隨著環境競爭加劇，現代的企業更需要員工具備創新的能力，然而在工作複雜度增加的不利條件下，激發員工創新變得更具挑戰性。本研究基於社會認知理論與矛盾理論，將創新視作一個涉及不同目標與需求間緊張關係的過程，這些緊張關係會因為工作複雜度增加而變得突出，我們的研究表明，學習如何建設性地應對這些緊張關係對於培養創新能力至關重要，而矛盾領導行為可以在這些具有挑戰性的情境下引導部屬，提升部屬的創造性自我效能並促進創新行為。本研究收集298對部屬和主管的配對問卷，透過統計分析檢視了不同組合下的情境，得到了以下研究結果：
當部屬具有高的觀點採取能力，能夠理解與接納矛盾型領導者的複雜和矛盾行為時，矛盾領導行為才能促進創造性自我效能和部屬的創新行為，同時，我們還發現當工作複雜度和觀點採取都很高時，通過創造性自我效能，矛盾領導行為對於促進部屬創新行為的效果最佳。然而，當工作複雜度低，或者當工作複雜度高但觀點採取低時，矛盾領導行為對於促進創造性自我效能和創新行為的效果較差。

With increasing competition in the business environment, modern organizations require employees who possess innovative capabilities. However, motivating innovation becomes more challenging under unfavorable conditions such as increased job complexity. This study integrates social cognitive theory and paradox theory to conceptualize innovation as a process involving tensions among different goals and demands, which become more salient as task complexity increases. Our research suggests that learning to constructively manage these salient tensions is crucial for fostering innovation, and paradoxical leader behavior (PLB) can guide employees and enhance their creative self-efficacy (CSE), ultimately promoting innovative behaviors.

After collecting data from 298 employee-supervisor pairs, we conducted statistical analyses to examine the contextual effects of different combinations. Findings indicate that PLB promotes CSE and employee innovation if employees have a high level of perspective-taking ability to understand and accept the complex and contradictory behaviors of their leaders. Furthermore, we found that when both task complexity and perspective-taking are high, PLB is most effective in promoting employee innovation through CSE. However, when task complexity is low or when task complexity is high but perspective-taking is low, the effectiveness of PLB in fostering CSE and innovation is reduced.

Baiano, C., Job, X., Santangelo, G., Auvray, M., & Kirsch, L. P. (2021). Interactions between interoception and perspective-taking: Current state of research and future directions. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 130, 252-262.
Bandura, A., Adams, N. E., & Beyer, J. (1977). Cognitive processes mediating behavioral change. Journal of personality and social psychology, 35(3), 125.
Bandura, A., & Wessels, S. (1994). Self-efficacy (Vol. 4, pp. 71-81).
Becker, T. E. (2005). Potential problems in the statistical control of variables in organizational research: A qualitative analysis with recommendations. Organizational research methods, 8(3), 274-289.
Bin, Z., & Dashuai, R. (2020). Are tensions beneficial or detrimental for the enterprise’s mainstream and new stream innovation? A paradox perspective. Human Systems Management, 39(3), 413-425.
Bligh, M. C., Pearce, C. L., & Kohles, J. C. (2006). The importance of self‐and shared leadership in team based knowledge work: A meso‐level model of leadership dynamics. Journal of managerial Psychology, 21(4), 296-318.
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological methods & research, 21(2), 230-258.
Campbell, D. J. (1988). Task complexity: A review and analysis. Academy of Management review, 13(1), 40-52.
Maynard, A., & Schaubroeck, J. (2007). The influence of leaders' and other referents' normative expectations on individual involvement in creative work. The Leadership Quarterly, 18(1), 35-48.
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. psychometrika, 16(3), 297-334.
Cummings, A., & Oldham, G. R. (1997). Enhancing creativity: Managing work contexts for the high potential employee. California management review, 40(1), 22-38.
Dashuai, R., & Bin, Z. (2020). How does paradoxical leadership affect innovation in teams: An integrated multilevel dual process model. Human Systems Management, 39(1), 11-26.
Davis, M. H., Conklin, L., Smith, A., & Luce, C. (1996). Effect of perspective taking on the cognitive representation of persons: a merging of self and other. Journal of personality and social psychology, 70(4), 713–726.
Deutsch, M. (1973). The resolution of conflict: Constructive and destructive processes. Yale University Press.
Doll, W. J., Xia, W., & Torkzadeh, G. (1994). A confirmatory factor analysis of the end-user computing satisfaction instrument. MIS quarterly, 453-461.
