Antecedents and effects of individual ambidexterity – A cross-level investigation of exploration and exploitation activities at the employee level

For long-term success, companies need to adapt to technological and environmental change. Organizational ambidexterity, which balances the exploration of new opportunities with the exploitation of existing capabilities, is increasingly viewed as a promising approach to tackle this challenge. However, despite the important role of individuals for firms' ambidexterity and performance, evidence on how exploration of new opportunities and exploitation of existing capabilities are triggered at an individual level and on their subsequent effects on overall performance is still lacking. Accordingly, the present research shifts the focus from organizational ambidexterity to individual ambidexterity. Based on data from 415 employees, the results of structural equation modeling show that both organizational architecture and organizational context can be used to induce individual ambidexterity. Furthermore, positive performance effects of individual ambidexterity across different organizational levels, namely the team and department levels, are confirmed.     

战略柔性、双元性创新和企业绩效

通过对274家企业的问卷调查,探讨了战略柔性对企业绩效的影响,以及双元性创新在此过程中的中介作用。研究表明,战略柔性不仅直接影响企业绩效,而且能够通过双元性创新间接影响企业绩效。最后,指出了研究的意义、研究局限和未来的研究方向。     

CEO proactiveness,innovation, and firm performance

Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) are essential in driving firm innovation. However, despite existing research on CEO personality characteristics and firm innovation and performance, we know relatively little about how personality characteristics reflecting anticipatory action and strong outcome-oriented components, such as proactiveness, shape firm innovation and performance. We explore the relationship between CEO proactiveness and three facets of organizational innovation, as well as its impact on firm performance. We suggest that CEO proactiveness is manifested in different network-building, problem-solving, and feedback-seeking behaviors with different implications for exploratory innovation, exploitative innovation, and organizational ambidexterity, and that its effect on firm performance is partially mediated by organizational ambidexterity. By examining the influence of this important CEO personality characteristic on key firm strategic choices and performance, we extend research on strategic leadership and firm innovation and performance.     

Top management team diversity and ambidexterity: The contingent role of shared responsibility and CEO cognitive trust

Earlier research has suggested that diversity is a double-edged sword when achieving organizational ambidexterity. While it may contribute to the development of new combinations of exploration and exploitation, it may also lead to disagreements and potential conflict within top management teams (TMTs). To improve our understanding of the effectiveness of diversity in ambidextrous organizations, we develop a synergistic perspective on TMT diversity and examine how two types of diversity – functional and age diversity – affect the achievement of organizational ambidexterity. We also identify shared responsibility and CEO cognitive trust as important contingencies that may complement the effects of diversity within TMTs in terms of resolving potential conflicts and managing tensions between exploration and exploitation effectively. Based on multisource data, our study shows that CEO cognitive trust and shared responsibility moderate the relationship between different types of diversity and ambidexterity. Our study has important implications for research on organizational ambidexterity, diversity, and senior leadership.     

Leveraging Big Data Analytics to Improve Quality of Care in Healthcare Organizations: A Configurational Perspective

Big data analytics (BDA) is beneficial for organizations, yet implementing BDA to leverage profitability is fundamental challenge confronting practitioners. Although prior research has explored the impact that BDA has on business growth, there is a lack of research that explains the full complexity of BDA implementations. Examination of how and under what conditions BDA achieves organizational performance from a holistic perspective is absent from the existing literature. Extending the theoretical perspective from the traditional views (e.g. resource‐based theory) to configuration theory, the authors have developed a conceptual model of BDA success that aims to investigate how BDA capabilities interact with complementary organizational resources and organizational capabilities in multiple configuration solutions leading to higher quality of care in healthcare organizations. To test this model, the authors use fuzzy‐set qualitative comparative analysis to analyse multi‐source data acquired from a survey and databases maintained by the Centres for Medicare & Medicaid Services. The findings suggest that BDA, when given alone, is not sufficient in achieving the outcome, but is a synergy effect in which BDA capabilities and analytical personnel's skills together with organizational resources and capabilities as supportive role can improve average excess readmission rates and patient satisfaction in healthcare organizations.     

