Search results

The aim of this paper is to deconstruct the organizational capability of ambidexterity into a typology of hierarchical dimensions that includes each type’s enabling mechanisms and capabilities.

This work reviews and integrates extant literature on ambidexterity and the hierarchy of capabilities to distinguish dimensions of ambidexterity and link each type to capabilities identified in prior research.

A hierarchy involving zero-, first- and second-order ambidexterity is developed. Mechanisms and capabilities for creating and sustaining each type of ambidexterity are described.

As only an initial and conceptual foray toward the purpose stated above, this research does not attempt to argue a comprehensive theoretical framework. Nor does it intend to extend or propose new theory regarding the origins of ambidexterity capabilities or the specific causal relationships between them.

Although prior literature emphasizes approaches for achieving and maintaining ambidexterity, these generally refer to what is described here as zero-order ambidexterity. The hierarchical and holistic system view offered in this research suggests greater importance for second-order ambidexterity and capabilities of top managers for exercising cognitive, behavioral and process leadership complexity.

Recent literature on ambidexterity begins to suggest varied types or levels of ambidexterity. No known work, however, has expressly deconstructed ambidexterity into component dimensions via the hierarchy of capabilities framework.

Establishing a competitive advantage in today's dynamic environment involves optimizing an organization's exploration and exploitation strategy. This paper aims to explore how an open innovation strategy complements the organization's ambidextrous strategy in attaining a competitive advantage. Organizational ambidexterity and dynamic capability theories are also explored to investigate the impact of open innovation on the organization's ambidextrous strategy and competitive advantage – especially inbound and outbound open innovation.

The authors conducted a systematic literature review using Boolean search techniques, which was focused on the research fields of the sub-areas of general management, strategy, innovation, organization studies, information management, entrepreneurship, international business, marketing, and economics, supplemented by the snowball technique.

Organizations that combine their ambidextrous strategy with open innovation attributes achieve a competitive advantage through developing their dynamic capabilities by which organizations change their value proposition. This study also shows that an ambidextrous strategy should no longer be viewed as a structural solution implemented by management, but also as a bottom-up intervention. Additionally, the authors found that the organization's dynamic capabilities establish a feedback loop, which changes the organization's ambidextrous strategy to resolve the efficiency–agility paradox.

Previous research has focused on strategic orientation; however, hardly any research has investigated how the interrelatedness of open innovation, organizational ambidexterity and dynamic capabilities support a competitive advantage. The authors present a conceptual model that inspires new research avenues.

In this study, the authors aim to address the following two research questions: (1) How do technology innovation paradoxes manifest themselves in technological changes? (2) How do incumbent firms manage technology innovation paradoxes through multi-level organizational ambidexterity? To do so, the authors examine technology innovation in cloud computing, which has taken shape and brought about changes to the information technology industry. Specifically, the authors examine how a traditional software company, China Standard Software Co., Ltd. (CS2C), successfully navigated the technological transition to cloud computing from its existing operating systems business by managing innovation paradoxes through multi-level ambidexterity capabilities.

This study examines a single exploratory case and conducts an in-depth analysis of how technology innovation paradoxes manifest themselves in technological changes and how incumbent firms manage technology innovation paradoxes through multi-level organizational ambidexterity. The data collection and analysis occurred simultaneously through three phases. In Phase 1, one of the authors who had worked at CS2C for many years enabled the authors to obtain access to the company. The data analysis during this phase provided the authors with the history and current situation of CS2C, enabling them to understand the external circumstances, such as particular historical period, and internal conditions, such as cultural and technological changes, that would be relevant throughout the course of their study. It also helped the authors identify organizational ambidexterity capability as the guiding theoretical concept for their research. In Phase 2, the authors engaged in site visits and conducted detailed interviews with employees working at CS2C. In Phase 3, most of the data analysis was conducted. When the interview data were not sufficient to support the theoretical analysis, additional data were collected via phone calls and emails, to assure data-theory-model alignment.

The authors’ findings show that technology innovation paradoxes manifest themselves as contradictory relationships and mutual support relationships between exploitative and exploratory innovation. In addition, the authors identify three integration mechanisms as key to multi-level organizational ambidexterity capabilities in managing technology innovation paradoxes in technological changes.

Three important theoretical implications can be drawn from our case analysis. First, this research contributes to the knowledge of innovation paradoxes during technological changes. Second, this research provides a model of multi-level organizational ambidexterity capability in technological changes. Third, this research proposes three integration mechanisms driven by three types of ambidexterity capability at different organizational levels.

