双元、悖论式领导对绩效的影响

尹奎; 支前闯; 代向阳; 李培凯

PDF(468 KB)

科研管理 ›› 2022, Vol. 43 ›› Issue (8) : 165-173.

论文

双元、悖论式领导对绩效的影响

尹奎¹,支前闯¹,代向阳²,李培凯³钱婧⁴

作者信息 +

The effects of ambidextrous leadership and paradoxical leadership on performance

Yin Kui¹, Zhi Qianchuang¹, Dai Xiangyang², Li Peikai³, Qian Jing⁴#br#

Author information +

文章历史 +

摘要

组织发展面临的张力越来越普遍，双元领导、悖论式领导日益引起理论界关注。然而双元领导、悖论式领导与创新绩效、任务绩效之间的关系如何？两种领导行为对两种绩效的影响是否存在差异？两种领导行为对创新绩效的影响是否会受到领导者层级的影响？上述问题亟待解答。对50项研究共13 232个样本进行元分析，分析结果发现：双元领导、悖论式领导分别对创新绩效、任务绩效有正向影响；双元领导、悖论式领导对创新绩效、任务绩效的影响不存在显著差异；双元领导、悖论式领导对创新绩效的影响不受领导者层级的调节作用。研究证实了两种相近领导行为影响不存在差异，为未来研究中的变量选择提供了依据，对实践中不同层级领导力开发提供了启示。

Abstract

Under the volatile, uncertainty, complex and ambiguous (VUCA) environment, organizations are facing paradoxical demands to achieve fast and steady growth. To achieve the above goals, organizational leaders play crucial roles in setting and leading the paradoxical goals. Earlier studies have mainly focused on one particular type of leadership in setting organizational goals (e.g., empowering leadership; authoritarian leadership) that may restrict the paradoxical organizational goals as they put more focus on one single aspect. Hence, leadership that can satisfy different even paradoxical organizational goals gained more research and practical attention.
To achieve the paradoxical demands, two newly developed leadership behaviors have gained much attention: ambidextrous leadership and paradoxical leadership. Ambidextrous leadership is defined as leaders who adjust their leadership behaviors to adopt two contradictory leadership behaviors based on the situations. Paradoxical leadership, however, is mostly studied in the Chinese context, which is rooted in the Yin-Yang philosophy. Paradoxical leadership is mostly shown as leaders taking two contradictory leadership behaviors to satisfy the paradoxical work goals. Although the root of ambidextrous and paradoxical leadership is different, both revealed that leaders should adopt their leadership behaviors even two contradictory leadership behaviors to satisfy the organizational competing goals.
Studies on ambidextrous and paradoxical leadership have consistently shown that both leadership behaviors can have positive relationships with innovation and task performance. However, there remains three main questions to be answered: first, research have shown different findings about the effect of ambidextrous and paradoxical leadership on task performance. For instance, studies on the relationship between ambidextrous leadership and task performance has ranged from negative to positive, and the relationship between paradoxical leadership and task performance has ranged from nonsignificant to significant. Second, since both ambidextrous and paradoxical leadership share similarities in their definition, understanding about which leadership style is more powerful in predicting employee performance is unknown. Third, it is also unknown about the role of leaders′ hierarchical level in affecting the effectiveness of ambidextrous and paradoxical leadership. For instance, prior studies have suggested that middle level managers′ paradoxical leadership are more likely to achieve effectiveness; and the effectiveness of ambidextrous leadership will also vary across different levels. Based on the above questions, we conducted our study with meta-analysis approach.
Different with the single-sample quantitative study, meta-analysis approach has several advantages. First, meta-analysis can resolve research dispute by integrating different research findings. With a large sample size, it can achieve more accurate estimation. Second, meta-analysis can also achieve sub-group analysis to show the different impact of ambidextrous and paradoxical leadership. Third, meta-analysis can also identify the conditional factors. As such, it can answer our third question about how leaders′ hierarchical level may affect their leadership effectiveness.
Before conducting meta-analysis, we firstly searched the database (i.e., CNKI, Web of Science, and ProQuest) on ambidextrous leadership and paradoxical leadership. We restricted the timeline to May, 2021. This led to a total of 249 papers. Second, we screened the literature and only included studies that meet our standards. For instance, we excluded conference paper and dissertation and excluded papers that did not report the correlations between leadership and performance outcomes. This led to 43 papers that satisfying all our requirements. Based on the 43 papers, we conducted our meta-analysis. Before coding the data, we trained all the coders about how to code the data to reduce misunderstandings and bias. According to the 43 papers, we got 50 samples with a total sample size of 13232. Applying R software, we found that: first, both ambidextrous leadership and paradoxical leadership had positive relationships with innovation and task performance. Second, subgroup comparison analysis results revealed the relationship between ambidextrous leadership and innovation performance was not significantly different from that between paradoxical leadership on innovation performance; and the relationship between paradoxical leadership and task performance was not significantly different from that between ambidextrous leadership and task performance. Third, subgroup analysis also showed that there was no moderating effect of leaders′ hierarchical level on the above relationships.
Our study has the following theoretical implications: First, through meta-analysis, it revealed the "real" effect of ambidextrous and paradoxical leadership on innovation and task performance, which could resolve the puzzle about the different impact of these two leaderships on the innovation and task performance outcomes. Second, through the comparative analysis between ambidextrous and paradoxical leadership and their outcomes, it could show the unique role of paradoxical leadership, which can offer further evidence on the studies about paradoxical leadership. Third, by focusing on the conditional factors in affecting the effectiveness of ambidextrous and paradoxical leadership, it offered insights for future studies to explore when and why these two leadership behaviors can have different impacts. Overall, our study contributed to the ambidextrous and paradoxical leadership studies by offering an integrated picture, which can also offer insights for future studies on these two leadership behaviors.