Introduction: Knowledge Construction and Creation in Organizations*

While adopting a knowledge‐based perspective on organizations has been valuable, since, among other things, it enables us to see links between organizational learning and a firm's competitive advantage through the development of idiosyncratic capabilities, it has nonetheless tended to treat organizational knowledge as ‘given’, exploring how it is related to other ‘given’ variables. The focus of this special issue is to unpack the notion of organizational knowledge by exploring the processes and practices through which knowledge is constructed and created in organizations. A constructivist perspective assumes that ‘knowledge’ presupposes work and seeks to explore how what comes to be considered as organizational knowledge is established and validated (or fails to do so). By seeing organizational knowledge as work we can further probe into how knowledge is shaped by organizational strategies and incentives and, more radically, how power and politics influence the struggle between competing bodies of knowledge in organizations.     

On micro-foundations of dynamic capabilities: A multi-level perspective based on CEO personality and knowledge-based capital

In recent years, researchers have asked why some firms are better than others at developing dynamic capabilities. The existing literature assesses micro-foundations separately, either on the managerial or on the organizational level. This study aims to provide a more holistic picture on the antecedents of dynamic capabilities by integrating managerial and organizational micro-foundations. Specifically, we posit that the personality of Chief Executive Officers (CEOs), manifested through their core self-evaluation (CSE), represents an individual-level micro-foundation which influences three types of a firm's knowledge-based capital—human, social, and organizational capital. We also argue that these three, in turn, are organization-level micro-foundations that ultimately enable the development of a firm's dynamic capabilities. We test our multi-level framework using data from 307 German CEOs, and confirm that CEO CSE is positively related with all three forms of knowledge-based capital. We further find that human capital and organizational capital mediate the relationship between a CEO's CSE and a firm's dynamic capabilities. Our research contributes by extending a central framework of the micro-foundations project (the bathtub model) that integrates the upper echelons perspective into a multi-level analysis. We empirically validate this model and advance the understanding of how firm leaders indirectly influence firm dynamic capabilities by shaping individual learning conditions.     

Dynamic Capabilities: An Exploration of How Firms Renew their Resource Base

The aim of this paper is to extend the concept of dynamic capabilities. Building on prior research, we suggest that there are three levels of dynamic capabilities which are related to managers' perceptions of environmental dynamism. At the first level we find incremental dynamic capabilities: those capabilities concerned with the continuous improvement of the firm's resource base. At the second level are renewing dynamic capabilities, those that refresh, adapt and augment the resource base. These two levels are usually conceived as one and represent what the literature refers to as dynamic capabilities. At the third level are regenerative dynamic capabilities, which impact, not on the firm's resource base, but on its current set of dynamic capabilities, i.e. these change the way the firm changes its resource base. We explore the three levels using illustrative examples and conclude that regenerative dynamic capabilities may either come from inside the firm or enter the firm from outside, via changes in leadership or the intervention of external change agents.     

Explaining ambidextrous leadership in the aerospace and defense organizations

Researchers have increasingly been using the term of organizational ambidexterity to denote the simultaneous use of exploration and exploitation in organizations. Exploration refers to innovation, whereas exploitation addresses cost efficiency. However, despite the plethora of research output on ambidexterity, very few studies are actually providing insights into what specific behaviors and leadership styles accomplish ambidexterity and how organizational constraints influence ambidextrous leadership. In this research, we aim to explain the key properties of ambidextrous leadership, where we propose that ambidexterity is most efficiently promoted by ambidextrous leaders who combine two leadership styles: transformational leadership and transactional leadership. In our study, we associate transformational leadership to exploration, whereas transactional leadership is linked to exploitation. We conduct a research on ambidextrous leadership in the aerospace and defense organizations while also taking into account how organizational structure and environmental dynamism impact leadership styles. The results of our research reveal that both leadership styles are present at the senior management level. Top management, however, mostly uses transactional leadership in part because of structural and environmental constraints while also employing some limited form of transformational leadership style. Therefore, our study concludes that in this particular field the ambidextrous leaders are primarily focused on exploitative activities, while only a limited amount of their time is being allocated on exploration-oriented objectives.     