Egan, G. (1990). The skilled helper: A systematic approach to effective helping. Thomson Brooks/Cole Publishing Co.
Festinger, L. (1962). A theory of cognitive dissonance (Vol. 2). Stanford university press.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.
Geng, Z., Wang, Y., Wang, H., & Chen, W. (2021). The Two Faces of Paradoxical Leader Behavior in Workplace Creativity: Motivation and Hindrance. In Academy of Management Proceedings (Vol. 2021, No. 1, p. 11069). Briarcliff Manor, NY 10510: Academy of Management.
Gong, Y., Huang, J.-C., & Farh, J.-L. (2009). Employee learning orientation, transformational leadership, and employee creativity: The mediating role of employee creative self-efficacy. Academy of Management Journal, 52(4), 765-778.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (1998). Multivariate data analysis (Vol. 5, No. 3, pp. 207-219).
Harmon-Jones, E. (2000). Cognitive dissonance and experienced negative affect: Evidence that dissonance increases experienced negative affect even in the absence of aversive consequences. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(12), 1490-1501.
Healey, M. L., & Grossman, M. (2018). Cognitive and affective perspective-taking: Evidence for shared and dissociable anatomical substrates. Frontiers in Neurology, 9(491), 1–8.
Heider, F. (1982). The psychology of interpersonal relations. Psychology Press.
Hogan, R., & Kaiser, R. B. (2005). What we know about leadership. Review of general psychology, 9(2), 169-180.
Hu, L. t., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural equation modeling: a multidisciplinary journal, 6(1), 1-55.
Jaiswal, N. K., & Dhar, R. L. (2015). Transformational leadership, innovation climate, creative self-efficacy and employee creativity: A multilevel study. International journal of hospitality management, 51, 30-41.
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). On the interpretation of intuitive probability: A reply to Jonathan Cohen. Cognition, 7(4), 409–411.
Kearney, E., Shemla, M., van Knippenberg, D., & Scholz, F. A. (2019). A paradox perspective on the interactive effects of visionary and empowering leadership. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 155, 20-30.
Kelley, H. H. (1987). Attribution in social interaction. In E. E. Jones, D. E. Kanouse, H. H. Kelley, R. E. Nisbett, S. Valins, & B. Weiner (Eds.), Attribution: Perceiving the causes of behavior (pp. 1–26). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Lewis, M. W. (2000). Exploring paradox: Toward a more comprehensive guide. Academy of Management review, 25(4), 760-776.
Lewis, M. W., & Smith, W. K. (2014). Paradox as a metatheoretical perspective: Sharpening the focus and widening the scope. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 50(2), 127-149.
Maynard, D. C., & Hakel, M. D. (1997). Effects of objective and subjective task complexity on performance. Human Performance, 10(4), 303-330.
Miller, D. (1993). The architecture of simplicity. Academy of Management review, 18(1), 116-138.
Miron-Spektor, E., & Beenen, G. (2015). Motivating creativity: The effects of sequential and simultaneous learning and performance achievement goals on product novelty and usefulness. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 127, 53-65.
Miron-Spektor, E., & Erez, M. (2017). Looking at creativity through a paradox lens. The oxford handbook of organizational paradox, 434-451.
Miron-Spektor, E., Erez, M., & Naveh, E. (2011). The effect of conformist and attentive-to-detail members on team innovation: Reconciling the innovation paradox. Academy of Management Journal, 54(4), 740-760.
Miron-Spektor, E., Gino, F., & Argote, L. (2011). Paradoxical frames and creative sparks: Enhancing individual creativity through conflict and integration. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 116(2), 229-240.
Miron-Spektor, E., Ingram, A., Keller, J., Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. (2018). Microfoundations of organizational paradox: The problem is how we think about the problem. Academy of Management Journal, 61(1), 26-45.
Moeini, B., Shafii, F., Hidarnia, A., Babaii, G. R., Birashk, B., & Allahverdipour, H. (2008). Perceived stress, self-efficacy and its relations to psychological well-being status in Iranian male high school students. Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal, 36(2), 257-266.
Mulaik, S. A., James, L. R., Van Alstine, J., Bennett, N., Lind, S., & Stilwell, C. D. (1989). Evaluation of goodness-of-fit indices for structural equation models. Psychological bulletin, 105(3), 430-445.
Niu, C., Meng, X., & Xiang, F. (2022). The Double-Edged Sword Effect of Paradoxical Leadership to Organizational Citizenship Behavior. Psychology Research and Behavior Management, 2513-2527.
