Search results

The purpose of this paper is to explore how organizations manage and integrate exploration and exploitation across the innovation project portfolio. Such ambidextrous capabilities are required for organizations to innovate and succeed in today's rapidly changing competitive environment. Understanding how exploration and exploitation projects are integrated can illustrate ways to enhance ambidexterity and boost learning for the benefit of both approaches.

A multiple-case study approach was used to explore innovation portfolio management in six large organizations that emphasize innovation in their strategies.

The findings draw upon concepts of paradox and contingency to reveal that the inherent tension between formality and flexibility in managing innovation project portfolios is aligned with the need for organizational ambidexterity that maintains effective exploitative innovation while supporting explorative innovation capabilities. Four integration mechanisms are identified that enhance ambidexterity across the innovation portfolio by embedding processes for transition from exploration to exploitation and cross-fertilizing knowledge to build innovation capability across both exploration and exploitation.

Managers may find inspiration on ways to enhance learning by bridging exploration and exploitation projects from the four types of integration mechanisms. Recognizing the paradoxical nature of the tension between formality and flexibility in project and portfolio management may also help guide organizations to effectively develop ambidextrous approaches to enhance overall innovation outcomes.

In contrast to perspectives which suggest that paradox and contingency approaches represent disparate perspectives, the authors demonstrate how they can complement each other and work together through innovation portfolio management to support ambidexterity at the portfolio and project levels.

This study examines the relationship between knowledge management (KM) capability and innovation ambidexterity, and their subsequent influence on firm performance. It also investigates whether organizational structure – in terms of connectedness and centralization – helps to develop a suitable context that either hinders or catalyzes the effectiveness of KM capability in predicting innovation ambidexterity.

Data were collected from 336 manufacturing organizations in Pakistan using a random sampling technique. Partial least square-based structural equation modelling (PLS–SEM) was employed to analyze the data.

Results reveal that KM capability is positively linked with innovation ambidexterity and firm performance. Innovation ambidexterity positively mediates the link between KM capability and firm performance. Connectedness positively moderates the association between KM capability and innovation ambidexterity. However, centralization negatively moderates the link between KM capability and innovation ambidexterity.

This research offers theoretical insights into when and how KM capability is effective in prompting performance through innovation ambidexterity by creating a suitable context.

The study indicates that innovation may develop in an ambidextrous manner in an organization as long as the organization is proficient in creating a suitable context, i.e. structure to support it. Organizations should strive to develop sustained KM capabilities because these are seminal for enabling the challenging task of exploiting existing resources for innovation while also tapping on new opportunities for explorative breakthroughs.

This research contributes to a novel understanding regarding the importance of KM capability in fostering manufacturing organizations to engage in ambidexterity by creating a suitable context where optimal amount of each form of innovation activities is calibrated using KM capability.

1. Knowledge management capability is crucial for simultaneous exploitation and exploration of innovation

2. Innovation ambidexterity (i.e. simultaneous exploitation and exploration of innovation) fosters firm performance

3. Innovation ambidexterity mediates the positive effect of knowledge management capability on firm performance

4. Connectedness strengthens the relationship between knowledge management capability and innovation ambidexterity

5. Centralization weakens the effect of knowledge management capability on innovation ambidexterity

6. Innovation can be developed in an ambidextrous way in organizations as long as organizations have knowledge-based competencies and proficient in creating suitable context

Knowledge management capability is crucial for simultaneous exploitation and exploration of innovation

Innovation ambidexterity (i.e. simultaneous exploitation and exploration of innovation) fosters firm performance

Innovation ambidexterity mediates the positive effect of knowledge management capability on firm performance

Connectedness strengthens the relationship between knowledge management capability and innovation ambidexterity

Centralization weakens the effect of knowledge management capability on innovation ambidexterity

Innovation can be developed in an ambidextrous way in organizations as long as organizations have knowledge-based competencies and proficient in creating suitable context

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the influence of a positive form of leadership, particularly authentic leadership, on ambidexterity, as ambidexterity has shown to improve financial performance. What is less clear, however, is how to create the organisational context towards ambidexterity or balanced exploitative and explorative innovation. This study set out to fill that gap in researching the direct influence of authentic leadership as well as indirect effect through innovation climate on ambidexterity.

