Introduction & Purpose: The interplay between paradoxical leadership, emotions, and regulatory strategies remains underexplored. This study examines paradoxical leadership situations and associated discrete emotions at both the individual and dyadic levels. Guided by Affective Events Theory (Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996) and the Cognitive-Affective-Behavioral-Trait (CAB-T) framework (Shao, 2024), the study emphasizes discrete emotions, their contextual triggers, and emotion regulation strategies beyond broad positive/negative affect measures. Paradoxical leadership—balancing contradictory yet interdependent demands - has been studied primarily in terms of cognition, while emotional processes remain understudied. This research addresses that gap by analyzing emotions across phases of paradoxical leadership situations and resolving strategies as well as highlighting followers' emotions and perceptions.
Method: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 15 leaders and 15 matched followers, using the Critical Incident Technique to explore paradoxical leadership situations. Data were analyzed through deductive-inductive content analysis, allowing for category expansion to strengthen the study's theoretical contribution.
Results: Preliminary findings highlight anxiety as the predominant leader-emotion. Compared with labeled "easy" paradoxical situations, anxiety peaks later, intensifies over a longer period of time and reaches higher levels in "difficult" situations. In addition a broader range of emotions characterize difficult paradoxical situations. Resolving mechanisms include optimism, perspective-taking, and emotion-regulation-strategies. Followers primarily reported joy when leadership was perceived as effective. When leadership was ineffective, followers reported anxiety, anger, and sadness. Notably, followers rarely recognized leader emotions.
Contributions: The findings advance understanding of emotional processes in paradoxical leadership by incorporating both leader and follower perspectives. They highlight factors shaping the success or failure of paradox management, guide future research directions, and provide practical insights for supporting leaders and followers in such contexts.