Leading between urgency and opportunity: a conceptual lens on asymmetric pressures

Le résumé fourni par la source

Purpose Contemporary organizations increasingly confront co-occurring demands that differ in urgency, reversibility, ethical salience, and actionability, making assumptions of balance, optimization, or simultaneous accommodation difficult to sustain. This paper reconceptualizes leadership as a process of mediation through which non-commensurable demands are rendered actionable via interpretation, prioritization, ethical justification, and temporal sequencing. In doing so, it addresses a theoretical gap at the intersection of leadership, organizational adaptation, temporality, and ethics. Under asymmetric conditions, leadership effectiveness depends less on structural alignment or capability deployment than on mediation quality − the coherence with which competing demands are sequenced over time. Design/methodology/approach This paper develops an integrative conceptual framework through abductive synthesis across leadership, strategy, sensemaking, paradox, temporality, ethics, organizational process, and attention-based literatures. Drawing on foundational and contemporary scholarship, it theorizes mediation as a distinct process through which leaders construct, justify, and sequence responses to uneven environmental pressures (Joseph et al., 2024; Brielmaier & Friesl, 2023). Sequencing is conceptualized as an ongoing ethically embedded interpretive practice, rather than a structural outcome or coordination device, that becomes increasingly consequential under conditions of non-commensurability. Cross-sector examples illustrate how asymmetric pressures are translated into situated organizational action. Findings Leadership effectiveness under asymmetric conditions depends less on structural alignment or capability deployment than on the quality of mediation through which competing demands are ordered over time. Organizational outcomes emerge through temporally sequenced patterns of interpretation, prioritization, ethical justification, and action, where early interventions shape subsequent option spaces. As asymmetry intensifies across urgency, reversibility, ethical salience, and actionability, mediation becomes central to sustaining adaptive capacity, organizational legitimacy, and ethical integrity. Originality/value This paper makes three novel contributions. First, it introduces environmental asymmetry as a theoretically specified condition in which co-occurring demands differ simultaneously across temporal urgency, reversibility, ethical salience, and actionability − a structural condition that existing frameworks do not adequately theorize. Second, it develops mediation as a distinct processual mechanism through which leaders construct, justify, and sequence responses to non-commensurable demands, thereby advancing beyond equilibrium-oriented accounts of leadership. Third, it theorizes cumulative ethical erosion as a sequencing-driven process structurally distinct from ethical fading, offering a new explanation for why organizations with recognized ethical stakes nonetheless experience moral deterioration over time. Together, these contributions reposition leadership as the disciplined ordering of action when simultaneous accommodation of competing demands is neither feasible nor desirable.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.