导出引用

尹奎支前闯代向阳李培凯钱婧. 双元、悖论式领导对绩效的影响[J]. 科研管理. 2022, 43(8): 165-173

Yin Kui, Zhi Qianchuang, Dai Xiangyang, Li Peikai, Qian Jing. The effects of ambidextrous leadership and paradoxical leadership on performance[J]. Science Research Management. 2022, 43(8): 165-173

参考文献

[1]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.
[2]TUAN L T. Reform in public organizations: The roles of ambidextrous leadership and moderating mechanisms[J]. Public Management Review, 2017, 19(3-4):1-24.
[3]MUELLER J, RENZL B, WILL M G, et al. Ambidextrous leadership: A meta-review applying static and dynamic multi-level perspectives[J]. Review of Managerial Science, 2020, 14(1):37-59.
[4]ZACHER H, KATHRIN R. Ambidextrous leadership and team innovation[J]. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 2015, 36(1):54-68.
[5]苏勇, 雷霆. 双元领导研究述评与未来研究展望[J]. 管理现代化, 2018, 38(04):109-112.
SU Yong, LEI Ting. Review and future prospects of dual leadership research[J]. Modernization of Management, 2018, 38(04):109-112.
[6]LEVINTHAL D A, MARCH J G. The myopia of learning[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 1993, 14: 95–112.
[7]DUNCAN R B. The ambidextrous organization: Designing dual structures for innovation. In: Kilmann RH, Pondy LR, Slevin D (eds) The management of organization design: strategies and implementation, edn. Elsevier, New York, 1976, 167–188
[8]ROSING K, FRESE M, BAUSCH A. Explaining the heterogeneity of the leadership-innovation relationship: Ambidextrous leadership[J]. Leadership Quarterly, 2011, 22(5):956-974.
[9]WANG S, EVA N, NEWMAN A, et al. A double-edged sword: The effects of ambidextrous leadership on follower innovative behaviors[J].?Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-020-09714-0.
[10]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(04):63-79.
TAN Le, SONG Po, YANG Xiao, et al. Paradoxical leadership: A literature review and prospects[J]. Foreign Economics & Management, 2020, 42(04):63-79.
[11]王朝晖. 悖论式领导如何让员工两全其美?——心理安全感和工作繁荣感的多重中介作用[J]. 外国经济与管理, 2018, 40(03): 107-120.
WANG Chaohui. How does paradoxical leadership enhance individual ambidexterity? —— The composite multiple mediating role of psychological safety and thriving at work[J]. Foreign Economics & Management, 2018, 40(03): 107-120.
[12]郑姗姗. 双元能力形成前因及其绩效结果的实证研究[D]. 中国科学技术大学, 2014.
ZHENG Shanshan. Empirical research on influence factor of organizational ambidexterity and its effects on performance: A leadership-based view[D]. University of Science and Technology of China, 2014.
[13]胡文安, 罗瑾琏, 钟竞. 双元创新搜索视角下组织创新绩效的提升路径研究:领导行为的触发作用[J]. 科学学与科学技术管理, 2017, 38(04):60-72.
HU Wenan, LUO Jinlian, ZHONG Jing. Research on the effect of ambidextrous leadership behaviors on organization innovation performance: Based on the perspective of ambidextrous innovative search[J]. Science of Science and Management of Science & Technology, 2017, 38(04):60-72.
[14]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.
[15]KASSOTAKI O. Ambidextrous leadership in high technology organizations[J]. Organizational Dynamics, 2018, 48(2), 37-43.
