scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Posted Content•

Structural Differentiation and Ambidexterity: The Mediating Role of Integration Mechanisms

Justin J. P. Jansen1, Michiel Pieter Tempelaar1, Frans van den Bosch1, Henk W. Volberda1•
Erasmus University Rotterdam1
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.

Content maybe subject to copyright    Report

Citations
More filters
Journal Article•DOI•
Institutional Complexity and Organizational Responses

[...]

Royston Greenwood1, Mia Raynard1, Farah Kodeih2, E. Micelotta1, Michael Lounsbury1 •
University of Alberta1, ESSEC Business School2
26 Jul 2011-The Academy of Management Annals
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)....

    [...]

Journal Article•DOI•
Organizational Ambidexterity: Balancing Exploitation and Exploration for Sustained Performance

[...]

Sebastian Raisch1, Julian Birkinshaw2, Gilbert Probst3, Michael L. Tushman4•
University of St. Gallen1, London Business School2, University of Geneva3, Harvard University4
01 Jul 2009-Organization Science
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•
Organizational Ambidexterity: Past, Present and Future

[...]

O'Reilly Charles A., Tushman Michael L.
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

Journal Article•DOI•
Exploration and Exploitation Within and Across Organizations

[...]

Dovev Lavie1, Uriel Stettner2, Michael L. Tushman3•
Technion – Israel Institute of Technology1, Tel Aviv University2, Harvard University3
19 Apr 2010-The Academy of Management Annals
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)....

    [...]

Journal Article•DOI•
CROSSROADS---Microfoundations of Performance: Balancing Efficiency and Flexibility in Dynamic Environments

[...]

Kathleen M. Eisenhardt1, Nathan Furr2, Christopher B. Bingham3•
Stanford University1, Brigham Young University2, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill3
01 Nov 2010-Organization Science
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•DOI•
Transformative capacity: continual structuring by intertemporal technology transfer

[...]

Raghu Garud1, Praveen R. Nayyar1•
New York University1
01 Jun 1994-Strategic Management Journal
TL;DR: The ability to maintain internally developed technology over time is important for corporate vitality as discussed by the authors, and it depends on how well a firm accomplishes three tasks: the choice of technologies, their maintenance over time, and their reactivation and synthesis when required.
Abstract: The ability to maintain internally developed technology over time is important for corporate vitality. We label this ability transformative capacity and suggest that it depends on how well a firm accomplishes three tasks, These tasks are: the choice of technologies, their maintenance over time, and their reactivation and synthesis when required. To establish the need for transformative capacity, we first discuss time lags in the development of technologies and markets to suggest that not all technologies developed by firms can be utilized immediately. We then examine dimensions of technological knowledge that affect knowledge transfer over time. Next, we build on the resource-based view of the firm to discuss how firms can create transformative capacity. The concluding discussion focuses on the implications of transformative capacity for the analysis and management of technological investments as a way to maintain corporate vitality.

755 citations

"Structural Differentiation and Ambi..." refers background in this paper

  • ...Integrative efforts are vital to ambidextrous organizations as existing knowledge sources in exploitative units may need to be revisited, reinterpreted, and applied in exploratory units due to changes in the organization’s strategy or environment (Garud and Nayyar 1994, Postrel 2002)....

    [...]

Journal Article•DOI•
Strategic leadership for exploration and exploitation: The moderating role of environmental dynamism

[...]

Justin J. P. Jansen1, Dusya Vera2, Mary Crossan3•
Erasmus University Rotterdam1, University of Houston2, University of Western Ontario3
01 Feb 2009-Leadership Quarterly
TL;DR: In this article, the authors explore the role of strategic leaders in managing exploration and exploitation, and reveal how the impact of leadership is contingent upon dynamic environmental conditions and argue that environmental dynamism needs to be taken into account to fully understand the effectiveness of leaders.
Abstract: This study advances prior theoretical research by linking transformational and transactional behaviors of strategic leaders to two critical outputs of organizational learning: exploratory and exploitative innovation. Findings indicate that transformational leadership behaviors contribute significantly to adopting generative thinking and pursuing exploratory innovation. Transactional leadership behaviors, on the other hand, facilitate improving and extending existing knowledge and are associated with exploitative innovation. In addition, we argue that environmental dynamism needs to be taken into account to fully understand the effectiveness of strategic leaders. Our study provides new insights that misfits rather than fits between leadership behaviors and innovative outcomes matter in dynamic environments. Hence, we contribute to the debate on the role of strategic leaders in managing exploration and exploitation, not only by examining how specific leadership behaviors impact innovative outcomes, but also by revealing how the impact of leadership is contingent upon dynamic environmental conditions.

