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: In this paper, the authors draw on a variety of cognate literatures to discuss the field-level structural characteristics and organizational attributes that shape institutional complexity and explore the repertoire of strategies and structures that organizations deploy to cope with multiple, competing demands.
Abstract: Organizations face institutional complexity whenever they confront incompatible prescriptions from multiple institutional logics. Our interest is in how plural institutional logics, refracted through field-level structures and processes, are experienced within organizations and how organizations respond to such complexity. We draw on a variety of cognate literatures to discuss the field-level structural characteristics and organizational attributes that shape institutional complexity. We then explore the repertoire of strategies and structures that organizations deploy to cope with multiple, competing demands. The analytical framework developed herein is presented to guide future scholarship in the systematic analysis of institutional complexity. We conclude by suggesting avenues for future research.
2,129 citations
Cites background from "Structural Differentiation and Ambi..."
...…the ambidextrous approach and to minimize internal resistance, and the skills to communicate clearly their approach in order to offset any media skepticism (e.g., O’Reilly & Tushman, 2004; Jansen et al., 2009; Fang, Lee, & Schilling, 2010; Benner & Tushman, 2003; Siggelkow & Levinthal, 2003)....
[...]
...These include the need for “ambidextrous leaders” with the ability to understand the requirements of different types of businesses, the authority to implement new incentive systems to institutionalize the ambidextrous approach and to minimize internal resistance, and the skills to communicate clearly their approach in order to offset any media skepticism (e.g., O’Reilly & Tushman, 2004; Jansen et al., 2009; Fang, Lee, & Schilling, 2010; Benner & Tushman, 2003; Siggelkow & Levinthal, 2003)....
[...]
TL;DR: An overview of the seven articles included in this special issue is provided and several avenues for future research are suggested.
Abstract: Organizational ambidexterity has emerged as a new research paradigm in organization theory, yet several issues fundamental to this debate remain controversial. We explore four central tensions here: Should organizations achieve ambidexterity through differentiation or through integration? Does ambidexterity occur at the individual or organizational level? Must organizations take a static or dynamic perspective on ambidexterity? Finally, can ambidexterity arise internally, or do firms have to externalize some processes? We provide an overview of the seven articles included in this special issue and suggest several avenues for future research.
1,946 citations
Cites background from "Structural Differentiation and Ambi..."
...The Jansen et al. (2009) article “Structural Differentiation and Ambidexterity: The Mediating Role of Integration Mechanisms” claims that structural differentiation can help ambidextrous organizations maintain multiple inconsistent and conflicting demands; however, these differentiated activities…...
[...]
...Third, ambidexterity may arise from both simultaneous and sequential attention to exploitation and exploration....
[...]
...Kogut and Zander (1992, p. 384) describe “combinative capabilities” as the firm’s ability “to synthesize and apply current and acquired knowledge.”...
[...]
...Several studies in this special issue provide the first evidence that ambidexterity results from interactions across multiple levels (Andriopoulos and Lewis 2009, Groysberg and Lee 2009, Jansen et al. 2009, Mom et al. 2009, Taylor and Helfat 2009)....
[...]
Posted Content•
01 Jan 2013
TL;DR: Organizational ambidexterity refers to the ability of an organization to both explore and exploit--to compete in mature technologies and markets where efficiency, control, and incremental improvement are prized and to also compete in new technologies as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: Organizational ambidexterity refers to the ability of an organization to both explore and exploit--to compete in mature technologies and markets where efficiency, control, and incremental improvement are prized and to also compete in new technologies and markets where flexibility, autonomy, and experimentation are needed. In the past 15 years there has been an explosion of interest and research on this topic. We briefly review the current state of the research, highlighting what we know and don't know about the topic. We close with a point of view on promising areas for ongoing research.
1,350 citations
TL;DR: The exploration and exploitation framework has attracted substantial interest from scholars studying phenomena such as organizational learning, knowledge management, innovation, organizational design, and strategic alliances as discussed by the authors, and it has become an essential lens for interpreting various behaviors and outcomes within and across organizations.
Abstract: Jim March's framework of exploration and exploitation has drawn substantial interest from scholars studying phenomena such as organizational learning, knowledge management, innovation, organizational design, and strategic alliances. This framework has become an essential lens for interpreting various behaviors and outcomes within and across organizations. Despite its straightforwardness, this framework has generated debates concerning the definition of exploration and exploitation, and their measurement, antecedents, and consequences. We critically review the growing literature on exploration and exploitation, discuss various perspectives, raise conceptual and empirical concerns, underscore challenges for further development of this literature, and provide directions for future research.
