While relational leadership constructionist scholarship has gained a powerful voice in the leadership conversation, mainstream leadership studies continue to ignore its contributions. Paradigm interplay represents an approach to knowledge construction that may help constructionists contribute to the cumulative relational leadership conversation, while reasserting their interpretive commitments. The article first explains why paradigm interplay is a promising strategy for overcoming two existing complications in relational leadership research and in its constructionist stream. It then offers an application of paradigm interplay in the leadership–trust research domain, to demonstrate how this approach works in practice, showing its promise for building a robust constructionist empirical research agenda to explore the role of trust in relational leadership. The article closes with a discussion of selected challenges associated with conducting paradigm interplay, and with a call to bridge distinct relational leadership perspectives to advance robust and actionable knowledge in the field.
AllportGW (1954) The Nature of Prejudice. Reading: Addison-Wesley.
2.
AlvessonMKärremanD (2007) Constructing mystery: Empirical matters in theory development. Academy of Management Review32(4): 1265–1281.
3.
BanfieldEC (1958) The Moral Basis of a Backward Society. Glencoe: The Free Press.
4.
BargeJK (2012) Systemic constructionist leadership and working from within the present moment. In: Uhl-Bien M and Ospina SM (eds) Advancing Relational Leadership Theory. A Dialogue among Perspectives. Greenwich: Information Age, pp.107–142.
5.
BrowerHHSchoormanFDTanHH (2000) A model of relational leadership: The integration of trust and leader–member exchange. The Leadership Quarterly11: 227–250.
6.
BurkeCSSimsDELazzaraEH, et al. (2007) Trust in leadership: A multi-level review and integration. The Leadership Quarterly18: 606–632.
7.
ChetkovichCKunreutherF (2006) From the Ground Up: Grassroots Organizations Making Social Change. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
8.
CormanSR (2000) The need for common ground. In: Corman SR and Poole MS (eds) Perspectives on Organizational Communication: Finding Common Ground. New York: Guilford Press, pp.3–13.
9.
CormanSRPooleMS (eds) (2000) Perspectives on Organizational Communication: Finding Common Ground. New York: Guilford Press.
10.
CrevaniLLindgrenMPackendorffJ (2010) Leadership, not leaders: On the study of leadership as practices and interactions. Scandinavian Journal of Management26(1): 77–86.
11.
CunliffeAL (2016) Philosophical underlabouring: Clearing the ground for research on collective leadership. Paper presented at the Third NYU/Wagner Collective Leadership Research Workshop, New York, 29 September-1 October, pp.1–11.
12.
CunliffeALEriksenM (2011) Relational leadership. Human Relations64: 1425–1449.
13.
DenisJLLangleyASergiV (2012) Leadership in the plural. Academy of Management Annals6: 1–73.
14.
DietzG and Den HartogDN. (2006) Measuringtrust inside organisations. Personnel Review35(5): 55710.1108/00483480610682299
15.
DirksKTFerrinDI (2002) Trust in leadership: Meta-analytic findings and implications for research and practice. Journal of Applied Psychology87: 611–628.
16.
DrathWMcCauleyCDPalusCJ, et al. (2008) Direction, alignment, commitment: Toward a more integrative ontology of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly19: 635–653.
17.
EndresSWeiblerJ (2017) Towards a three-component model of relational social constructionist leadership: A systematic review and critical interpretive synthesis. International Journal of Management Reviews19(2): 214–236.
18.
FairhurstGTConnaughtonSL (2014) Leadership: A communicative perspective. Leadership10(1): 7–35.
19.
FairhurstGTGrantD (2010) The social construction of leadership: A sailing guide. Management Communication Quarterly24(2): 171–210.
20.
FairhurstGTSmithWKBanghartSG, et al. (2016) Diverging and converging: Integrative insights on a paradox meta-perspective. Academy of Management Annals10(1): 173–182.
21.
FletcherJK (2004) The paradox of post-heroic leadership: An essay on gender, power and transformational change. The Leadership Quarterly15: 647–661.
22.
FoldyEGGoldmanLOspinaSM (2008) Sensegiving and the role of cognitive shifts in the work of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly19: 514–529.
23.
FordJLawlerJ (2007) Blending existentialist and constructionist approaches in leadership studies: An exploratory account. Leadership & Organization Development Journal28: 409–425.
24.
GiddensA (1991) Modernity and Self-Identity. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
25.
GoldmanGA (2016) Multiparadigmatic, cooperative opportunities for the study of business management. Management Dynamics25(3): 2–15.
26.
GovierT (1997) Social Trust and Human Communities. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.
27.
GraenGBUhl-BienM (1995) Relationship-based approach to leadership: Development of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective. The Leadership Quarterly6: 219–247.
28.
GranovetterM (1985) Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology91: 481–510.
29.
GronnP (2002) Distributed leadership as a unit of analysis. The Leadership Quarterly13: 423–451.
30.
HoskingDM (2007) Not leaders, not followers: A post-modern discourse of leadership processes. In: Shamir B, Pilai R, Bligh M, et al. (eds) Follower-Centered Perspectives of Leadership. Greenwich: Information Age, pp.243–264.
31.
JohnsonRB (2017) Dialectical pluralism: A metaparadigm whose time has come. Journal of Mixed Methods Research11(2): 156–173.
32.
KangDStewartJ (2007) Leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership and HRD: Development of units of theory and laws of interaction. Leadership & Organization Development Journal28: 531–551.