A quantitative research approach was followed, with an online survey to employees in South African organisations. There were 733 useable questionnaires. Structural equation modelling was used to test proposed hypotheses of direct, indirect and moderation effects.

The results revealed that authentic leadership has a significant and positive direct effect on ambidexterity and a significant indirect effect through an innovation climate. Environmental dynamism lessened the regression weight of the relationship between authentic leadership and ambidexterity.

The data collected were cross-sectional and respondents were South African employees; therefore, caution should be exercised when generalising the results to other organisations in a broader African context.

Understanding that both authentic leadership and innovation climate are required to significantly influence ambidexterity allows organisations to direct their leadership selection and development.

The main contribution of this research lies in clarifying the influence of authentic leadership on ambidexterity in the South African context.

The purpose of this paper is to examine how and when distributed leadership (DL) enhances innovation ambidexterity by considering knowledge sharing as a mediator and element of organizational structure as a moderator.

Data obtained from 269 questionnaires were analyzed empirically to reveal the relationship of the variables.

The results suggest that DL has a positive effect on innovation ambidexterity, and the relationship was partially mediated by knowledge sharing. Connectedness positively moderated the relationship between knowledge sharing and innovation ambidexterity.

The complexity and ambiguity that organizations often experience increases the difficulty for a single leader to successfully perform necessary leadership functions. The results show that DL is crucial to the promotion of innovation ambidexterity.

By building on organizational learning theory and integrating insights from knowledge creation theory, this study extends the prior research by uncovering the mechanism through which DL promotes innovation ambidexterity and the moderating effect of informal organizational structure.

This study aims to extend the temporal perspective on ambidexterity by investigating how and under what conditions top management team (TMT) temporal leadership improves innovation ambidexterity.

Using a questionnaire survey, data were collected from 165 small- and medium-sized enterprises in China. Ordinary least squares regression models were applied to test the hypotheses.

The findings show that TMT temporal leadership has a positive effect on innovation ambidexterity and temporal conflict mediates this relationship. Market dynamism and institutional support moderate the indirect effect of TMT temporal leadership on innovation ambidexterity.

Managers wishing to promote exploration and exploitation simultaneously should pay attention to the temporal aspects of their innovation strategy and improve their temporal leadership activities.

This study highlights the temporal conflicts in ambidexterity and clarifies the enabling role of TMT temporal leadership. It contributes new insights to the research on organizational ambidexterity and strategic leadership.

The purpose of this paper is to examine innovation in the resource-constrained context of India’s healthcare industry. It is argued that the process of innovation in addressing healthcare management challenges in such a context occurs through organisational ambidexterity and that human resource management (HRM) plays an important role.

A qualitative research methodology is applied to explore the role of HR practices in facilitating contextual ambidexterity and subsequent innovations in healthcare in India. The unit of analysis is the “case” of healthcare providers in India and in-depth interview and documentary data in two case sites are analysed to reveal the role of HRM in facilitating contextual ambidexterity and innovation. Data analysis was undertaken first at a within-case and then at a cross-case analysis level using interpretive manual coding based on how the data explained the role of HRM in delivering innovative outcomes and supporting organisational ambidexterity.

The authors found evidence of the use of sets of high-involvement HRM practices for exploration of new ideas and efficiency-driven HRM practices for creating contextual ambidexterity in the case organisations. Further, managerial/leadership style was found to play an important role in creating cultures of trust, openness, risk-taking and employee empowerment, supported by an appropriate mix of intrinsic and extrinsic rewards. Finally, training was also reported as being central to creating an ambidextrous context for delivering on various innovations in these healthcare providers.

This study represents an exploration of innovation in the context of India’s healthcare sector through intersecting literatures of ambidexterity, innovation and HRM practices. In light of the emerging economy research context, an important empirical contribution is palpable. Moreover, through a study design which included collecting data from multiple informants on the role of human resources in facilitating innovative outcomes, the authors reveal the role of HR-related initiatives, beyond formal HR practices in creating contextual ambidexterity. This study also reveals the degree to which contextual idiosyncrasies enhance our understanding of the role of HR in facilitating innovation in emerging economies.

Innovation ambidexterity is crucial for fostering growth and gaining a competitive advantage in small and medium enterprises (SMEs). Previous research indicates that achieving a balance between exploration and exploitation is a multifaceted phenomenon occurring across various levels. This paper aims to examine the influence of individual, organizational and institutional factors on the ambidextrous innovation of Chinese niche leaders using a configurational perspective.

