scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Posted Content

Structural Differentiation and Ambidexterity: The Mediating Role of Integration Mechanisms

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.

Content maybe subject to copyright    Report

Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors conceptualize ambidextrous organizational culture as a higher-order construct consisting of organizational diversity and shared vision, and examine its impacts on contextual ambidexterity and consequently on new product innovation outcomes.
Abstract: Contextual ambidexterity is of paramount importance for new product innovation and organizational success, particularly in high-tech firms operating in a dynamic environment. Whilst it is recognized that contextual ambidexterity is grounded in organizational culture, existing research has not crystallized what kind of organizational culture enables contextual ambidexterity and consequently new product innovation. In this paper, drawing on data from 150 UK and 242 Chinese high-tech firms, we conceptualize ambidextrous organizational culture as a higher-order construct consisting of organizational diversity and shared vision, and examine its impacts on contextual ambidexterity and consequently on new product innovation outcomes. Using structural equation modelling, we find significant relationships between ambidextrous organizational culture, contextual ambidexterity and new product innovation outcomes; contextual ambidexterity mediates the relationship between ambidextrous organizational culture and new product innovation outcomes. Our findings also suggest that the above relationships are robust in the UK–China comparative research context, and that contextual ambidexterity and new product innovation outcomes are dependent on business unit level heterogeneity (i.e. ambidextrous organizational culture and research and development strength) rather than industry or cross-cultural differences.

266 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors show that interorganizational partnerships represent a potentially important resource for the development of ambidexterity, but little is known about how a firm's ambidext...
Abstract: Recent research indicates that interorganizational partnerships represent a potentially important resource for the development of ambidexterity. However, little is known about how a firm’s ambidext...

261 citations


Cites background from "Structural Differentiation and Ambi..."

  • ...As Jansen et al. (2009) elucidate, ambidextrous organizations need routines and processes to mobilize, coordinate and integrate structurally separate exploration and exploitation activities at all levels of organizing....

    [...]

  • ...Therefore, as several scholars (Gilbert, 2006; Jansen et al., 2009; Tushman and O’Reilly, 1996) have argued, the separation between exploration and exploitation helps firms to maximize the distinct benefits of both activities (cf....

    [...]

  • ...Similar to Andriopoulos and Lewis (2009) and Jansen et al. (2009), this article argues that both separation and integration are essential....

    [...]

  • ...…such integration tactics include behavioural integration among the upper management (Lubatkin et al., 2006), cross-functional teams and processes (Jansen et al., 2005, 2009), a synergetic combination of optimized organizational practices (Kim and Rhee, 2009), paradoxical mindsets (Andriopoulos…...

    [...]

  • ...Therefore, as several scholars (Gilbert, 2006; Jansen et al., 2009; Tushman and O’Reilly, 1996) have argued, the separation between exploration and exploitation helps firms to maximize the distinct benefits of both activities (cf. Andriopoulos and Lewis, 2009)....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the advantages and disadvantages of local and non-local search, discusses organizational responses, and identifies potential exogenous triggers for different kinds of search, concluding that the initial focus on local search was a consequence, in part, of the attention in evolutionary economics to path-dependent behavior, but that as localized behavior was increasingly accepted as the standard mode, studies began to question whether locally search was the best solution in all cases.
Abstract: This article critically reviews and synthesizes the contributions found in theoretical and empirical studies of firm-level innovation search processes. It explores the advantages and disadvantages of local and non-local search, discusses organizational responses, and identifies potential exogenous triggers for different kinds of search. It argues that the initial focus on local search was a consequence, in part, of the attention in evolutionary economics to path-dependent behavior, but that as localized behavior was increasingly accepted as the standard mode, studies began to question whether local search was the best solution in all cases. More recently, the literature has focused on the trade-offs being created, by firms having to balance local and non-local search. We account also for the apparent “variety paradox” in the stylized fact that organizations within the same industry tend to follow different search strategies, but end up with very similar technological profiles in fast-growing technologies. The article concludes by highlighting what we have learnt from the literature and suggesting some new avenues for research.

260 citations


Cites background or methods from "Structural Differentiation and Ambi..."

  • ...…some firms can manage seemingly ambidextrous activities (see, for instance, Gibson and Birkinshaw, 2004; He and Wong, 2004; Fosfuri and Rønde, 2009; Jansen et al., 2009), there is no indication of which of these organizational models is superior when it comes to introducing product innovation…...

    [...]