The purpose of this paper is to develop a holistic model regarding the antecedents and consequences of organizational ambidexterity in the context of small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs), particularly for developing countries such as Turkey. Moreover, this paper also aims to reveal the moderating role of networking between organizational ambidexterity and firm performance.

By studying 105 SMEs engaged in small business and technology development centers (SBTDCs), structural equation modeling through SmartPLS is executed.

The findings show that: discipline and support positively influence the formation and the maintenance of organizational ambidexterity; organizational ambidexterity significantly contributes to firm performance; and the greater the networking the greater the relationship between exploitation capability and firm performance.

To date, there has been no systematic attempt in the extant literature to develop a holistic manner of organizational ambidexterity, with its antecedents and consequences in the context of SMEs in general, in SMEs of a developing country, Turkey in particular. Moreover, the moderating role of networking between organizational ambidexterity and a firm’s performance has never been examined.

This study aims to offer and validate an integrated marketing capability-product innovations framework. Particularly, it aims to examine the role of adaptive marketing capability in enabling market ambidexterity and incremental as well as radical product innovation. Also it intends to investigate the moderating role of transformational leadership between adaptive marketing capability and market ambidexterity.

Manufacturing firms in Pakistan, an emerging economy, are taken as the context for this study. A designed survey questionnaire is used for data collection. Partial least square technique is employed to empirically validate and test the hypothesized model with a sample of 192 manufacturing firms. Particularly, the two-stage approach in SmartPLS is used to validate measurement models, and structural equation modeling technique is used to test the proposed hypothesis.

The findings not only confirm that adaptive marketing capability is instrumental to both incremental and radical product innovations but also reveal that adaptive marketing capability serves an important antecedent to market ambidexterity shedding new lights on its mediating role in the relationship of adaptive marketing capability with incremental and radical product innovations. Moreover, the results find that the effectiveness of adaptive marketing capability to support market ambidexterity may involve a possible trade-off between exploitation and exploration when the leaders exhibit a low or high level of transformational leadership behavior.

This study contributes to outside-in strategic perspective and contextual ambidexterity literature by revealing the role of adaptive marketing capability as an important enabler of market ambidexterity which, in turn, allows the firm to simultaneously introduce incremental and radical product innovations. In this way, this study advances the current understanding of the antecedents and consequences of contextual ambidexterity. Also, this study provides insight into the types of capabilities needed for the firm's contextual and employees' behavioral adaptation to simultaneously manage exploitation and exploration within the same business unit which was lacking in the previous literature. Further, this study also offers a novel understanding of the conditional role of transformational leadership between adaptive marketing capability and market ambidexterity.

Dynamic capabilities and organizational ambidexterity are closely related concepts. Unfortunately, there is still a lack of understanding about the relation between the two. This paper aims to offer a theoretical explanation of the relationship between dynamic capabilities, organizational ambidexterity and firm competitive advantage. The authors find that organizational ambidexterity may be considered as a mediator in the relationship between dynamic capabilities and firm competitive advantage. Therefore, this paper contributes theoretically to the authors’ understanding of the relationship between organizational ambidexterity and dynamic capabilities with regard to firm competitive advantage.

In this conceptual paper, the review of research literature on dynamic capabilities and organizational ambidexterity is presented. Theoretical analysis is followed by theoretical prepositions that should be subsequently tested empirically.

By considering dynamic capabilities and organizational ambidexterity related to competitive advantage, this paper provides a new perspective on concepts’ relationship. The theoretical findings described in this paper suggest that organizational ambidexterity plays a mediating role in the relationship between dynamic capabilities and firm competitive advantage.

Further research are required to develop organizational ambidexterity and dynamic capabilities theories, focusing more on the relation to competitive advantage. Additional testing is necessary to empirically validate the propositions given in this paper.

Based on theoretical findings, this paper clarifies the relationship between dynamic capabilities and organizational ambidexterity concepts. Theoretical findings described in this paper also determine the guidelines for further theoretical and empirical research within the fields.

Literature survey shows that it is not clear how knowledge management capability (KMC) and ambidexterity capability affect entrepreneurial creativity (EC) and entrepreneurial intensity (EI) promotion. While empirical studies have emphasized the importance of these factors in improving business performance, the cumulative effect and self-reinforcing loops of these factors in improving firm performance have not been identified. In this regard, the study seeks to investigate how to increase the entrepreneurial capabilities of KMC, EI, EC and ambidexterity of food firms to improve their performance.

