Posted Content•
Structural Differentiation and Ambidexterity: The Mediating Role of Integration Mechanisms
05 Nov 2008-ERIM report series research in management Erasmus Research Institute of Management (Erasmus Research Institute of Management)-
TL;DR: The findings suggest that the previously asserted direct effect of structural differentiation on ambidexterity operates through informal senior team and formal organizational integration mechanisms, and contributes to a greater clarity and better understanding of how organizations may effectively pursue exploration and exploitation simultaneously to achieve ambideXterity.
Abstract: 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.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: The authors investigated how middle and front-line managers contribute to organizational ambidexterity through their engagement with long-standing organizational dilemmas, supplementing earlier senior management focused work, concluding that the transition to ambidextrous working was impeded by restrictive bureaucratic dimensions and facilitated by a distributed pattern of interaction, shared responsibility and more empowering bureaucratic forms.
6 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, social interdependence theory is used as a valuable complementary theoretical lens for examining the subtleties of how design shapes behavior and how behavior in turn may influence design.
Abstract: The innovation era has seen firms adopting a variety of organization designs with autonomous teams as their basic building blocks. Such organization designs have confronted firms with the challenge of managing complex task interdependence configurations. The predominant assumption within the organization design field for decades has been that task interdependence given by design would determine team behavior. We argue on theoretical grounds that research on interdependence should revisit the relationship between design and behavior. More specifically, we suggest social interdependence theory as a valuable complementary theoretical lens for examining the subtleties of how design shapes behavior and how behavior in turn may influence design. At the end of our discussion, we propose the implications for research and practice and present several research opportunities which are expected to further contribute to a better understanding of the strategic organization of innovation-led firms.
6 citations
Cites background from "Structural Differentiation and Ambi..."
...A prevalent structural linking mechanism included in the organizational design of large organizations is the cross-functional interface (Jansen et al. 2009)....
[...]
23 Dec 2019
TL;DR: In this article, the authors examine how hybrid organisations combine institutional logics to tackle complex social needs, and show that there is heterogeneity in how logics are blended externally in their strategies and in how they are integrated internally within the organisation.
Abstract: The purpose of this paper is to examine how hybrid organisations combine institutional logics to tackle complex social needs.,A multiple case study design was followed, and cases were selected using a two-staged sampling process. Using qualitative analysis, the mechanisms through which logics are selected, prioritised and get integrated in the strategies and practices of these organisations are illustrated.,The study contributes to the literature on hybrid organisations and their ability to address social problems in two important ways. First, the paper reveals through the concept of institutional rationality why market-based organisations emerge to address complex social needs in a complex institutional context. Second, the study demonstrates that there is heterogeneity in how logics are blended externally in their strategies and in how logics are integrated internally within the organisation.,All the cases are selected from India; hence the possibility that the findings are valid only for countries with similar institutional and socio-economic contexts cannot be negated.,The policy implication is that if business organisations should embrace social goals substantively, a regulation in the form of CSR is not enough. Instead, there should be institutional provisions to promote such hybrid organisational forms where alternative logics such as community, profession, etc., are part of the core logics of the organisation.,This study connects the strategic choices of organisations with their institutional logics’ configuration in the Indian context.
6 citations
Dissertation•
01 Jan 2013
TL;DR: This article conducted questionnaires and interviews at five SMEs engaged in lean management to find out what the effects of lean management are on an SMEs behavior in relation to the tension between exploitative innovation and explorative innovation.
Abstract: The tension between exploitative innovation and explorative innovation is a result of a firm’s need to be efficient on the short-term and flexible on the long-term. It has become increasingly important that a firm needs to pursue both innovation types to create sustainably superior performance. A lot of research has already been done on how larger firms can deal with this tension. However, still little is known on how SMEs, which are relatively constrained by its resources efforts and attention, can best deal with this tension. Moreover, this research did not focus on randomly selected SMEs but on SMEs engaged in lean management. This, because it is suggested that SMEs engaged in lean management will focus on increasing efficiency within the organization and along the value stream of its products by pursuing exploitative innovations. The aim of this research was therefore to find out what the effects of lean management are on an SMEs behavior in relation to the tension, and how an SME engaged in lean management can best achieve sustainably superior performance. This research conducted questionnaires and interviews at five SMEs engaged in lean management to test hypotheses derived from the current literature. The findings of this research suggest that the current literature is incomplete in the constraints that an SME faces in its decision on how to deal with this tension. In addition, the findings suggest that current literature is incorrect in generalizing entire SMEs engaged in lean management by exploitative characteristics. Furthermore, this research suggests how SMEs engaged in lean management can best achieve sustainably superior performance.
