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•
Hybrid Ambidexterity: How the Environment Shapes Incumbents’ Use of Structural and Contextual Approaches

[...]

Jan Ossenbrink1, Jan Ossenbrink2, Joern Hoppmann2, Joern Hoppmann3, Volker H. Hoffmann2 •
Stanford University1, ETH Zurich2, University of Oldenburg3
08 Jul 2019-Organization Science
TL;DR: It is shown that not only can organizations use structural or contextual approaches to simultaneously explore novel opportunities and exploit existing ones, but also how these approaches can be combined to create new opportunities for women in the workforce.
Abstract: According to the literature on ambidexterity, organizations can use structural or contextual approaches to simultaneously explore novel opportunities and exploit existing ones. So far, however, we ...

47 citations

Journal Article•DOI•
Shedding new light on the relationship between contextual ambidexterity and firm performance: An investigation of internal contingencies

[...]

Dirk De Clercq1, Narongsak (Tek) Thongpapanl1, Dimo Dimov2•
Brock University1, University of Bath2
01 Apr 2013-Technovation
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors investigated four key factors that influence the relationship between contextual ambidexterity and firm performance: two knowledge exchange elements (i.e., informational justice and task conflict) and two aspects of the internal competitive environment (e.g., resource competition and reward interdependence).

47 citations

Journal Article•DOI•
Introducing conflict as the microfoundation of organizational ambidexterity

[...]

Alexander Martin1, Arne Keller2, Johann Fortwengel•
University of Flensburg1, Free University of Berlin2
01 Feb 2019-Strategic Organization
TL;DR: The authors argue that ambidexterity is a dynamic and conflict-laden phenomenon, and locate conflict at the level of individuals, units, and organizations, and develop the argument that conflicts in social interaction serve as the micro-foundation to organizing ambideXterity.
Abstract: This article contributes to our understanding of organizational ambidexterity by introducing conflict as its microfoundation. Existing research distinguishes between three approaches to how organizations can be ambidextrous, that is, engage in both exploitation and exploration. They may sequentially shift the strategic focus of the organization over time, they may establish structural arrangements enabling the simultaneous pursuit of being both exploitative and explorative, or they may provide a supportive organizational context for ambidextrous behavior. However, we know little about how exactly ambidexterity is accomplished and managed. We argue that ambidexterity is a dynamic and conflict-laden phenomenon, and we locate conflict at the level of individuals, units, and organizations. We develop the argument that conflicts in social interaction serve as the microfoundation to organizing ambidexterity, but that their function and type vary across the different approaches toward ambidexterity. The perspect...

47 citations

Journal Article•DOI•
Examining Links between Pre and Post M&A Value Creation Mechanisms — Exploitation, Exploration and Ambidexterity in Central European SMEs

[...]

Florian Bauer, Andreas Strobl, Mai Anh Dao, Kurt Matzler, Nicole Rudolf 
21 Jul 2016-Long Range Planning
TL;DR: In this article, the authors apply exploration and exploitation as different concepts of learning to conceptualize the strategic fit among organizations involved, and derive implications for theory and practice based on those findings.

47 citations

Journal Article•DOI•
The role of project and organizational context in managing high-tech R&D projects

[...]

Aravind Chandrasekaran1, Kevin Linderman2, Roger G. Schroeder2•
Max M. Fisher College of Business1, University of Minnesota2
01 Apr 2015-Production and Operations Management
TL;DR: In this paper, a qualitative case study from four high-tech business units involving 10 R&D projects helps understand the different types of projects based on their learning goals and the importance of designing project and organizational context differently.
Abstract: High-tech organizations often struggle to manage different types of R&D projects. Evidence from research and practice suggests that managers frequently categorize and manage projects based on the extent of change triggered in product, process, technology, and market dimensions. However, this can create challenges in high-tech organizations. This study investigates how high-tech organizations manage R&D projects based on their learning goals. First, we argue for the benefits of categorizing R&D projects based on the degree of exploration and exploitation learning goals. A qualitative case study from four high-tech business units involving 10 R&D projects helps understand the different types of projects based on their learning goals. The case study shows that R&D projects in high-tech organizations typically fall into three categories based on their learning goals: Radical innovation projects, Incremental innovation projects, and Hybrid projects. Second, we iterate between literature and evidence from our qualitative data to theorize how project context and organizational context affect project performance depending on the type of project. The data for the empirical analysis come from a multilevel survey of 110 R&D projects across 34 high-tech business units. Results show the importance of designing project and organizational context differently for the three types of R&D projects. Collectively, this study offers a new perspective on how to manage high-tech R&D projects.

47 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