Search results

Business-to-business (B2B) firms increasingly have a need for frontline sales employees who can both sell and service customer account, a task known as sales-service ambidexterity which may pose significant challenges to frontline sales employees. Thus, the purpose of this paper is to show that one has to be cognizant of the potential negative consequences brought about requiring frontline sales employees to engage in sales-service ambidexterity and find a way to mitigate such negative consequences.

The multisource data for this study was collected from frontline sales employees and their respective supervisors working across multiple B2B pharmaceutical companies in a Southeast Asian country. The data were analyzed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) and PROCESS Macro.

The results reveal a negative indirect effect of sales-service ambidexterity sales performance through role overload. This negative indirect effect is fully neutralized when information exchange is high but not when it is low.

This study underscores the importance of not only the negative consequence of sales-service ambidexterity but also offers insights into how this negative consequence is neutralized so that sales performance is maximized.

Environmental uncertainty (EU) and firm size (FS) generate inertial forces that can push small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) to emphasize either exploration or exploitation. In this article, the authors explore how structural (e.g. formal processes, control and discipline) and social (e.g. employee support and decision-making involvement) managerial instruments counteract such inertial forces and enable SME ambidexterity. Building on the organization-context literature, the authors propose a model in which EU and firms' size moderate the relationship between structural and social managerial instruments on SME ambidexterity.

The authors examined a moderation model using surveys of chief executive officers (CEOs) and performance archival data from 237 Chilean SMEs.

The authors find that the positive effect of structure on SME ambidexterity decreases with FS. In contrast, social instruments have a positive effect on ambidexterity for larger firms, especially for those operating in uncertain environments. In cases in which EU and firms' size reinforce the exploration or exploitation tendencies of SMEs, structural and social instruments play a complementary role in achieving ambidexterity.

The authors contribute by proposing a contingent mix of structural and social instruments to enable SME ambidexterity. These results inform policymakers and SME managers by suggesting strategies to promote ambidexterity based on firms' size and EU.

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.

The manager of the 21st century is expected to succeed in an environment strongly characterized by unprecedented volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity (VUCA). In fact, today’s business environment consists of contradictory pressure and tensions, where competitive advantage could be gained by ambidextrous activities. The concept of ambidexterity has already been discussed by many scholars, but still little is known about managerial practice and actions that are useful for finding the balance between the paradoxes that have been identified at that level. Although there are different tensions, dynamic and evolving according to the changes observed in the environment: more volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous, the pressure to remain flexible and simultaneously maintain the plan of development, seems to be essential. In recent research studies, networking perspective is mentioned as one of areas worth exploring while analyzing the concept of ambidexterity. For that reason, the main goal of this chapter is to investigate if networking is one of the factors useful for managing ambidexterity. To gain deeper insight, we investigated further, searching for the factors essential for managing ambidexterity: we compared the research results between companies of different sizes to identify any regularities. We focused on ambidexterity reflected by managerial practice where stability/plans and flexibility are implemented simultaneously. We investigated 150 managers using paper-and-pencil interviewing. Our research results confirmed that networking could be one of the main approaches having an impact on ambidextrous activities. However, we cannot conclude that companies are obliged to apply a networking perspective to be ambidextrous, although it could be recommended. Further analysis of companies of different sizes revealed the relationship between ambidexterity and networking in case of small and large companies, and no relation in medium-sized enterprises.

Since March (1991) presented his ideas on organizational learning, hundreds of empirical tests have been conducted on relationships among the activities of exploration, exploitation, ambidexterity, and firm performance. Despite continued interest in his ideas, there has not been a systematic assessment of extant research to reveal whether, and to what extent, these activities relate to firm performance. This study uses meta-analysis to take a next step by aggregating results of 117 studies from more than 21,000 firms. I find strong performance effects for exploration and exploitation, but contrary to received theory, I discover ambidexterity yields weaker effects than a focus on either exploration or exploitation. Thus, I leverage these findings to offer future research opportunities.

This paper develops a practice approach to institutional ambidexterity. In doing so, it first explores the ‘promise’ of institutional ambidexterity as a concept to address shortcomings with the treatment of complexity in institutional theory. However, we argue that this is an empty promise because ambidexterity remains an organizational level construct that neither connects to the institutional level, or to the practical actions and interactions within which individuals enact institutions. We therefore suggest a practice approach that we develop into a conceptual framework for fulfilling the promise of institutional ambidexterity. The second part of the paper outlines what a practice approach is and the variation in practice-based insights into institutional ambidexterity that we might expect in contexts of novel or routine institutional complexity. Finally, the paper concludes with a research agenda that highlights the potential of practice to extend institutional theory through new research approaches to well-established institutional theory questions, interests and established-understandings.

