textPrior studies have emphasized that structural attributes are crucial to simultaneously pursuing exploration and exploitation, yet our understanding of antecedents of ambidexterity is still limited. Structural differentiation can help ambidextrous organizations to maintain multiple inconsistent and conflicting demands; however, differentiated exploratory and exploitative activities need to mobilized, coordinated, integrated, and applied. Based on this idea, we delineate formal and informal senior team integration mechanisms (i.e. contingency rewards and social integration) and formal and informal organizational integration mechanisms (i.e. cross-functional interfaces and connectedness) and examine how they mediate the relationship between structural differentiation and ambidexterity. Overall, our findings suggest that the previously asserted direct effect of structural differentiation on ambidexterity operates through informal senior team (i.e. senior team social integration) and formal organizational (i.e. cross-functional interfaces) integration mechanisms. Through this richer explanation and empirical assessment, we contribute to a greater clarity and better understanding of how organizations may effectively pursue exploration and exploitation simultaneously to achieve ambidexterity.

/pdf/structural-differentiation-and-ambidexterity-the-mediating-4tfwksgx8f.pdf

Structural Differentiation and Ambidexterity: The Mediating Role of Integration Mechanisms

Can supply chain risk management practices mitigate the disruption impacts on supply chains’ resilience and robustness? Evidence from an empirical survey in a COVID-19 outbreak era

Strategic activity is often punctuated through the application of strategy tools. Despite widespread use, a lack of understanding exists regarding the impact such tools and their practices have on an organization's strategy process. Of the growing body of research tackling the phenomenon, none appears to extend beyond an intra-organizational setting. Acknowledging the importance of multi-organizational partnerships, particularly in the public sector, in this paper an attempt is made to help fill this void through examining the application and effect of a scenario planning process at an inter-organizational level. Conceptualizing scenario planning as a practice of simplexity, where complexity of thought combines with simplicity of action, an in-depth, longitudinal case study is used to demonstrate the importance and interaction of sensemaking, storytelling and organizing in creating meaning within strategizing activities at the inter-organizational level. However, also demonstrated is the relative weakness of the output of the scenario planning process − the stories − as a boundary object capable of transferring knowledge and meaning to the intra-organizational level. Through empirical and theoretical integration a model is developed presenting the flow of practices and artefacts used in sensemaking within inter- and intra-organizational strategizing.

The Practice of Scenario Planning: An Analysis of Inter- and Intra-organizational Strategizing

Purpose




Over the last three decades, the role of intellectual capital (IC) in ensuring an organization’s competitiveness has increased significantly. The purpose of this paper is to analyse and evaluate the evolution of the concept of (IC) by showing its transformation from resource to capital, while offering a new perspective on the structure of (IC).




Design/methodology/approach




The formation and development of (IC) is studied on the basis of literature review, logical and comparative analysis. The new structural components of (IC) are defined upon studying the relationships of the relevant concepts and the content of the concept at organizational level today.




Findings




In the scientific literature, (IC) is mainly viewed as a resource or set of resources an organization uses for creation of competitive advantage and value. Using the information gathered about different views on (IC), this study shows the development of the sources of the organization’s competitiveness: from resource to (IC).




Research limitations/implications




This study offers the authors’ view on the nature of the concept of (IC) showing (IC) as a business asset. The analysis of the concept is focused at organizational level.




Originality/value




The study explains the differences between the interrelated concepts: knowledge, competence, performance and (IC). The authors offer an improved definition of (IC) by showing the evolution of its content and offer their own approach to the structure of (IC) that might facilitate tracking this asset in the organization’s accounts and promote effective management of the asset.

The transformation of the organization’s intellectual capital: from resource to capital

The practice of scenario planning: An analysis of inter- and intra- organizational strategizing

This chapter reviews the dynamic capability literature to explore relationships between definition, operationalization, and measurement of dynamic capability. Subsequently, we develop a design-oriented approach toward dynamic capability that distinguishes between design rules, recurrent patterns of behavior, operating routines and processes, market and competitive conditions, and performance outcomes. This framework serves to develop a number of propositions for further research. As such, we integrate the literature on dynamic capability that primarily draws on economics, with a design-oriented approach.

/pdf/unpacking-dynamic-capability-a-design-perspective-4d4t1cc8ck.pdf

Unpacking Dynamic Capability: A Design Perspective

This paper explores how founders’ blueprints affect the dynamism of organizational practices, and in particular the capability to sustain as well as change practices. First, a theoretical argument is developed on the critical role of founders’ blueprints of the employment model, which are difficult to alter and mark firms’ future paths by affecting the dynamism of organizational practices over an extended period of time. Subsequently, case studies of several organizational practices in three management consulting firms in the USA, the Netherlands and the UK illustrate how founders’ conceptions of the employment relationship (i.e. their employment model) affect the way in which competing demands of continuity and renewal are addressed. Moreover, engineering- or commitment-oriented blueprints appear to facilitate the capability to adapt, while autocratic blueprints do not.

The Dynamism of Organizational Practices: The Role of Employment Blueprints

Purpose – The dynamic capability view serves to explain how particular practices ensure the firm's performance and competitiveness within a continuously changing environment. In this paper, the staff induction processes of two small firms in The Netherlands (management consultancy and biotech (BT) start‐up) are examined from a practice‐based view. The authors explore whether the staff induction processes of these firms can be regarded as practices, and if so, whether and how these firms have developed a dynamic capability in staff induction.Design/methodology/approach – Case studies are conducted in the management consultancy and biotechnology sectors to explore the practising of dynamic capability.Findings – The findings suggest small firms can effectively develop and master their staff induction processes (as practices), but do this on the basis of ad hoc problem solving rather than a dynamic capability. If small firms develop any dynamic capability at all, they apparently do so towards specialized reso...

Deborah E.M. Mulders

Papers

Unpacking Dynamic Capability: A Design Perspective

The Dynamism of Organizational Practices: The Role of Employment Blueprints

Dynamic capability and staff induction practices in small firms