Ambidextrous Organizational Culture,Contextual Ambidexterity and New Product Innovation: A Comparative Study of UK and Chinese High‐tech Firms

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.     

Drivers and Performance Outcomes of Innovativeness: An Empirical Study

The issue of innovativeness within organizations has attracted considerable attention in the literature. However, limited knowledge exists about the drivers of and their simultaneous effects on innovativeness and the role of innovativeness in enhancing performance. We adopt the resource‐based view (RBV) of the firm and insights from the literature on capabilities to investigate specific capability types serving as antecedents to innovativeness and to examine its performance outcomes. From a sample of 218 Greek manufacturers, the results indicate that managerial, entrepreneurial and technical capabilities facilitate the establishment of innovativeness, which in turn enhances business performance. The study lends support to prior research that highlights the importance of innovativeness in enhancing organizational performance and sharpens understanding of the drivers of innovativeness and the way they collectively operate through innovativeness to boost performance. The study further provides new insights into the role of innovativeness from the perspective of the RBV, while highlighting certain firm capabilities that might both enable and impede competitive advantage and superior performance creation. As such, this study contributes to the effective management of the innovativeness process within organizations.     

Mechanisms for Managing Ambidexterity: A Review and Research Agenda

Ambidexterity is of central importance to the competitive advantage of the firm, yet to date there is limited understanding of how it is managed. The theorization of ambidexterity is inadequate for complex, practical realities and, in turn, this hinders the way in which it can aid the management of ambidexterity in practice. This paper asks: What are the mechanisms for achieving ambidexterity? The authors use a systematic review to develop a research framework which integrates intellectual capital resources (organizational, social and human capital) across various levels of analysis (organization, group and individual). This review extends understanding of the generic mechanisms (i.e. temporal, structural and contextual ambidexterity) that dominate the literature. This allows for a more fine‐grained understanding of how ambidexterity is achieved and enables avenues for further research to be identified.     

Darwinism,organizational evolution and survival: key challenges for future research

How do social organizations evolve? How do they adapt to environmental pressures? What resources and capabilities determine their survival within dynamic competition? Charles Darwin’s seminal work The Origin of Species (1859) has provided a significant impact on the development of the management and organization theory literatures on organizational evolution. This article introduces the JMG Special Issue focused on Darwinism, organizational evolution and survival. We discuss key themes in the organizational evolution research that have emerged in recent years. These include the increasing adoption of the co-evolutionary approach, with a particular focus on the definition of appropriate units of analysis, such as routines, and related challenges associated with exploring the relationship between co-evolution, re-use of knowledge, adaptation, and exaptation processes. We then introduce the three articles that we have finally accepted in this Special Issue after an extensive, multi-round, triple blind-review process. We briefly outline how each of these articles contributes to understanding among scholars, practitioners and policy makers of the continuous evolutionary processes within and among social organizations and systems.     

Distributed sensemaking in network risk analysis

This article responds to the call advancing risk science as an independent research field, by introducing a conceptual model for risk analysis based on distributed sensemaking. Significant advances in recent decades have expanded the use of risk analysis to almost every organization globally. Continued improvements have been made to our understanding of risk, placing a wide range of contexts under organizational control. This article argues that four dimensions are central in how organizations make sense of uncertainty in their context and hence do risk analysis: the activities the organization engages in, their sensory systems, the role and competence of individuals, and the ability to coordinate information through organizational structures. The structure enables insight into the decision-making process and the dimensions contributing to how organizations perceive risks and uncertainty in a given context. Three examples from the Arctic context illustrate the network risk analysis model's practical application and how it will expose weaknesses in these organizations’ risk analysis and decision-making processes. Finally, the article discusses sensemaking in network risk analysis and how such an approach supports organizations’ ability to perceive, collect, process, and decide on changes in context.     

How top management team behavioral integration and behavioral complexity enable organizational ambidexterity: The moderating role of contextual ambidexterity

Little is known about how top management teams (TMTs) make balanced strategic decisions (exploration and exploitation) and spearhead organizational ambidexterity. To address the theoretical call to explore how TMTs can help create ambidexterity, we propose a theoretical model where TMT behavioral integration cultivates behavioral complexity in a TMT that can build organizational ambidexterity. Further, we argue that the relationship between TMT behavioral complexity and organizational ambidexterity is moderated by contextual ambidexterity. Drawing on research in the areas of leadership, TMT, organizational context and ambidexterity, we explore implications for future research.     