742 citations

"Structural Differentiation and Ambi..." refers background in this paper

  • ...…has argued that leadership behaviors such as transformational and transactional leadership contribute to exploration and exploitation within an organization (Jansen et al. 2009), and may also may foster an organizational context suitable for hosting contradictory forces (Vera and Crossan 2004)....

    [...]

Journal Article•DOI•
Architectural Innovation and Modular Corporate Forms

[...]

D. Charles Galunic1, Kathleen M. Eisenhardt2•
INSEAD1, Stanford University2
01 Dec 2001-Academy of Management Journal
TL;DR: Based on an intensive and inductive study of a Fortune 100 corporation, the authors describes how dynamic capabilities that reconfigure division resources may enable architectural innovation, that is, architectural innovation.
Abstract: Based on an intensive and inductive study of a Fortune 100 corporation, this article describes how dynamic capabilities that reconfigure division resources—that is, architectural innovation—may ope...

739 citations

Journal Article•DOI•
Organizational Ambidexterity: Towards a Multilevel Understanding

[...]

Zeki Simsek1•
University of Connecticut1
01 Jun 2009-Journal of Management Studies
TL;DR: The concept of organizational ambidexterity has been extensively studied in the literature as mentioned in this paper, however, this line of inquiry remains unfocused and limited due to a lack of more encompassing conceptual efforts.
Abstract: Although interest in the concept of organizational ambidexterity has increased during recent years, this line of inquiry remains unfocused and limited due to a lack of more encompassing conceptual efforts. As a first step, we begin by critically reviewing previous research on the conceptualization, antecedents, and consequences of ambidexterity. We then offer a model that specifies a more encompassing, multilevel explanation of ambidexterity. Finally, we trace research and managerial implications and suggest some potential research avenues.

731 citations

"Structural Differentiation and Ambi..." refers background in this paper

  • ...Additionally, future research may capture multiple levels of analysis and uncover how unit-level and firm-level or firm-level and interfirm-level characteristics contribute to achieving ambidexterity (see, e.g., Simsek 2009)....

    [...]

Journal Article•DOI•
Strategy as Vector and the Inertia of Coevolutionary Lock-in:

[...]

Robert A. Burgelman1•
Stanford University1
01 Jun 2002-Administrative Science Quarterly
TL;DR: In this article, a longitudinal study of Andy Grove's tenure as Intel Corporation's chief executive officer (CEO) documents how he moved Intel's strategy-making process from an internal-ecology model to the classical rational-actor model during 1987-1998.
Abstract: To examine the consequences of a period of extraordinary success for the long-term adaptive capability of a firm's strategy-making process, this comparative longitudinal study of Andy Grove's tenure as Intel Corporation's chief executive officer (CEO) documents how he moved Intel's strategy-making process from an internal-ecology model to the classical rational-actor model during 1987-1998. His creation of a highly successful strategy vector pursued through an extremely focused induced-strategy process led to coevolutionary lock-in with the personal computer market segment, in which Intel's strategy making became increasingly tied to its existing product market. Intracompany analysis of four new business development cases highlights the inertial consequences of coevolutionary lock-in. The paper examines implications of coevolutionary lock-in in terms of its effect on balancing induced and autonomous strategy processes and exploitation and exploration in organizational learning.

708 citations

Related Papers (5)
Antecedents and effects of individual ambidexterity – A cross-level investigation of exploration and exploitation activities at the employee level

[...]

01 Aug 2019-European Management Journal
Benedikt Schnellbächer, Sven Heidenreich, Andreas Wald
Toward a dynamic construction of organizational ambidexterity: Exploring the synergies between structural differentiation, organizational context, and interorganizational relations

[...]

01 May 2020-Journal of Business Research
Mercedes Úbeda-García, Enrique Claver-Cortés, Bartolomé Marco-Lajara, Patrocinio Zaragoza-Sáez 
Organizational Ambidexterity : Balancing Exploitation and Exploration in Organizations

[...]

01 Jan 2013
Mert Yigit
Achieving ambidexterity across multiple organisational levels and functional areas : synchronising the development and marketing of firms' new and established products

[...]

01 Oct 2012
Nima Heirati
Organizing for Ambidexterity: A Paradox-based Typology of Ambidexterity-related Organizational States

[...]

01 Dec 2015-Bar. Brazilian Administration Review
Daniel Karrer, Denise Fleck