33.
KlaussnerS (2012) Trust and leadership: Toward an interactive perspective. Journal of Change Management12: 417–439.
34.
KramerRM (2010) Collective trust within organizations: Conceptual foundations and empirical insights. Corporate Reputation Review13: 82–97.
35.
KuhnTS (2012) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions: 50th Anniversary Edition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
36.
LewickiRJBunkerBB (1996) Developing and maintaining trust in work relationship. In: Kramer RM and Tyler TR (eds) Trust in Organizations: Frontiers of Theory and Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage, pp.114–139.
37.
LewickiRJTomlinsonECGillespieN (2006) Models of interpersonal trust development: Theoretical approaches, empirical evidence, and future directions. Journal of Management32: 991–1022.
38.
LewisMWKelemenML (2002) Multi-paradigm inquiry: Exploring organizational pluralism and paradox. Human Relations55: 251–275.
39.
McKnightDHCummingsLChervanyNL (1998) Initial trust formation in new organizational relationships. The Academy of Management Review23(3): 473–490.
40.
MoyaPMHames-GarcíaMR (eds) (2000) Reclaiming Identity: Realist Theory and the Predicament of Postmodernism. Berkeley: University of California Press.
41.
NüboldADörrSLMaierGW (2014) Considering the orphan: Personal identification and its relations with transformational leadership, trust, and performance in a three-path mediation model. Leadership11(2): 230–254.
42.
OspinaSMFoldyEG (2010) Building bridges from the margins: The work of leadership in social change organizations. The Leadership Quarterly21: 292–307.
43.
OspinaSMFoldyEGEl HadidyW, et al. (2012) Social change leadership as relational leadership. In: Uhl-Bien M and Ospina SM (eds) Advancing Relational Leadership Theory. A Dialogue among Perspectives. Greenwich: Information Age, pp.255–302.
44.
OspinaSMFoldyEGFairhurstG, et al. (2020) Collective dimensions of leadership: Connecting theory and method. Human Relations 73(4): 441–463.
45.
OspinaSMSuC (2009) Weaving color lines: Race, ethnicity, and the work of leadership in social change organizations. Leadership5: 131–170.
46.
ParésMOspinaSMSubirátsJ (2017) Social Innovation and Democratic Leadership: Communities and Social Change from Below. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
47.
PooleMSLynchOH (2000) Reflections on finding common ground. In: Corman SR and Poole MS (eds) Perspectives on Organizational Communication: Finding Common Ground. New York: Guilford Press, pp.211–224.
48.
RaelinJA (2016) Imagine there are no leaders: Reframing leadership as collaborative agency. Leadership12(2): 131–158.
49.
ReidWKarambayyaR (2016) The shadow of history: Situated dynamics of trust in dual executive leadership. Leadership12: 609–631.
50.
RomaniLPrimeczHTopçuK (2011) Paradigm interplay for theory development: A methodological example with the Kulturstandard method. Organizational Research Methods14: 432–455.
51.
RousseauDMSitkinSBBurtRS, et al. (1998) Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review23: 393–404.
52.
SchultzMHatchMJ (1996) Living with multiple paradigms: The case of paradigm interplay in organizational culture studies. The Academy of Management Review21: 529–557.
53.
SchützALuckmanT (1973) The Structure of the Life World. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.
54.
Schwartz-SheaPYanowD (2012) Interpretation Research Design: Concepts and Processes. New York: Routledge.
55.
SkinnerDDietzGWeibelA (2014) The dark side of trust: When trust becomes a ‘poisoned chalice’. Organization21(2): 206–224.
56.
SztompkaP (1999) Trust: A Sociological Theory. Port Chester: Cambridge University Press.
57.
ThorneS (2016) Interpretive Description: Qualitative Research for Applied Practice. 2nd ed.New York: Routledge.
58.
TourishDBargeJK (2010) An exchange of letters: What can a specifically social constructionist perspective bring to bear on what must be one of the most studied subjects in human history?Management Communication Quarterly24(2): 322–347.
59.
TylerTRDegoeyP (1996) Trust in organizational authorities: The influence of motive attributions on willingness to accept decisions. In: Kramer RM and Tyler TR (eds) Trust in Organizations: Frontiers of Theory and Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage, pp.331–356.
60.
Uhl-BienM (2006) Relational leadership theory: Exploring the social processes of leadership and organizing. The Leadership Quarterly17: 654–676.
61.
Uhl-BienMMaslynJOspinaSM (2011) The nature of relational leadership: A multi-theoretical lens on leadership relationships and processes. In: Day D and Antonakis J (eds) The Nature of Leadership. 2nd ed. London: Sage, pp.289–330.
62.
Uhl-BienMOspinaSM (eds) (2012) Advancing Relational Leadership Theory. A Dialogue among Perspectives. Greenwich: Information Age.
63.
WeberLRCarterAI (2003) The Social Construction of Trust. Clinical Sociology: Research and Practice. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.
64.
WhitenerEMBrodtSEKorsgaardMA, et al. (1998) Managers as initiators of trust: An exchange relationship framework for understanding managerial trustworthy behavior. Academy of Management Review23: 513–530.
65.
WilkinsonC (2014) On not just finding what you (thought you) were looking for: Reflections on fieldwork data and theory. In: Yanow D and Schwartz-Shea P (eds) Interpretation and Method: Empirical Methods and the Interpretive Turn. New York: M.E. Sharp, pp.387–405.