组织能力：资源基础理论的静态观与动态观辨析

基于资源基础理论的演化过程,将组织能力区别为静态能力和动态能力;企业的静态能力集中表现为企业实力,企业的动态能力集中表现为企业活力.静态能力和动态能力是企业能力的不同解释.据文献回顾,基于静态观而形成VRIN模型,基于动态观而形成动态能力模型.阐明了组织能力、静态能力和动态能力的概念.并且对静态能力与动态能力的关系进行辨析,认为动态能力是对静态能力的一种扬弃.进而,提出了企业组织能力研究模型并探讨动态能力进一步的研究方向.     

基于和谐管理理论的企业动态能力研究

基于和谐管理理论的组织运行模式,从组织学习的角度,以横向基于认知的构建和纵向基于适应性的演化两个维度展开,界定了动态能力的内涵.首先,认为动态能力包括组织对环境变化的认知能力以及在新主题导引下对原有资源配置方式做出调整以适应变化的能力,是组织在日常运行过程中应对外界变化时全体组织成员的学习能力;其次,认为动态能力是在构建与演化两个维度的耦合中演化的;第三,从组织运行的主题形成、主题实现和反馈学习三个阶段归纳了影响动态能力形成和演化的因素,这些因素主要分布在组织和领导两个层次上,最后针对已有动态能力研究中存在的一些问题进行了讨论.     

Building Organizational and Scientific Platforms in the Pharmaceutical Industry: A Process Perspective on the Development of Dynamic Capabilities

In this paper, we examine the process of dynamic capability development in a large pharmaceutical firm. Using interviews with multiple managers at different organizational levels, we developed two narratives of the process of developing two separate dynamic capabilities in the same firm. We focus on three areas that prior research has shown to be critical in the early stages of the process of implementing new strategic initiatives: the cognitive orientations of key personnel, managerial action undertaken within the firm, and the firm's internal and external contexts. We provide evidence that managers undertake specific initiatives based on their own particular cognitive orientations , and that senior managers play a major role in the development of capabilities by imprinting the organization with their specific cognitive orientation and then orchestrating the multilevel organizational routines necessary for actualization of a capability. These replicable actions by senior management during the early stages of capability development can lead to the development of a capability that is not initially in the cognitive frames of lower level employees. Finally, we will show that internal and external contingencies have a profound impact on the decision to develop a capability, and to discontinue its development. Our findings thus suggest that the process of developing new capabilities shares common elements with other strategic initiatives.     

Routines Revisited: Exploring the Capabilities and Practice Perspectives

Organizational routines, repetitive patterns of interdependent organizational actions, have been investigated through the lens of capabilities, rooted in organizational economics, and the lens of practice, grounded in organization theory. The former approach emphasizes the “what” or “why,” while the latter emphasizes the “how.” In this review, we summarize both of these literatures and explore recent empirical studies in each stream, identifying common themes. In particular, we compare and contrast how each perspective incorporates the effects of individual actors, tacit knowledge, ambidexterity, and context specificity. We find that the two streams of work have distinct trajectories and strengths, but elements of each can be complementary to developing a more holistic understanding of organizational routines.     

Organizational Memory: From Expectations Memory to Procedural Memory

Organizational memory is not just the stock of knowledge about how to do things, but also of expectations of organizational members vis‐à‐vis each other and the organization as a whole. The central argument of this paper is that this second type of organizational memory –organizational expectations memory– is a necessary precondition for successfully creating and maintaining organizational procedural memory, which is at the basis of organizational performance. If members of organizations have fewer expectations of being rewarded beyond what is stipulated in formal contracts, these individuals are less likely to risk investing in collective tacit and firm‐specific knowledge resources and more likely to focus on building individual and mobile knowledge resources that have value outside the boundaries of the organization. A case study of latent organizations in the Dutch film industry is presented to support the central argument and suggests further avenues of research, in particular concerning the effects of labour mobility on organizational expectations memory.