This study uses secondary data collected from 69 Chinese niche leaders in the new equipment manufacturing industry. The authors use fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis to investigate how owner openness, age, digitization, the formal institutional environment and the informal institutional environment jointly influence innovation ambidexterity.

By using fuzzy set analysis, this study categorizes combinations of interdependent factors that promote innovation ambidexterity. In particular, the authors pinpoint three configurations that foster high innovation ambidexterity and two configurations that lack such high levels of innovation ambidexterity. The analysis results suggest that innovation paradoxes in SMEs are linked to a nested system comprising leadership, organizational factors and the institutional environment.

This study elucidates the mechanism of innovation ambidexterity through a configurational perspective. This research proposes and validates a framework that enables SMEs to develop ambidextrous innovation capabilities, thereby integrating organizational ambidexterity theory and shedding light on the intricately complex nature of innovation ambidexterity.

This study aims to explore the innovation deployment of construction contracting firms through exploratory–exploitative learning and organisational ambidexterity.

Firstly, a literature-based conceptual framework was developed to explain innovation implementation through exploratory–exploitative learning and organisational ambidexterity. A prominent Hong Kong construction contracting firm was then selected as the case study to explore its innovation deployment at different organisational levels (i.e. firm and project levels). Qualitative data were attained by conducting 12 semi-structured interviews with industry experts and document analysis. The thematic analysis using NVivo 12 software was adopted to analyse data.

Findings reveal that the case study firm successfully fosters innovation when ambidexterity is achieved through the balance between exploratory (i.e. radical innovation) and exploitative learnings (i.e. incremental innovation).

Establishing uniform ambidexterity (i.e. 50:50) at the firm or project level is not mandatory to deploy innovation successfully. The ratio can vary based on the characteristics and requirements of construction firms.

This paper shall motivate construction practitioners to adopt radical–incremental innovation ambidexterity in firms and ultimately enhance the productivity and efficiency of the construction industry.

Previous construction innovation research has frequently explored firm or project-level innovation separately. This study identified a multi-level focus on innovation. Through the lens of exploratory–exploitative theory, different forms of innovation ambidexterity for different levels are suggested rather than one specific ambidexterity.

This study aims to build upon resource orchestration theory to theorize and empirically test a model that demonstrates how knowledge assets and innovation ambidexterity trigger a synergy in favor of firm performance.

Drawing on a survey of 158 Iranian knowledge-intensive companies, this study uses the partial least squares based on structural equation modeling to test the research hypotheses.

The results show that two elements of knowledge assets, namely, structural and relational capital, indirectly affect firm performance through the full mediation of innovation ambidexterity. The findings indicate that human capital has no relationship with both innovation ambidexterity and firm performance.

This study offers fresh insights into the issue of how organizations can create value from an effective orchestration of various strategic resources and capabilities, including knowledge assets and innovation ambidexterity.

This study applies resource orchestration theory to concurrently the areas of knowledge resources and organizational ambidexterity to show how innovation ambidexterity plays a role in translating three various knowledge assets into performance.

While the performance benefits of relational resources and managerial ambidexterity have been widely discussed in coopetition literature, there is only limited evidence that illustrates the underlying relationships between these relational resources and managerial ambidexterity. Against this background, this paper aims to investigate how managerial ambidexterity moderates the innovation ambidexterity effects of relational resources (i.e. reciprocal investments and complementary resources).

This study forwards various hypotheses that are grounded within the theoretical tenets of the relational view and the dynamic capabilities perspective. To test the hypotheses, this study uses survey data provided by 313 firms that pursue horizontal coopetition relationships.

The research findings offer important insights in that while reciprocal investments lead to innovation ambidexterity, complementary resources do not result in such benefits. Additionally, managerial ambidexterity complements the relational resources to develop innovation ambidexterity if and only if both managerial exploration and exploitation are applied simultaneously.

As opposed to widely-held beliefs, this study finds that firms' use of complementary resources is not likely to lead to innovation ambidexterity even though such resources can help in developing strong relationships. In addition, although often overlooked, managerial ambidexterity plays a vital role in transforming relational resources into useful innovations for firms involved in coopetition relationships. It is crucial for firms that their managers balance their ambidextrous activities of exploration and exploitation so as to develop innovation ambidexterity.