1,241 citations
Cites background from "Structural Differentiation and Ambi..."
...…the notion of ambidexterity quite narrowly when referring to contextual balancing and organizational separation, whereas many studies consider ambidexterity as a general term for describing balance between exploration and exploitation (e.g., Jansen et al., 2009; Raisch et al., 2009; Simsek, 2009)....
[...]
...By loosely integrating their exploratory and exploitative units, organizations simultaneously perform both activities and balance them within their boundaries through active integration of the senior-management teams (Jansen et al., 2009)....
[...]
TL;DR: Overall, this work contributes a more accurate view of how leaders effectively balance between efficiency and flexibility by emphasizing heuristics-based “strategies of simple rules,” multiple environmental realities, and higher-order “expert” cognition.
Abstract: Our purpose is to clarify the microfoundations of performance in dynamic environments. A key premise is that the microfoundational link from organization, strategy, and dynamic capabilities to performance centers on how leaders manage the fundamental tension between efficiency and flexibility. We develop several insights. First, regarding structure, we highlight that organizations often drift toward efficiency, and so balancing efficiency and flexibility comes, counterintuitively, through unbalancing to favor flexibility. Second, we argue that environmental dynamism, rather than being simply stable or dynamic, is a multidimensional construct with dimensions that uniquely influence the importance and ease of balancing efficiency and flexibility. Third, we outline how executives balance efficiency and flexibility through cognitively sophisticated, single solutions rather than by simply holding contradictions. Overall, we go beyond the caricature of new organizational forms as obsessed with fluidity and the simplistic view of routines as the microfoundation of performance. Rather, we contribute a more accurate view of how leaders effectively balance between efficiency and flexibility by emphasizing heuristics-based “strategies of simple rules,” multiple environmental realities, and higher-order “expert” cognition. Together, these insights seek to add needed precision to the microfoundations of performance in dynamic environments.
621 citations
Cites background from "Structural Differentiation and Ambi..."
...…and flexibility are contradictory choices that require mutually exclusive solutions that support either efficiency or flexibility (Duncan 1976, Jansen et al. 2009, Lubatkin et al. 2006, Raisch and Birkinshaw 2008, Raisch et al. 2009, Tushman and O’Reilly 1996; see also the Organization…...
[...]
...Finally, regardless of whether ambidexterity is spatial or temporal, senior executives ultimately must integrate the contradictory cognitive agendas of efficiency and flexibility (Gilbert 2006, Smith and Tushman 2005) through mechanisms such as contingent awards for senior teams (Jansen et al. 2009) and education (Taylor and Helfat 2009)....
[...]
...…is spatial or temporal, senior executives ultimately must integrate the contradictory cognitive agendas of efficiency and flexibility (Gilbert 2006, Smith and Tushman 2005) through mechanisms such as contingent awards for senior teams (Jansen et al. 2009) and education (Taylor and Helfat 2009)....
[...]
References
More filters
Journal Article•
TL;DR: In this article, the authors investigated the relationship between exploration and the profitability, survival, and acquisition likelihood of start-ups simultaneously and found a balance-is-best relationship for profitability of survived firms and for the acquisition likelihood for high tech firms.
Abstract: The theory of exploration and exploitation is based on the logic of trade-offs and yet empirical research has rarely investigated these trade-offs as manifested between different dimensions of performance In the context of start-ups, getting acquired is an additional performance dimension previously ignored in the ambidexterity literature This paper utilizes the recently completed Kauffman Firm Survey data to investigate the relationship between exploration and the profitability, survival, and acquisition likelihood of start-ups simultaneously A balance-is-best relationship is found for profitability of survived firms and for the acquisition likelihood of high tech firms, while an exploitation focus is found to maximize the survival chances of low and medium tech firms For low and medium technology start-ups we find evidence of a trade-off between survival likelihood and profitability-given-survival, and for high tech start-ups we find evidence of a differently shaped trade-off between acquisition likelihood and profitability-given-survival
3 citations
Journal Article•
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors investigate how socio-cultural barriers to knowledge transfer emerge from the divergent life-worlds of new ventures and parent corporations and what enables interorganisational knowledge transfer across these barriers.
