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
DOI•
01 Apr 2020TL;DR: In this article, the authors examined how human resource flexibility in the university facilitates organizational ambidexterity and performance and found that flexibility of human resources is positively related to organizational ambidesterity.
Abstract: The behavior, practice, and skills of human resources can be effective in advancing the organizational goals of universities. Therefore, the strategic role that staff might play in the university to achieve its goals and maintain its position is an issue worth being addressed. The purpose of the article was to examine how human resource flexibility in the university facilitates organizational ambidexterity and performance. The research hypotheses were tested by forming a structural equation of the research variables using the partial least squares method. The studied population consisted of Payame Noor University of Isfahan staff members. The results of this research showed that flexibility of human resources is positively related to organizational ambidexterity. This relationship was observed in each of the three components of Human Resource (HR) flexibility including behavioral, skill, and practical flexibility. However, the results also indicated no significant effect for organizational ambidexterity on performance. Furthermore, no positive effect for human resource flexibility on university performance was observed whether directly or mediated by organizational ambidexterity. This study shows that the goals and tasks of Payame Noor University will only be achieved through the flexibility of its human resources in its three aspects.
4 citations
Cites background or methods from "Structural Differentiation and Ambi..."
...We consider these two scores to be orthogonal variables [4][55]....
[...]
...In this study, we utilize the exploitation and exploration scores presented by [54][55][56] and adapt those questionnaire-derived scores to the studied population....
[...]
TL;DR: In this article, a longitudinal unbalanced panel database of 1081 firm-year observations of FTSE 350 firms for the period of 2011 to 2016 was used to investigate the impact of innovation disclosure on cost of capital.
Abstract: Motivated to cover a gap in disclosure literature, this paper tackles, specifically, innovation disclosure effects on cost of capital. Innovation disclosure is recognized as the disclosure of organizational ambidexterity OA process, which combines two main types of innovation: exploration and exploitation. Using a longitudinal unbalanced panel database of 1081 firm-year observations of FTSE 350 firms for the period of 2011 to 2016, we ran a series of time-firm fixed effects panel regression analyses. Results show consistent evidence in two regards. First, the major significant benefits of reduced cost of capital arise from exploitation not from exploration disclosure, intriguingly, contrasting the fact that firms on average disclose exploration more than exploitation. This might be reasoned by the low quality of explorative innovation disclosure or the use of impression management which creates reliability issues that could limit the value-relevance of such disclosure. Alternatively, explorative innovation disclosure could be intentionally made of limited informational content to avoid competitive disadvantage by giving away critical business secrets. Second, firms of high analyst following, R&D firms, and small size firms enjoy significant benefits of OA innovation disclosures greater than the average benefits of the entire sample. This paper provides novel empirical evidence to the economic based view of disclosure literature by highlighting that two types of innovation disclosure have different effects on cost of capital.
4 citations
15 Jun 2020
TL;DR: This study analyzed 23 semi-structured interviews conducted with established companies that are running entrepreneurial activities and shows that three general types of knowledge can be explored through corporate entrepreneurship and that some organizational designs are more suited to explore certain knowledge types than others are.
Abstract: In today's volatile world, established companies must be capable of optimizing their core business with incremental innovations while simultaneously developing discontinuous innovations to maintain their long-term competitiveness. Balancing both is a major challenge for companies, since different types of innovation require different organizational structures, operational modes and management styles. Established companies tend to excel in improving their current business through incremental innovations which are closely related to their current knowledge base and competencies. However, this often goes hand in hand with challenges in the exploration of knowledge that is new to the company and that is essential for the development of discontinuous innovations. In this respect, the concept of corporate entrepreneurship is recognized as a way to strengthen the exploration of new knowledge and to support the development of discontinuous innovation. For managing corporate entrepreneurship more effectively, it is crucial to understand which types of knowledge can be created through corporate entrepreneurship and which organizational designs are more suited to gain certain types of knowledge. To answer these questions, this study analyzed 23 semi-structured interviews conducted with established companies that are running such entrepreneurial activities. The results show (1) that three general types of knowledge can be explored through corporate entrepreneurship and (2) that some organizational designs are more suited to explore certain knowledge types than others are.
4 citations
Cites background from "Structural Differentiation and Ambi..."
...At the same time, it is crucial to find the optimal balance of differentiation and integration in order to ensure exchange of information and knowledge but also to support the creation of synergies [24,25]....
[...]
DOI•
02 Jul 2018
TL;DR: In this article, a qualitative study in the medical and scientific division of the Italian National Olympic Committee tried to incorporate an exploitation logic in addition to its dominant exploration logic, describing a two-phase experiment in which the organization leveraged the organizational space as a transition tool towards ambidexterity, while also trying to maintain its exploration innovation driven competitive advantage.
Abstract: Influenced by internal and external factors, organizations are increasingly operating in divergent fields that require them to develop ambidextrous competencies. While research relating ambidexterity to aspects such as strategy and innovation has reached a maturity stage, we still know little about the strategic processes that allow organizations to implement ambidexterity, and in particular about the role that organizational space can play in an organization’s attempt to become ambidextrous. By conducting a qualitative study in the medical and scientific division of the Italian National Olympic Committee trying to incorporate an exploitation logic in addition to its dominant exploration logic, we describe a two-phase experiment in which the organization leveraged the organizational space as a transition tool towards ambidexterity, while also trying to maintain its exploration innovation-driven competitive advantage. We find that organizational space can be used as a coping tool against identity and competence threats triggered by organizational transition to ambidexterity, affording both integration and differentiation of the ambidextrous logics.
4 citations
Cites background from "Structural Differentiation and Ambi..."
...This implies conceiving organizational design as emergent, dynamic and in need of constant coordination (Benner & Tushman, 2015; Jansen et al 2009; Simsek et al. 2009)....
[...]
...…implementation, new areas of inquiry are starting to involve the cognitive and behavioural processes by which ambidextrous structures are managed (coordination, decision making, organizational role leveraging, leadership, etc.) (Jansen et al. 2009; Lubatkin et al. 2006; Turner et al. 2013)....
[...]
...…shows that organizations exit their comfort zones in search of a renewed equilibrium between external changes (industry shocks, sectorial crises, new policies and regulation) and internal needs for growth and development (Andriopoulos & Lewis 2009; Jansen et al. 2009; Van Looy et al. 2005)....
[...]
...…characteristics (Lubatkin et al. 2006; Smith & Tushman 2005), coordination challenges related to the management of separate ambidextrous units (Jansen et al. 2009; Prange & Schlegelmilch 2009; Simek et al. 2009), decision making about the degree of integration and/or autonomy of the different…...
[...]
4 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