从一个自相矛盾的领导者身上受益还是受苦?自我调节视角

IF 4.5 2区 管理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT Human Relations Pub Date : 2023-10-05 DOI:10.1177/00187267231199644
Nils Fürstenberg, Jonathan E Booth, Kerstin Alfes
{"title":"从一个自相矛盾的领导者身上受益还是受苦?自我调节视角","authors":"Nils Fürstenberg, Jonathan E Booth, Kerstin Alfes","doi":"10.1177/00187267231199644","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Why do followers’ reactions to perceived paradoxical leader behavior (PLB) differ? To answer this question, we draw from self-regulation theory and argue that making sense of a paradoxical leader’s seemingly contradictory behavior can pose a challenge for followers and requires specific cognitive traits and abilities that enable them to navigate such complex and dynamic environments. We propose that followers who lack these cognitive traits and related abilities find it more difficult to make sense of and navigate their paradoxical leader’s behavior, thereby perceiving them as behaviorally unpredictable. This, in turn, impairs followers’ self-regulation when working with such leaders, and leads to lower well-being. Conversely, followers endowed with appropriate cognitive traits can make sense of PLB and thrive in these environments. To test our propositions, we conducted two multi-wave field studies. In Study 1, we examine the role of followers’ trait cognitive flexibility in interpreting PLB; whereas Study 2 explores the role of followers’ trait self-regulation. The findings from these studies support our hypotheses, with an important implication: the efficacy of PLB may not only solely depend on a leader’s ability to enact these behaviors but also on their followers’ ability to interpret and make sense of them.","PeriodicalId":48433,"journal":{"name":"Human Relations","volume":"200 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Benefitting or suffering from a paradoxical leader? A self-regulation perspective\",\"authors\":\"Nils Fürstenberg, Jonathan E Booth, Kerstin Alfes\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00187267231199644\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Why do followers’ reactions to perceived paradoxical leader behavior (PLB) differ? To answer this question, we draw from self-regulation theory and argue that making sense of a paradoxical leader’s seemingly contradictory behavior can pose a challenge for followers and requires specific cognitive traits and abilities that enable them to navigate such complex and dynamic environments. We propose that followers who lack these cognitive traits and related abilities find it more difficult to make sense of and navigate their paradoxical leader’s behavior, thereby perceiving them as behaviorally unpredictable. This, in turn, impairs followers’ self-regulation when working with such leaders, and leads to lower well-being. Conversely, followers endowed with appropriate cognitive traits can make sense of PLB and thrive in these environments. To test our propositions, we conducted two multi-wave field studies. In Study 1, we examine the role of followers’ trait cognitive flexibility in interpreting PLB; whereas Study 2 explores the role of followers’ trait self-regulation. The findings from these studies support our hypotheses, with an important implication: the efficacy of PLB may not only solely depend on a leader’s ability to enact these behaviors but also on their followers’ ability to interpret and make sense of them.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48433,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Human Relations\",\"volume\":\"200 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Human Relations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00187267231199644\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Relations","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00187267231199644","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

为什么跟随者对感知到的矛盾领导行为(PLB)的反应不同?为了回答这个问题,我们从自我调节理论中得出结论,认为要理解一个自相矛盾的领导者看似矛盾的行为,可能会给追随者带来挑战,需要特定的认知特征和能力,使他们能够驾驭如此复杂和动态的环境。我们认为,缺乏这些认知特征和相关能力的下属更难以理解和驾驭他们自相矛盾的领导者的行为,从而认为他们的行为是不可预测的。这反过来又削弱了下属在与这样的领导者共事时的自我调节能力,并导致幸福感下降。相反,被赋予适当认知特征的追随者可以理解PLB,并在这些环境中茁壮成长。为了验证我们的假设,我们进行了两次多波场研究。在研究1中,我们考察了追随者特质认知灵活性在解释公共行为中的作用;而研究2则探讨了追随者特质自我调节的作用。这些研究的结果支持了我们的假设,并提供了一个重要的启示:公共行为管理的有效性可能不仅取决于领导者制定这些行为的能力,还取决于其下属解释和理解这些行为的能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Benefitting or suffering from a paradoxical leader? A self-regulation perspective
Why do followers’ reactions to perceived paradoxical leader behavior (PLB) differ? To answer this question, we draw from self-regulation theory and argue that making sense of a paradoxical leader’s seemingly contradictory behavior can pose a challenge for followers and requires specific cognitive traits and abilities that enable them to navigate such complex and dynamic environments. We propose that followers who lack these cognitive traits and related abilities find it more difficult to make sense of and navigate their paradoxical leader’s behavior, thereby perceiving them as behaviorally unpredictable. This, in turn, impairs followers’ self-regulation when working with such leaders, and leads to lower well-being. Conversely, followers endowed with appropriate cognitive traits can make sense of PLB and thrive in these environments. To test our propositions, we conducted two multi-wave field studies. In Study 1, we examine the role of followers’ trait cognitive flexibility in interpreting PLB; whereas Study 2 explores the role of followers’ trait self-regulation. The findings from these studies support our hypotheses, with an important implication: the efficacy of PLB may not only solely depend on a leader’s ability to enact these behaviors but also on their followers’ ability to interpret and make sense of them.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Human Relations
Human Relations Multiple-
CiteScore
12.60
自引率
7.00%
发文量
82
期刊介绍: Human Relations is an international peer reviewed journal, which publishes the highest quality original research to advance our understanding of social relationships at and around work through theoretical development and empirical investigation. Scope Human Relations seeks high quality research papers that extend our knowledge of social relationships at work and organizational forms, practices and processes that affect the nature, structure and conditions of work and work organizations. Human Relations welcomes manuscripts that seek to cross disciplinary boundaries in order to develop new perspectives and insights into social relationships and relationships between people and organizations. Human Relations encourages strong empirical contributions that develop and extend theory as well as more conceptual papers that integrate, critique and expand existing theory. Human Relations welcomes critical reviews and essays: - Critical reviews advance a field through new theory, new methods, a novel synthesis of extant evidence, or a combination of two or three of these elements. Reviews that identify new research questions and that make links between management and organizations and the wider social sciences are particularly welcome. Surveys or overviews of a field are unlikely to meet these criteria. - Critical essays address contemporary scholarly issues and debates within the journal''s scope. They are more controversial than conventional papers or reviews, and can be shorter. They argue a point of view, but must meet standards of academic rigour. Anyone with an idea for a critical essay is particularly encouraged to discuss it at an early stage with the Editor-in-Chief. Human Relations encourages research that relates social theory to social practice and translates knowledge about human relations into prospects for social action and policy-making that aims to improve working lives.
期刊最新文献
Relations between reflexivity and institutional work: A case study in a public organisation Inspired to be transformational: The interplay between employee voice type and manager construal level Cultivating dispersed collectivity: How communities between organizations sustain employee activism The different ways of being true to self at work: A review of divergence among authenticity constructs Embodying wilfulness: Investigating the unequal power dynamics of informal organisational body work through the case of women in stand-up comedy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1