[16]BANKS G C, ENGEMANN K N, WILLIAMS C E, et al. A meta-analytic review and future research agenda of charismatic leadership[J]. The Leadership Quarterly, 2017, 28(4):508-529.
[17]ANTONAKIS J, SIMONTON D K, HOUSE R J. Can super smart leaders suffer from too much of a good thing? The curvilinear effect of intelligence on perceived leadership behavior[J]. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2017, 102(7):1003-1021.
[18]BASS B M, AVOLIO B J, DONG I J, et al. Predicting unit performance by assessing transformational and transactional leadership[J]. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2003, 88(2):207-218.
[19]罗瑾琏, 赵莉, 韩杨,等. 双元领导研究进展述评[J]. 管理学报, 2016, 13(12):1882-1889.
LUO Jinlian, ZHAO Li, HAN Yang, et al. Overview and prospect on research of ambidextrous leadership[J]. Chinese Journal of Management, 2016, 13(12):1882-1889.
[20]汪章. 双元领导对新生代知识型员工创新行为的影响研究——工作繁荣和LMX的中介作用[D]. 安徽大学, 2020.
WANG Zhang. Research on the impact of ambidextrous leadership on the innovation behavior of the new generation of knowledge workers —— The mediating role of work prosperity and LMX[D]. Anhui University, 2020.
[21]LUU T, LE V, MASLI E, et al. Corporate social responsibility, ambidextrous leadership, and service excellence[J]. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 2019, 37(5):580-594.
[22]郭萌. 何以激发越轨创新——双元领导与责任知觉的作用[J]. 科技进步与对策, 2020, 37(09):55-60.
GUO Meng. How to enhance bootlegging —— The effect of ambidextrous leadership and felt obligation[J]. Science & Technology Progress and Policy, 2020, 37(09):55-60.
[23]YU T W, TUNG F C. Does innovation leadership enhance creativity in high-tech industries?[J]. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 2016, 37(5):579-592.
[24]WEST M A. Sparkling fountains or stagnant ponds: An integrative model of creativity and innovation implementation in work groups[J]. Applied Psychology,?2002, 51(3):355-424.
[25]罗瑾琏, 胡文安, 钟竞. 双元领导对新员工社会化适应与创新的双路径影响研究[J]. 科学学与科学技术管理, 2016, 37(12):161-173.
LUO Jinlian, HU Wenan, ZHONG Jing. The dual path influence mechanism of ambidextrous leadership on newcomer socialization and innovative behavior[J]. Science of Science and Management of Science & Technology, 2016, 37(12):161-173.
[26]LUU T T. Ambidextrous leadership, entrepreneurial orientation, and operational performance: Organizational social capital as a moderator[J]. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 2017, 38(2):229-253.
[27]赵莉, 罗瑾琏, 钟竞,等. 双元领导对团队创造力影响机制研究:基于团队互动的视角[J]. 科学学与科学技术管理, 2017,38(12):148-160.
ZHAO Li, LUO Jinlian, ZHONG Jing, et al. Research of the influence mechanism of ambidextrous leadership on team creativity: Based on team interactive perspective[J]. Science of Science and Management of Science & Technology, 2017,38(12):148-160.
[28]罗瑾琏, 管建世, 钟竞,等. 基于团队双元行为中介作用的双元领导与团队创新绩效关系研究[J]. 管理学报, 2017, 14(06):814-822.
LUO Jinlian, GUAN Jianshi, ZHONG Jing, et al. The impact of ambidextrous leadership behavior on innovation performance: Mediating role of team ambidextrous behavior[J]. Chinese Journal of Management, 2017, 14(06):814-822.
