How are organizations embracing the emotional complexity of the emerging organizational landscape? More specifically, how do leaders develop the capacity necessary to infuse the organization's emotional circuitry with renewed energy at a time of transformation? In this essay, I posit that vulnerability can be the threshold for change capacity in institutional work, fortifying leaders' developmental trajectories and transforming organizing and organizations. While paradoxical, the regenerative nature of vulnerability yields change capacity requisite of navigating the emotional complexity leaders encounter on their developmental journeys.
AshforthB.RogersK.PrattM.PradiesC. (2014). Ambivalence in organizations: A multilevel approach. Organization Science, 25(5), 1453-1478. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2014.0909
2.
ButlerJ. (2004). Precarious life: The powers of mourning and violence. Verso.
3.
CameronK.McNaughtanJ. (2014). Positive organizational change. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 50(4), 445-462. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886314549922
4.
CameronK. S. (2008). Paradox in positive organizational change. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 44(1), 7-24. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886308314703
5.
CollinsonD. (2014). Dichotomies, dialectics and dilemmas: New directions for critical leadership studies?Leadership, 10(1), 36-55. https://doi.org/10.1177/1742715013510807
6.
CorlettS.MavinS.BeechN. (2019). Reconceptualising vulnerability and its value for managerial identity and learning. Management Learning, 50(5), 556-575. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507619865650
7.
CorlettS.RuaneM.MavinS. (2021). Learning (not) to be different: The value of vulnerability in trusted and safe identity work spaces. Management Learning 52(4), 424-441. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507621995816
8.
CreedD.HudsonA.OkhuysenG.Smith-CroweK. (In press). A place in the world: Vulnerability, wellbeing, and the ubiquitous evaluation that animates participation in institutional processes. Academy of Management Review. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2018.0367
9.
FarnyS.KiblerE.DownS. (2019). Collective emotions in institutional creation work. The Academy of Management Journal, 62(3), 765-799. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2016.0711
10.
HahnT.KnightE. (2021). The ontology of organizational paradox: A quantum approach. The Academy of Management Review, 46(2), 362-384. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2018.0408
MethotJ. R.MelwaniS.RothmanN. B. (2017). The space between us: A social-functional emotions view of ambivalent and indifferent workplace relationships. Journal of Management, 43(6), 1789-1819. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206316685853
13.
PradiesC.TunarosaA.LewisM. W.CourtoisJ. (2021). From vicious to virtuous paradox dynamics: The social-symbolic work of supporting actors. Organization Studies, 42(8), 1241-1263. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840620907200
14.
RaelinJ. A. (2016). Imagine there are no leaders: Reframing leadership as collaborative agency. Leadership, 12(2), 131-158. https://doi.org/10.1177/1742715014558076
15.
RothmanN.MelwaniS. (2017). Feeling mixed, ambivalent, and in flux: The social functions of emotional complexity for leaders. Academy of Management Review, 42(2), 259-282. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2014.0355
16.
RothmanN.PrattM.ReesL.VogusT. (2017). Understanding the dual nature of ambivalence: Why and when ambivalence leads to good and bad outcomes. Academy of Management Annals, 11(1), 33-72. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2014.0066
17.
SharmaG.BartunekJ.BuzzanellP. M.CarmineS.EndresC.EtterM.FairhurstG.HahnT.LêP.LiX.PamphileV.PradiesC.PutnamL. L.RochevilleK.SchadJ.SheepM.KellerJ.. (2021). A paradox approach to societal tensions during the pandemic crisis. Journal of Management Inquiry, 30(2), 121-137. https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492620986604
18.
SmithW. K.BesharovM. L. (2019). Bowing before dual gods: How structured flexibility sustains organizational hybridity. Administrative Science Quarterly, 64(1), 1-44. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839217750826
19.
StephensJ. P.HeaphyE. D.CarmeliA.SpreitzerG. M.DuttonJ. E. (2013). Relationship quality and virtuousness: Emotional carrying capacity as a source of individual and team resilience. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 49(1), 13-41. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886312471193
20.
TugadeM. M.FredricksonB. L.BarrettL. F. (2004). Psychological resilience and positive emotional granularity: Examining the benefits of positive emotions on coping and health. Journal of Personality, 72(6), 1161-1190. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2004.00294.x
21.
WatersL.AlgoeS.DuttonJ.EmmonsR.FredricksonB.HeaphyE.MoskowitzJ.NeffK.NiemiecR.PuryC.StegerM. (In press). Positive psychology in a pandemic: Buffering, bolstering, and building mental health. The Journal of Positive Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2021.1871945
