Be a Master of Paradox

The term “master of paradox” in its basic form, means that a leader knows when to do what is necessary for the cause, purpose, or situation. The leader’s behavior contradicts itself, depending on the circumstances. To some, this exhibits the inability to make decisions. However, mastering paradox in leadership displays the leader’s willingness to be flexible. While consistency is important, at times it is necessary to change your course.


Abraham Lincoln was a classic example of a leader having mastered paradox. Lincoln was known for his consistent behavior throughout his presidency. Yet, Lincoln also had the ability to be flexible. As he put it, “I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause.” Lincoln never wavered from his core values. They were always the foundation for what he chose to do, or not to do.

Impression management is related to being a master of paradox based on public perception. Impression management theory describes leaders as actors who orchestrate their behavior to influence their audience. Leaders may use impression management in order to control the impression that others may have of their public behavior. Privately, leaders will express themselves differently. One must consider the end result of impression management to determine if it is being used for evil or for good.

Being a master of paradox is a reflection that humility and a personal commitment to a cause are more important for a good leader to do the right thing, rather than pushing their own agenda.

A leader is positioned to be more successful when they have the ethical capacity to respond proactively rather than reactively. The leader is able to control the outcome of events rather than being controlled by the events.

Another way to build ethical capacity through character development is to have the willingness to acknowledge our weaknesses. Usually, we shift blame to others and point out why “they” make “us” act a certain way. We fail to realize that life is about choices. And, blaming others is also a choice that we have made to deal with our own shortcomings.

Leaders must also learn how to choose their battles. It is not necessary to fight every battle; sometimes, we must save our energy for the war. Responding out of anger is not appropriate and does not serve the greater purpose. It is not that leaders do not become angry, but that leaders are less effective when they respond out of anger. Not having a safe place to express our anger can leave us susceptible to outside pressures and limit our capacity to deal with situations rationally.

It is important that leaders weigh their options and the consequences for choosing one behavior over another. Leaders must ask questions such as: What purpose does this serve? What will be the consequences of my actions? What is there to gain? What is there to loose? Asking these questions will eliminate the possibility of making rash decisions. Additionally, the realization that different situations require different approaches and solutions helps to increase our ethical capacity to always make the right decisions. And, ethical responsibility is ethical accountability. We will discuss this next week.

“The challenge of leadership is to be strong, but not rude; be kind, but not weak; be bold, but not a bully; be thoughtful, but not lazy; be humble, but not timid; be proud, but not arrogant; have humor, but without folly.” Jim Rohn