[29]罗瑾琏, 胡文安, 钟竞. 悖论式领导、团队活力对团队创新的影响机制研究[J]. 管理评论, 2017,29(07):122-134.
LUO Jinlian, HU Wenan, ZHONG Jing. The mechanism of paradoxical leadership and team viability on team innovation: An integrated model in the Chinese context[J]. Management Review, 2017,29(07):122-134.
[30]管建世,罗瑾琏,钟竞. 动态环境下双元领导对团队创造力影响研究——基于团队目标取向视角[J]. 科学学与科学技术管理, 2016,37(08):159-169.
GUAN Jianshi, LUO Jinlian, ZHONG Jing. The effects of ambidextrous leadership behavior and team creativity in dynamic environments: Based on perspective of team goal orientations[J]. Science of Science and Management of Science & Technology, 2016, 37(08):159-169.
[31]韩杨, 罗瑾琏, 钟竞. 双元领导对团队创新绩效影响研究——基于惯例视角[J]. 管理科学, 2016, 29(01):70-85.
HAN Yang, LUO Jinlian, ZHONG Jing. The research on the effects of ambidextrous leadership on team innovation performance: From the perspective of routine practice[J]. Journal of Management Science, 2016, 29(01):70-85.
[32]LUO B, ZHENG S, JI H, et al. Ambidextrous leadership and TMT-member ambidextrous behavior: The role of TMT behavioral integration and TMT risk propensity[J]. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 2018,29(2):338-359.
[33]SHAO Y, NIJSTAD B A, T?UBER 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.
[34]彭伟, 马越. 悖论式领导对团队创造力的影响机制——社会网络理论视角[J]. 科技进步与对策, 2018, 35(22):145-152.
PENG Wei, MA Yue. The influence mechanism of paradoxical leadership on team creativity: An empirical study from the perspective of social network[J]. Science & Technology Progress and Policy, 2018, 35(22):145-152.
[35]DYNE L V, LEPINE J A. Helping and voice extra-role behaviors: Evidence of construct and predictive validity[J]. The Academy of Management Journal, 1998, 41(1):108-119.
[36]王圣慧, 易明, 罗瑾琏. 双元领导对建言行为的影响:内部动机与外部动机的作用[J]. 科学学与科学技术管理, 2019, 40(07):136-150.
WANG Shenghui, YI Ming, LUO Jinlian. The effect of ambidextrous leadership on voice behavior: The role of intrinsic and extrinsic motivations[J]. Science of Science and Management of Science & Technology, 2019, 40(07):136-150.
[37]侯楠, 彭坚. 恩威并施,积极执行与工作绩效——探索中国情境下双元领导的有效性[J]. 心理学报, 2019, 51(01):117-127.
HOU Nan, PENG Jian. Authoritarian-benevolent leadership, active implementation and job performance: An investigation on effectiveness of ambidextrous leadership in the Chinese context[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2019, 51(01):117-127.
[38]韩紫蕾. 双元领导对员工创新绩效的影响机理研究[D].南京邮电大学,2020.
HAN Zilei. Study on the influence mechanism of ambidextrous leadership on employee’s innovation performance[D]. Nanjing University of Posts and Telecommunications, 2020.
[39]李树文, 罗瑾琏, 梁阜. 与"亲近"的人畅所欲言:双元领导对员工建言的影响路径与边界[J]. 外国经济与管理, 2020, 42(06):99-110.
LI Shuwen, LUO Jinlian, LIANG Fu. Speaking your mind freely to insiders: The influencing path and boundary of ambidextrous leadership on employee voice[J]. Foreign Economics & Management, 2020, 42(06):99-110.
[40]李仲秋. 动机视角下悖论式领导行为对员工创造力的影响研究[D].哈尔滨工业大学,2020.
LI Zhongqiu. An empirical research on the relationship of paradoxical leader behavior on employee creativity from the perspective of motivation[D]. Harbin Institute of Technology, 2020.