6 citations
Cites background from "Structural Differentiation and Ambi..."
...Since exploitative innovation activities are associated with increasing efficiency within products and organizational processes (Jansen et al., 2009), it can be stated that a lean thinking SME striving towards perfection will pursue exploitative innovation activities....
[...]
...…have a loose inherent culture (Jansen et al., 2009), a low degree of centralization of decision-making (Chang et al., 2011; Jansen et al., 2006; Jansen et al., 2009), a high degree of connectedness that facilitates knowledge and idea sharing among employees (Chang et al., 2011; Jansen et al.,…...
[...]
..., 2009), a high degree of centralization of decision-making (Chang et al., 2011; Jansen et al., 2006; Jansen et al., 2009), a high degree of connectedness as it helps to build knowledge and idea sharing among employees (Chang et al....
[...]
...1 Focus Exploration A firm with a focused innovation strategy on exploration will have a loose inherent culture (Jansen et al., 2009), a low degree of centralization of decision-making (Chang et al....
[...]
...A firm with a focused innovation strategy on exploration will have a loose inherent culture (Jansen et al., 2009), a low degree of centralization of decision-making (Chang et al., 2011; Jansen et al., 2006; Jansen et al., 2009), a high degree of connectedness that facilitates knowledge and idea…...
[...]
Dissertation•
01 Jan 2014
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors take a longitudinal perspective on ambidexterity, focusing on the role of time in the exploration exploitation dilemma, and introduce several mechanisms that allow firms to achieve exploration-exploitation balance over time.
Abstract: Organizational ambidexterity has recently been named a "hot topic" in strategy
research (Birkinshaw and Gupta, 2014: 2). It is defined as a firm's ability to
simultaneously pursue exploration and exploitation (Gupta, Smith, and Shalley, 2006), and has emerged as a "new research paradigm in organization theory" (Raisch, Birkinshaw, Probst, and Tushman, 2009: 685). Over the last two decades, scholars have studied ambidexterity from many different theoretical perspectives, mostly adopting cross-sectional research designs (Raisch and Birkinshaw, 2008).
Contributing to this cross-sectional work, this dissertation takes a longitudinal
perspective on ambidexterity, focusing on the role of time in the exploration exploitation dilemma. Time has an important function in understanding organizational ambidexterity: The outcomes of exploration and exploitation differ with regard to time (March, 1991), and time can be a solution to balance both conflicting tasks (Boumgarden, Nickerson, and Zenger, 2012). In summary, "the adoption of time as an important research lens (…) allows for a deeper exploration of the dynamic processes underlying the emergence of organizational ambidexterity" (Raisch et al., 2009: 689).
This dissertation consists of five papers, each of which stresses time's role in
organizational ambidexterity from a different perspective. For example, Paper 1
investigates how firms' exploration-exploitation balance changes over time, whereas Paper 4 draws a comparison between the simultaneous and sequential pursuit of exploration and exploitation. The papers adopt different levels (firm, project, and individual-level) of analysis and apply distinct methodologies (qualitative and quantitative).
This dissertation contributes to theory and practice. First, by introducing the novel
concept of dynamic ambidexterity, it provides a longitudinal perspective on how firms adjust their simultaneous exploration-exploitation balance over time. Second, it provides insights into how and why firms often end up with unbalanced allocations, that is, over-exploration or exploitation. Finally, this dissertation introduces several mechanisms that allow firms to achieve exploration-exploitation balance over time. These mechanisms comprise the analysis of firm resources (Paper 4), the composition of firms' organizational models (Paper 5), or the use of acquisitions as a firm-external mechanism to pursue exploration and exploitation (Paper 3).
6 citations
References
More filters
TL;DR: This article seeks to make theorists and researchers aware of the importance of not using the terms moderator and mediator interchangeably by carefully elaborating the many ways in which moderators and mediators differ, and delineates the conceptual and strategic implications of making use of such distinctions with regard to a wide range of phenomena.
Abstract: In this article, we attempt to distinguish between the properties of moderator and mediator variables at a number of levels. First, we seek to make theorists and researchers aware of the importance of not using the terms moderator and mediator interchangeably by carefully elaborating, both conceptually and strategically, the many ways in which moderators and mediators differ. We then go beyond this largely pedagogical function and delineate the conceptual and strategic implications of making use of such distinctions with regard to a wide range of phenomena, including control and stress, attitudes, and personality traits. We also provide a specific compendium of analytic procedures appropriate for making the most effective use of the moderator and mediator distinction, both separately and in terms of a broader causal system that includes both moderators and mediators.
