Managing Paradoxical Tensions While Practicing Virtual Leadership in Academia: A Phenomenology

Abstract

Many higher education administrators do not receive adequate training to succeed in leadership, let alone virtual leadership. This lack of training, combined with the exponential increase in online students and faculty, suggests some academic administrators are not prepared adequately to manage the tensions of virtual leadership required of them in their roles. Some researchers have recently focused on paradox to explain the contradictory yet interrelated tensions that managers of teleworkers must address. The purpose of this interpretative phenomenological analysis was to discover insights as to how higher education administrators at a large online American university perceived and managed paradoxical tensions while practicing virtual leadership. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with eight academic chairs who managed teleworkers. The six-step interpretative phenomenological analysis framework established by Smith, Flowers, and Larkin guided data analysis. Findings suggested that department chairs experienced five paradoxical tensions: impersonality/objectivity, isolation/connectivity, freedom/control, data overload/richness, and cultural barriers/diversity. These tensions were experienced as both negative (challenging, stressful, frustrating) and positive (opportunity, advantage). The study results will be used to develop a one-hour online continuing professional education program for academic chairs to increase awareness of and provide strategies for managing paradoxical tensions inherent in virtual leadership.

Keywords: virtual leadership, paradox, paradoxical tensions, telework, higher education administration, department chairs