Although ambivalence is a common phenomenon in organizations, the scientific literature on this topic remains at a nascent stage. In particular, little is known about how employees cope with ambivalence. To address this gap, this paper examines a systematic model of employees’ strategies for coping with ambivalence. In study 1, using various samples, we develop a multidimensional scale of employees’ strategies for coping with ambivalence. The results reveal four distinct strategies, which fall into two categories: proactive strategies (i.e., holism and compromise) and reactive strategies (i.e., domination and avoidance). In study 2, we examine the potential antecedents and outcomes of these four strategies, building on the conservation of resources theory. The results show that, unlike domination and avoidance, holism and compromise strategies buffer the negative impacts of ambivalence on employees’ tasks and innovative performance. Moreover, employees are particularly likely to use holism and compromise approaches if their personality or job encourages proactivity. Taken together, these findings support a new coping-oriented perspective on ambivalence, reveal why some employees choose (in)effective ways to deal with ambivalence, and show how effective coping can be fostered.

尽管矛盾心理是组织中的普遍现象，但有关该主题的科学文献仍处于起步阶段。特别是，人们对员工如何应对矛盾心理知之甚少。为了解决这一差距，本文研究了员工应对矛盾心理策略的系统模型。在研究 1 中，我们使用各种样本，开发了员工应对矛盾心理策略的多维量表。结果揭示了四种不同的策略，分为两类：主动策略（即整体主义和妥协）和反应性策略（即支配和回避）。在研究 2 中，我们在资源保护理论的基础上研究了这四种策略的潜在前因和结果。结果表明，与支配和回避不同，整体主义和妥协策略可以缓冲矛盾心理对员工任务和创新绩效的负面影响。此外，如果员工的个性或工作鼓励积极主动，他们特别有可能使用整体主义和妥协的方法。总之，这些发现支持了一种新的以应对为导向的矛盾心理观点，揭示了为什么一些员工选择（无效）有效的方式来处理矛盾心理，并展示了如何培养有效的应对方式。