[41]SHE Z, LI Q, YANG B, et al. Paradoxical leadership and hospitality employees' service performance: The role of leader identification and need for cognitive closure[J]. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 2020, 89:102524.
[42]褚昊,黄宁宁. 悖论式领导对员工工作绩效的影响:二元工作激情和角色认同的作用[J]. 财经理论与实践, 2020, 41(06):133-140.
CHU Hao, HUANG Ningning. Research on the impact of paradoxical leadership on employee performance: The effect of dualistic working passion and role identification[J]. The Theory and Practice of Finance and Economics, 2020, 41(06):133-140.
[43]杨柳. 悖论型领导对员工工作投入的影响:有调节的中介模型[J]. 心理科学, 2019, 42(03):646-652.
YANG Liu. The effect of paradoxical leadership on employee engagement: A moderated-mediating model[J]. Journal of Psychological Science, 2019, 42(03):646-652.
[44]FüRSTENBERG N, ALFES K, KEARNEY E. How and when paradoxical leadership benefits work engagement: The role of goal clarity and work autonomy[J]. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12344.
[45]罗瑾琏, 易明, 钟竞. 双元领导对亲社会性沉默的影响[J]. 管理科学, 2018, 31(02):105-119.
LUO Jinlian, YI Ming, ZHONG Jing. Effects of ambidextrous leadership on prosocial silence[J]. Journal of Management Science, 2018, 31(02):105-119.
[46]宋端雅, 李金生. 领导风格演进、环境动态性与团队创新绩效——从单元到双元视角[J]. 企业经济, 2018, 37(05):95-100.
SONG Duanya, LI Jinsheng. Leadership style evolution, environmental dynamics and team innovation performance —— from unit to dual perspective[J]. Enterprise Economy, 2018, 37(05):95-100.
[47]赵红丹, 郭利敏. 组织中的双面娇娃:双元领导的概念结构与作用机制[J]. 中国人力资源开发, 2017(04):55-65.
ZHAO Hongdan, GUO Limin. The best of both worlds: The conceptual structure and influencing mechanisms of ambidextrous leadership[J]. Human Resources Development of China, 2017(04):55-65.
[48]PEARCE C L, WASSENAAR C L, BERSON Y, et al. Toward a theory of meta-paradoxical leadership[J]. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 2019,115:31-41.
[49]YAMMARINO F J, DIONNE S D, CHUN J U, et al. Leadership and levels of analysis: A state-of-the-science review[J]. Leadership Quarterly, 2005, 16(6):879-919.
[50]陈建勋,杨正沛,傅升. 低成本与差异化竞争优势的融合——二元领导行为的启示与证据[J]. 研究与发展管理，2009,21(05):57-64.
CHEN Jianxun, YANG Zhengpei, FU Sheng. Amalgamation of competitive advantages of low cost and differenentiation —— Insight and evidence from dual leadership behavior[J]. Research & Development Management, 2009, 21(05):57-64.
[51]TUNG F C. Does transformational, ambidextrous, transactional leadership promote employee creativity? Mediating effects of empowerment and promotion focus[J]. International Journal of Manpower, 2016, 37(8):1250-1263.
[52]张毅, 曾玉娇, 李坚飞. 团队断裂带对团队创新绩效的影响——一个有中介的调节效应模型[J]. 企业经济, 2019,(06):44-54.
ZHANG Yi, ZENG Yujiao, LI Jianfei. The impact of team fracture zone on team innovation performance —— A mediating regulatory effect model[J]. Enterprise Economy, 2019,(06):44-54.
[53]GIBSON C B, BIRKINSHAW J. The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2004, 47(2):209-226.
[54]SMITH W K, TUSHMAN M L. Managing strategic contradictions: A top management model for managing innovation streams[J]. Organization Science, 2005, 16(5):522-536.