  • ...Also, several papers operationalize exploitative innovation strategies as actions that can be characterized as process innovation and measure explorative innovation as actions closely aligned to product innovation (for instance, He and Wong, 2004; Jansen et al., 2009)....

    [...]

  • ...To obtain variables for ambidexterity, He and Wong (2004) subtract explorative and exploitative search activities from one another; Gibson and Birkinshaw (2004) multiply the two activities, and Jansen et al. (2009) add them together....

    [...]

  • ...However, although there seems to be evidence that some firms can manage seemingly ambidextrous activities (see, for instance, Gibson and Birkinshaw, 2004; He and Wong, 2004; Fosfuri and Rønde, 2009; Jansen et al., 2009), there is no indication of which of these organizational models is superior when it comes to introducing product innovation (however, see Tushman et al....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors provide a theoretical synthesis and integrative review of research from strategy, organization theory, innovation, networks, and complexity to provide a framework of leadership for organizational adaptability.
Abstract: One of the biggest challenges facing leaders today is the need to position and enable organizations and people for adaptability in the face of increasingly dynamic and demanding environments. Despite this we know surprisingly little about this topic. In this paper we provide a theoretical synthesis and integrative review of research from strategy, organization theory, innovation, networks, and complexity to provide a framework of leadership for organizational adaptability. Our review shows that leadership for organizational adaptability is different from traditional leadership or leading change. It involves enabling the adaptive process by creating space for ideas advanced by entrepreneurial leaders to engage in tension with the operational system and generate innovations that scale into the system to meet the adaptive needs of the organization and its environment. Leadership for organizational adaptability calls for scholars and practitioners to recognize organizational adaptability as an important organizational outcome, and enabling leadership (i.e., enabling the adaptive process through adaptive space) as a critical form of leadership for adaptive organizations.

251 citations

Posted Content
TL;DR: In this article, the role of strategic learning as a mediating construct between opportunity-seeking (exploration) and advantage-seeking strategies and profit performance is discussed. And the authors suggest that strategic learning effectively allows both types of strategies to improve profit performance.
Abstract: This study focuses on the role of strategic learning as a mediating construct between opportunity-seeking (exploration) and advantage-seeking (exploitation) strategies and profit performance. Prior studies argue that the effect of these core elements of strategic entrepreneurship (exploration and exploitation) cannot be fully captured through their direct effects on profit performance, but that this relationship consists of mediating factors. This study proposes that the process of strategic learning, through its intraorganizational elements that enable the dissemination, interpretation, and implementation of strategic knowledge, enables firms to capitalize on the benefits of both exploration and exploitation strategies. Results from 206 Finnish software firms indicate that strategic learning fully mediates the relationship between exploration, exploitation, and profit performance. The result contributes by stressing the importance of strategic learning processes, especially in conjunction with entrepreneurial exploration strategies. Furthermore, the study demonstrates that the effect from exploration to strategic learning is moderated by the level of exploitation. This moderation effect suggests that the strategic learning is limited, being a path dependent capability that favors exploitation over exploration when stretched. However, strategic learning effectively allows both types of strategies to improve profit performance.

248 citations


Cites background from "Structural Differentiation and Ambi..."

  • ...However, explorative behaviors do not generate returns without investment in the development, evaluation, and implementation of the new knowledge generated (Jansen et al., 2009; McGrath, 2001; Rothaermel and Alexandre, 2009)....

    [...]

  • ...Therefore, we argue that to benefit from exploration and exploitation strategies, organizations require integrative strategic learning processes to increase the flow of knowledge across the structurally separated functions (Jansen et al., 2009)....

    [...]

  • ...Their argument is that although exploitative actions are, by definition, developments that take place in any part of the organization, the lessons learned during the development process must be mobilized, integrated, and applied across all organizational units (Jansen et al., 2009; Rothaermel and Alexandre, 2009)....

    [...]

  • ...Organizations are prone to meeting the needs of existing customers via established competences and products to strengthen current customer ties and short-term profits (Jansen et al., 2009; Jansen, van den Boch, and Volberda, 2006)....

    [...]

  • ...…that although exploitative actions are, by definition, developments that take place in any part of the organization, the lessons learned during the development process must be mobilized, integrated, and applied across all organizational units (Jansen et al., 2009; Rothaermel and Alexandre, 2009)....

    [...]

References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
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,…...

    [...]

Book ChapterDOI
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)....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
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…...

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
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)....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
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