The method of the present study is applied in terms of purpose and is quantitative in terms of data collection. In order to collect the data, a questionnaire was designed that contained the variables of the conceptual model of the research. This questionnaire was distributed among industrial and academic experts in the Iranian food industry. The method of data collection is an online cross-sectional survey, and the method of data analysis is structural equation modeling using Smart PLS software to analyze the conceptual model.

The present study is cross-sectional survey research that examines the impact of KMC, EC and EI on firm performance by considering the mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. The research study shows a positive impact of entrepreneurial capabilities as KMC, EI, EC and ambidexterity on performance. Accordingly, if a firm builds KMC and fosters EC, it can achieve ambidextrous innovation and thus enhance its EI and performance in the food industry.

This study highlights the knowledge-based view (KBV) in explaining the role of KMC on innovative capabilities and its influence on performance. Research findings shed light on the importance of KMC as a prerequisite for innovation strategy. The study has also established the mediating role of ambidexterity in entrepreneurial value creation. According to the results, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs)' performance is positively influenced by entrepreneurial capabilities as KMC, EI, EC and ambidexterity.

This paper gives insights into how SMEs can improve their performance to gain a competitive advantage by developing knowledge and creative ideas in line with entrepreneurial goals. In this regard, the food industry can adopt new strategies to reduce the impact of these challenges to achieve superior performance and competitive advantage.

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 the study was to analyse the impact of innovation ambidexterity represented by explorative and exploitative innovation capabilities and their combined effects on product innovation performance and to prove the mediating effect of decentralization.

The study uses partial least squares for structural equation models and SmartPLS version 3.3.1 on a sample of 174 Romanian medium- and large-sized firms from the IT industry to test six research hypotheses. To measure innovation ambidexterity, the orthogonal approach was used, conceptualizing innovation ambidexterity as a multidimensional, second-order construct composed of explorative and exploitative innovation capabilities. Innovation ambidexterity was conceptualized as a multiplicative term of both explorative and exploitative innovation capabilities.

The empirical results prove that innovation ambidexterity is positively correlated with product innovation performance, while decentralization is mediating the impact of innovation ambidexterity on product innovation performance in the IT industry.

The data was based on self-reported assessments of senior executives. While innovation ambidexterity may influence product innovation performance in the long term, such long-term effects are not assessed. Other studies found a moderating effect between centralization or decentralization and ambidexterity, while we found that it has a mediating effect.

In the context of innovation capability, the combination of explorative or exploitative capabilities may lead to a better synergy. Innovation ambidexterity influences product innovation performance through a synergistic effect, making the simultaneous combination of capabilities useful for firms willing to make efficient use of existing resources and make their capabilities mutually supportive. Moreover, for senior executives, the effects of decentralization as a mediator provide further incentive to include it in their development of firms' innovation capabilities.

This study extends findings of other studies by contributing to a deeper examination of the effects of decentralization, on innovation outcomes by focusing on a specific type of innovation, product innovation. Moreover, since innovation capability is often studied in small firms or in the manufacturing industry, this study contributes to the research on innovation capability and the consequences on innovation capability in the services sector and medium- and large-sized companies. By proving that decentralization mediates the effects of innovation ambidexterity on product innovation performance, it enables reconsideration of the organizational structure role in fostering innovation.

Developing ambidexterity as a dynamic capability is important for firms to sustain their competitive advantage. Moreover, this capability allows firms to build the resiliency to mitigate enterprise risks. The purpose of this paper is to apply two main theoretical frames from the strategy literature, dynamic capabilities, and organizational ambidexterity, to supply chain management (SCM) to examine mitigation strategies for supply chain (SC) disruptions. The authors empirically investigated how the firm’s SC ambidexterity is developed through a dynamic capability-building process and how this, in turn, can mitigate the negative impact of SC disruptions and improve business performance.

This study conducted a field survey to answer the research questions as there exists no archival database with detailed information on ambidextrous SC strategies and dynamic capability. A total of 316 usable responses were received from managers working in the SC area. Confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modeling were run on SPSS (version 16.0) and AMOS (version 18.0) to test the hypotheses to answer research questions.

Overall, the results of the study confirmed that a dynamic SC capability-building process is an antecedent of SC ambidexterity, and that SC ambidexterity is important to firms as it mitigate the negative impact of SC disruptions and enhance business performance. To take advantage of an ambidextrous SC, through minimizing the negative impact of SC disruptions and maximizing firm performance, firms should continually search for creative ways to satisfy new market needs and adapt to the fast changing business environment.

This study applied a dynamic capability-building process and ambidexterity to SCM. From the resilient SC perspective, the study found that the ability to effectively utilize existing resources and create novel strategies for problem solving plays a critical role in addressing SC disruptions.