[55]ZIMMERMANN A, RAISCH S, CARDINAL L B. Managing persistent tensions on the frontline: A configurational perspective on ambidexterity[J]. Journal of Management Studies, 2018, 55(5):739-769.
[56]FISCHER T, DIETZ J, ANTONAKIS J. Leadership process models: A review and synthesis[J]. Journal of Management, 2017, 43(6):1726-1753.
[57]赵斌, 古睿, 李瑶. 员工越轨创新成功的情境化研究[J]. 科学学研究, 2019, 37(11):2102-2112.
ZHAO Bin, GU Rui, LI Yao. A situation study on the success of employee’s bootleg innovation[J]. Studies in Science of Science, 2019, 37(11):2102-2112.
[58]LI Q, SHE Z, YANG B. 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
[59]SEMRAD M, SCOTT-PARKER B, NAGEL M. Personality traits of a good liar: A systematic review of the literature[J]. Personality and Individual Differences, 2019, 147:306-316.
[60]LIPSEY M W, WILSON D B. Practical Meta-Analysis[J]. 2000.
[61]JIANG K, LEPAK D P, HU J, et al. How does human resource management influence organizational outcomes? A meta-analytic investigation of mediating mechanisms[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2012, 55(6): 1264-1294.
[62]周文霞, 谢宝国, 辛迅,等. 人力资本,社会资本和心理资本影响中国员工职业成功的元分析[J]. 心理学报, 2015, 47(02):251-263.
ZHOU Wenxia, XIE Baoguo, XIN Xun, et al. A meta-analysis on effects of human, social, and psychological capital on career success in Chinese business organizations[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2015, 47(02):251-263.
[63]ROTH P L, LE H, OH I S, et al. Using beta coefficients to impute missing correlations in meta-analysis research: Reasons for caution[J]. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2018, 103(6):644-658.
[64]HUNTER J E, SCHMIDT F L. Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings (2nd ed.)[M]. CA: Sage，2004.
[65]WOOD J A. Methodology for dealing with duplicate study effects in a meta-analysis[J]. Organizational Research Methods, 2008, 11(1):79-95.
[66]HARRER M, CUIJPERS P, FURUKAWA T A, et al. Doing meta-analysis in R: A hands-on guide[EB/OL]. 2019. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2551803.
[67]EGGER M, SMITH G D, SCHNEIDER M, et al. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test[J]. British Medical Journal, 1997, 315(7109), 629–634.
[68]DUVAL S J. (Ed.). (2005). The trim and fifill method. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
[69]罗瑾琏, 胡文安, 钟竞. 双元领导对团队创新的影响机制研究——基于互动认知的视角[J]. 华东经济管理, 2016,30(07):35-44.
LUO Jinlian, HU Wenan, ZHONG Jing. A study on the mechanism of ambidextrous leadership on team innovation —— From the perspective of interactive cognition[J]. East China Economic Management, 2016,30(07):35-44.
[70]JIA J F , YAN J Q , CAI Y H , et al. Paradoxical leadership incongruence and Chinese individuals’ followership behaviors: moderation effects of hierarchical culture and perceived strength of human resource management system[J]. Asian Business & Management, 2018,17(5):313-338.
[71]LI P K, SUN J M, TARIS T W, et al. Country differences in the relationship between leadership and employee engagement: A meta-analysis[J]. The Leadership Quarterly, 2021, 32(1):101458.