In this chapter, the authors examine the main effect of entrepreneurial orientation (EO) – a firm’s strategic entrepreneurial posture – on balancing exploration and exploitation in the form of organizational ambidexterity. Resource-constrained firms face an imperative to conduct innovative activities, survive hostile environments, and compete with larger and more resource-rich firms. The authors contend that firms can address these potential impediments through achieving ambidexterity via dynamic capabilities, firm-specific resources, and institutional factors. Specifically, The authors review the EO and ambidexterity literatures and summarize extant arguments related to the relationship between EO, exploration, and exploitation. The authors also discuss the most prominent scales and measures of EO, exploration, and exploitation. Moreover, the authors discuss operationalizational challenges that should be considered when conducting EO–ambidexterity research and suggest future research directions by specifying an agenda outlining useful theoretical perspectives and various contingencies that may influence the EO–ambidexterity relationship.

This study serves two purposes: (1) to evaluate the effects of organizational ambidexterity by examining how the balanced and the combined sales–service configurations of chatbots differ in their abilities to enhance customer experience and patronage and (2) to apply information boundary theory to assess the contingent role that chatbot sales–service ambidexterity can play in adapting to customers' personalization–privacy paradox.

An online survey of artificial intelligence chatbots users was conducted, and a mixed-methods research design involving response surface analysis and polynomial regression was adopted to address the research aim.

The results of polynomial regressions on survey data from 507 online customers indicated that as the benefits of personalization decreased and the risk to privacy increased, the inherently negative (positive) effects of imbalanced (combined) chatbots' sales–service ambidexterity had an increasing (decreasing) influence on customer experience. Furthermore, customer experience fully mediated the association of chatbots' sales–service ambidexterity with customer patronage.

First, this study enriches the literature on frontline ambidexterity and extends it to the setting of human–machine interaction. Second, the study contributes to the literature on the personalization–privacy paradox by demonstrating the importance of frontline ambidexterity for adapting to customer concerns. Third, the study examines the conduit between artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots' ambidexterity and sales performance, thereby helping to reconcile the previously inconsistent evidence regarding this relationship.

This paper develops a practice approach to institutional ambidexterity. In doing so, it first explores the ‘promise’ of institutional ambidexterity as a concept to address shortcomings with the treatment of complexity in institutional theory. However, we argue that this is an empty promise because ambidexterity remains an organizational level construct that neither connects to the institutional level, or to the practical actions and interactions within which individuals enact institutions. We therefore suggest a practice approach that we develop into a conceptual framework for fulfilling the promise of institutional ambidexterity. The second part of the paper outlines what a practice approach is and the variation in practice-based insights into institutional ambidexterity that we might expect in contexts of novel or routine institutional complexity. Finally, the paper concludes with a research agenda that highlights the potential of practice to extend institutional theory through new research approaches to well-established institutional theory questions, interests and established-understandings.

Ambidexterity in teams represents powerful dynamic capabilities for innovation and adaptation in rapidly changing environments. This study focused on the emerging concept of team ambidexterity. Primary purposes were to consolidate emerging research on ambidexterity within teams and to synthesise antecedent inputs.

This study applied a systematic content-based review method to collect articles relevant to enabling ambidexterity within teams. The study integrated relevant studies on ambidexterity and on teams and teamwork. It analysed content through theoretical frameworks of ambidexterity and dynamic capabilities.

Team ambidexterity constitutes a distinct and increasingly important organisational concept beyond just supporting firm-level ambidexterity. Team ambidexterity depends on inputs that can include ambidexterity's multilevel, generic mechanisms and additional team-centric inputs specially characterising teams.

Organisational leaders need insights into the valuable potential of ambidextrous teams that can increase innovation and enable successful adaptation at an operational level for longterm survival and competitive advantage in volatile environments. The study highlights the essential inputs for designing and equipping ambidextrous teams.

Team ambidexterity research is growing, but so far it has mostly addressed team ambidexterity as a microfoundation supporting firm-level ambidexterity. Existing studies have remained mostly disparate and unorganized. This study appears unique in having identified and synthesised studies most relevant to developing ambidexterity within teams. The study articulated a more comprehensive understanding of team ambidexterity, derived a novel set of team-centric inputs and analysed ambidexterity as dynamic capabilities at operational unit level.