Park, I.-J., Shim, S.-H., Hai, S., Kwon, S., & Kim, T. G. (2022). Cool down emotion, don’t be fickle! The role of paradoxical leadership in the relationship between emotional stability and creativity. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 33(14), 2856-2886.
Parker, S. K., Atkins, P. W., & Axtell, C. M. (2008). 5 Building better workplaces through individual perspective taking: a fresh look at a fundamental human process. International review of industrial and organizational psychology, 23, 149.
Pearce, C. L. (2004). The future of leadership: Combining vertical and shared leadership to transform knowledge work. Academy of Management Perspectives, 18(1), 47-57.
Proulx MJ, Todorov OS, Aiken AT, de Sousa AA (2016) Where am I? Who am I? The relation between spatial cognition, social cognition and individual diferences in the built environment. Front Psychol 7(February):1–23.
Schad, J., Lewis, M. W., Raisch, S., & Smith, W. K. (2016). Paradox research in management science: Looking back to move forward. Academy of Management Annals, 10(1), 5-64.
Scott, S. G., & Bruce, R. A. (1994). Determinants of innovative behavior: A path model of individual innovation in the workplace. Academy of Management Journal, 37(3), 580-607.
Shao, Y., Nijstad, B. A., & Täuber, S. (2019). Creativity under workload pressure and integrative complexity: The double-edged sword of paradoxical leadership. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 155, 7-19.
Shi, S. (2018). The Cross-Cultural Generalizability of Paradoxical Leader Behavior Theory. Doctoral Thesis, Polytechnic University, Department of Management and Marketing, Hong Kong.
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.
Smith, W. K., & Tracey, P. (2016). Institutional complexity and paradox theory: Complementarities of competing demands. Strategic organization, 14(4), 455-466.
Sparr, J. L., van Knippenberg, D., & Kearney, E. (2022). Paradoxical leadership as sensegiving: stimulating change-readiness and change-oriented performance. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 43(2), 225-237.
Tierney, P., & Farmer, S. M. (2002). Creative self-efficacy: Its potential antecedents and relationship to creative performance. Academy of Management Journal, 45(6), 1137-1148.
Tierney, P., & Farmer, S. M. (2011). Creative self-efficacy development and creative performance over time. Journal of applied psychology, 96(2), 277.
Uhl-Bien, M., Riggio, R. E., Lowe, K. B., & Carsten, M. K. (2014). Followership theory: A review and research agenda. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(1), 83-104.
Van Kooten, A.L.F (2019). Do Paradoxical Leader Behaviors Pave The Way to Innovative Work Behaviors? Master's Thesis, Utrecht University, Utrecht.
Vince, R., & Broussine, M. (1996). Paradox, defense and attachment: Accessing and working with emotions and relations underlying organizational change. Organization studies, 17(1), 1-21.
Walumbwa, F. O., Mayer, D. M., Wang, P., Wang, H., Workman, K., & Christensen, A. L. (2011). Linking ethical leadership to employee performance: The roles of leader–member exchange, self-efficacy, and organizational identification. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 115(2), 204-213.
West, M. A. (2002). Sparkling fountains or stagnant ponds: An integrative model of creativity and innovation implementation in work groups. Applied psychology, 51(3), 355-387.
Yang, Y., Li, Z., Liang, L., & Zhang, X. (2021). Why and when paradoxical leader behavior impact employee creativity: Thriving at work and psychological safety. Current Psychology, 40, 1911-1922.
Ye, P., Liu, L., & Tan, J. (2022). Creative leadership, innovation climate and innovation behaviour: the moderating role of knowledge sharing in management. European Journal of Innovation Management, 25(4), 1092-1114.
Zacher, H., Robinson, A. J., & Rosing, K. (2016). Ambidextrous leadership and employees' self‐reported innovative performance: The role of exploration and exploitation behaviors. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 50(1), 24-46.
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.
Zhou, J., & Hoever, I. J. (2014). Research on workplace creativity: A review and redirection. Annu. Rev. Organ. Psychol. Organ. Behav., 1(1), 333-359.
Zigurs, I., & Buckland, B. K. (1998). A theory of task/technology fit and group support systems effectiveness. MIS quarterly, 313-334.
張偉豪, 統計學, 鄭時宜, & 公共行政. (2012). 與結構方程模型共舞: 曙光初現. 前程文化.
黃芳銘. (2015). 結構方程模式-理論與應用. 台灣五南圖書出版股份有限公司.