80,095 citations
"Structural Differentiation and Ambi..." refers background in this paper
...A four-item scale ( = 0 70) measures firmlevel exploitative innovation (Jansen et al. 2006) and captures the extent to which organizations build on existing knowledge and pursue incremental innovations that meet the needs of existing customers (Abernathy and Clark 1985, Benner and Tushman 2003,…...
[...]
TL;DR: In this article, the authors examined the link between firm resources and sustained competitive advantage and analyzed the potential of several firm resources for generating sustained competitive advantages, including value, rareness, imitability, and substitutability.
46,648 citations
"Structural Differentiation and Ambi..." refers background in this paper
...provides organizations with competitive advantages over time (Barney 1991)....
[...]
...Our study broadens the conceptual interpretation of organizational ambidexterity and suggests that it is difficult to achieve yet rare and not easily imitated, and 797 provides organizations with competitive advantages over time (Barney 1991)....
[...]
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors argue that the ability of a firm to recognize the value of new, external information, assimilate it, and apply it to commercial ends is critical to its innovative capabilities.
Abstract: In this paper, we argue that the ability of a firm to recognize the value of new, external information, assimilate it, and apply it to commercial ends is critical to its innovative capabilities. We label this capability a firm's absorptive capacity and suggest that it is largely a function of the firm's level of prior related knowledge. The discussion focuses first on the cognitive basis for an individual's absorptive capacity including, in particular, prior related knowledge and diversity of background. We then characterize the factors that influence absorptive capacity at the organizational level, how an organization's absorptive capacity differs from that of its individual members, and the role of diversity of expertise within an organization. We argue that the development of absorptive capacity, and, in turn, innovative performance are history- or path-dependent and argue how lack of investment in an area of expertise early on may foreclose the future development of a technical capability in that area. We formulate a model of firm investment in research and development (R&D), in which R&D contributes to a firm's absorptive capacity, and test predictions relating a firm's investment in R&D to the knowledge underlying technical change within an industry. Discussion focuses on the implications of absorptive capacity for the analysis of other related innovative activities, including basic research, the adoption and diffusion of innovations, and decisions to participate in cooperative R&D ventures. **
31,623 citations
"Structural Differentiation and Ambi..." refers background in this paper
...Organizational integration mechanisms not only facilitate new value creation through linking previously unconnected knowledge sources (Cohen and Levinthal 1990), but also through providing opportunities to leverage common resources and obtaining synergies across exploratory and exploitative units…...
[...]
TL;DR: The dynamic capabilities framework as mentioned in this paper analyzes the sources and methods of wealth creation and capture by private enterprise firms operating in environments of rapid technological change, and suggests that private wealth creation in regimes of rapid technology change depends in large measure on honing intemal technological, organizational, and managerial processes inside the firm.
Abstract: The dynamic capabilities framework analyzes the sources and methods of wealth creation and capture by private enterprise firms operating in environments of rapid technological change. The competitive advantage of firms is seen as resting on distinctive processes (ways of coordinating and combining), shaped by the firm's (specific) asset positions (such as the firm's portfolio of difftcult-to- trade knowledge assets and complementary assets), and the evolution path(s) it has aflopted or inherited. The importance of path dependencies is amplified where conditions of increasing retums exist. Whether and how a firm's competitive advantage is eroded depends on the stability of market demand, and the ease of replicability (expanding intemally) and imitatability (replication by competitors). If correct, the framework suggests that private wealth creation in regimes of rapid technological change depends in large measure on honing intemal technological, organizational, and managerial processes inside the firm. In short, identifying new opportunities and organizing effectively and efficiently to embrace them are generally more fundamental to private wealth creation than is strategizing, if by strategizing one means engaging in business conduct that keeps competitors off balance, raises rival's costs, and excludes new entrants. © 1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
27,902 citations
"Structural Differentiation and Ambi..." refers background in this paper
...…capabilities, which are embedded in the distinct ways that organizations integrate, build, and recombine competences flexibly across boundaries, are fundamental to long-term strategic advantage (Eisenhardt and Martin 2000, Henderson and Cockburn 1994, Kogut and Zander 1992, Teece et al. 1997)....
[...]
TL;DR: In this article, structural equation models with latent variables are defined, critiqued, and illustrated, and an overall program for model evaluation is proposed based upon an interpretation of converging and diverging evidence.
Abstract: Criteria for evaluating structural equation models with latent variables are defined, critiqued, and illustrated. An overall program for model evaluation is proposed based upon an interpretation of converging and diverging evidence. Model assessment is considered to be a complex process mixing statistical criteria with philosophical, historical, and theoretical elements. Inevitably the process entails some attempt at a reconcilation between so-called objective and subjective norms.
19,160 citations