Abstract: Since most innovations occur at the boundaries of cultural systems, the transfer of knowledge across these boundaries is of paramount interest to knowledge management. We investigate how socio-cultural barriers to knowledge transfer emerge from the divergent life-worlds of new ventures and parent corporations and what enables interorganisational knowledge transfer across these barriers. The paper is anchored in the micro-interactionist tradition in organisational learning and addresses the constructivist discourse in social studies of knowledge. The empirical part is based on an exploratory multi-case study on 12 corporate venture capital (CVC) dyads in two different industries in Germany. The results highlight the 'clash of cultures' between parent corporations and new ventures and suggest drawing more attention to the integration of different modes of learning and types of knowledge by boundary-spanning across divergent life-worlds. The CVC units of parent corporations play a crucial role in interorganisational learning both as translator and as broker of knowledge.
3 citations
TL;DR: The results show that IT function competence positively influences organizational ambidexterity and this relationship is stronger when the IT function aims to be an active business partner or aims to reduce architectural complexity.
Abstract: We investigate whether the information technology (IT) function’s competence and role affect organizational ambidexterity. We first hypothesize that IT function competence is positively related to ...
3 citations
17 Jun 2018
TL;DR: This research contributes to existing literature by providing an understanding of corporate incubators as a multinational phenomenon, which has been neglected so far, and applies a multiple case study approach including 18 semi-structured interviews with incubation managers.
Abstract: Multinational corporations increasingly establish corporate incubators to combine their own resources with complementary resources of nascent ventures. In order to fulfill their parent's strategic objectives, corporate incubators need to turn into highly efficient resource brokers. The cross-regional embeddedness of incubation hubs leads to a high diversity of involved stakeholders and a complex resource flow among them, which requires a particular organizational design of the corporate incubator. In this context, results of this paper incorporate the recommendation of striking a critical balance between autonomy and integration that might shift depending on the parent's strategic orientation. Furthermore, this research contributes to existing literature by providing an understanding of corporate incubators as a multinational phenomenon, which has been neglected so far. Therefore, the study applies a multiple case study approach including 18 semi-structured interviews with incubation managers.
3 citations
01 Jan 2014
TL;DR: In this article, the authors examined the impact of bring-your-own-device (BYOD) policies on employees' performance, job satisfaction, and work-life conflicts.
Abstract: This dissertation examines how the management and configuration of organizational IT portfolios enhance organizations and their employees. Specifically, the theory of the differentiation and integration of information technologies is developed with in-depth examinations of “Bring-Your-Own-Device” (BYOD) policies. Four data collections are utilized: survey vignettes, case studies, agent-based simulations, and a questionnaire survey. Each essay uses a mixed-method approach providing insights into the selection, development, and management of ITs across individual and organizational levels. Essay 1 explores the impact of BYOD on employees’ performance, job satisfaction, and work-life conflicts. The results indicate that IT integration improves performance and job satisfaction, and reduces work-life conflicts. Alternatively, IT differentiation increases work-life conflicts while having no direct impact on performance or job satisfaction. However, the impact of IT differentiation is enhanced when increased IT integration is present in the organization’s IT portfolio which in combination provides variety for individuals while ensuring reduced compatibility issues across employee tasks. Essay 2 examines how organizations can configure their IT portfolios over time to meet the demands of varying task portfolios. The results provide insights into optimal levels of IT differentiation and IT integration for varying environments. Increased IT differentiation allows employees to utilize more efficient and effective technologies to meet their specific tasks. However, an increased level of IT integration is needed to meet the additional compatibility concerns arising from this IT differentiation. Essay 3 examines how individual decision-making behaviors and organizational IT policies impact the configuration of IT differentiation and IT integration. A combination of online survey vignettes, agent-based simulations, and a questionnaire survey provides insights into how individuals and organizations can impact the IT portfolio over time. The results indicate that the claimed benefits of BYOD may not materialize unless the employees are choosing their provided technologies based on rational decisions. This dissertation finds that BYOD polices may increase productivity and satisfaction for employees and organizations. However, organizations must ensure they examine their task portfolio, employee technology needs and knowledge, and IT policy attributes to ensure BYOD is the right solution. The results provide organizations increased knowledge to ensure increased performance from their IT decisions. Table of
3 citations