This is the third article in my Adaptive Paradox Leadership™ Series. A paradox is a pair of opposing forces that cannot be permanently resolved. Centralization and decentralization. Stability and change. Autonomy and control. Each side carries its own value, and each carries risk. 

When I managed the School of Fisheries, I faced this paradox every day. Centralizing processes made training efficient and consistent, yet instructors felt restricted. Granting more autonomy encouraged creativity and innovation, yet the quality of training became uneven across campuses. The breakthrough came when we stopped debating which side was “right” and began holding the tension itself. Both centralization and autonomy were needed, but neither could dominate. 

Tensional Leadership provides a way of working with these forces. Instead of trying to solve them once and for all, leaders learn to navigate the push and pull. The practice involves surfacing the value of each pole, acknowledging the risks of over-reliance, and developing the capacity to notice when the system is leaning too far one way.  

Gaim, Clegg, and Cunha (2022) show that paradoxes are not exceptions but the normal condition of organizational life, requiring leaders to continually navigate them. 

The Tension Compass™ helps leaders surface strengths, risks, and early signals on each side of a tension. Tensional Leadership goes further by treating paradoxes as living dynamics that require continuous attention.  

Activity Prompt 

Pick one tension in your workplace. Using the Tension Compass™, capture your ideas in the structure below: 

• Strengths of Side A (what value it brings) 

• Risks of Over-focusing Side A (what happens if it dominates) 

• Strengths of Side B (what value it brings) 

• Risks of Over-focusing Side B (what happens if it dominates) 

• Early Warning Signals (how you will know if the stretch is tipping too far one way) 

Example: In the School of Fisheries, centralization brought consistency and quality control, but too much created rigidity. Autonomy sparked innovation and creativity, but too much made quality uneven. Early signals included rising instructor frustration or uneven student outcomes. 

Notice how the Compass does not force a choice between sides. Instead, it helps leaders hold both in play and watch for shifts that require adaptive moves. 

Next in the series: Frameworks like Tensional Leadership help leaders see paradoxes clearly and work with them in practice. Yet tools alone are not enough. Leaders also need to pause and sense what is emerging in the present moment. In the next post, I will introduce Theory U™, a framework for slowing down and seeing more deeply. 

By Kevin Henderson, Chief Learning Officer at Velsoft
Part 3 of the Adaptive Paradox Leadership™ Series