-leadership and positive work behaviours through leader-member exchange. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 98(1), e70013. https: //doi.org/10.1111/joop.70013

[7]. Wei, W., Zhou, Y., & Wang, D. (2023). Learning to integrate conflicts: Paradoxical leadership fosters team innovation. Journal of Business Research, 165, 114076. https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.114076

[8]. Wei, W., Zhou, Y., & Wang, D. (2023). Learning to integrate conflicts: Paradoxical leadership fosters team innovation. Journal of Business Research, 165, 114076. https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.114076

[9]. Fürstenberg, N., Alfes, K., & Kearney, E. (2021). How and when paradoxical leadership benefits work engagement: The role of goal clarity and work autonomy. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 94(3), 672-705. https: //doi.org/10.1111/joop.12344

[10]. Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory (Vol. 1). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

[11]. Gardner, D. G., Huang, G. H., Niu, X., Pierce, J. L., & Lee, C. (2015). Organization-based sel-esteem, psychological contract fulfillment, and perceived employment opportunities: A test of self-regulatory theory. Human Resource Management, 54(6), 933-953. https: //doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21648

[12]. Chen, S., Zhang, Y., Liang, L., & Shen, T. (2021). Does paradoxical leadership facilitate leaders’ task performance? A perspective of self-regulation theory. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(7), 3505. https: //doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18073505

[13]. Fürstenberg, N., Booth, J. E., & Alfes, K. (2024). Benefitting or suffering from a paradoxical leader? A self-regulation perspective. Human Relations, 77(10), 1502-1533. https: //doi.org/10.1177/00187267231199644

[14]. Zhang, Y., & Liu, S.-M. (2022). Balancing employees’ extrinsic requirements and intrinsic motivation: A paradoxical leader behaviour perspective. European Management Journal, 40(1), 127-136. https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2021.11.008

[15]. Zhang, M. J., Zhang, Y., & Law, K. S. (2022). Paradoxical leadership and innovation in work teams: The multilevel mediating role of ambidexterity and leader vision as a boundary condition. Academy of Management Journal, 65(5), 1652-1679. https: //doi.org/10.5465/amj.2017.1265

[16]. Zhang, Y., & Han, Y.-L. (2019). Paradoxical leader behavior in long-term corporate development: Antecedents and consequences. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 155, 42-54. https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2019.03.007

References

[1]. Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. (2011). Toward a theory of paradox: A dynamic equilibrium model of organizing. Academy of Management Review, 36(2), 381-403. https: //doi.org/10.5465/amr.2009.0223

[4]. Ishaq, E., Bashir, S., & Khan, A. K. (2021). Paradoxical leader behaviors: Leader personality and follower outcomes. Applied Psychology, 70(1), 342-357. https: //doi.org/10.1111/apps.12233

[10]. Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory (Vol. 1). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Cite this article

Huang,Q. (2025). A Review of Paradoxical Leadership Behavior: Definition, Measurement, Antecedent and Effect. Advances in Economics, Management and Political Sciences,244,38-44.

Data availability

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study will be available from the authors upon reasonable request.

About volume

Volume title: Proceedings of ICFTBA 2025 Symposium: Strategic Human Capital Management in the Era of AI

ISBN: 978-1-80590-563-9(Print) / 978-1-80590-564-6(Online)

Editor: Lukáš Vartiak, Anil Nguyen

Conference website: https://www.icftba.org/London.html

Conference date: 4 November 2025

Series: Advances in Economics, Management and Political Sciences

Volume number: Vol.244

ISSN: 2754-1169(Print) / 2754-1177(Online)

© 2024 by the author(s). Licensee EWA Publishing, Oxford, UK. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license. Authors who publish this series agree to the following terms:

1. Authors retain copyright and grant the series right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this series.

2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the series's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this series.

3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See Open access policy for details).