Ambidexterity in Agile Distributed Development: An Empirical Investigation

References

• Adler P. S., Goldoftas B., Levine D. I. Flexibility versus efficiency? A case study of model changeovers in the Toyota production system. Organ. Sci. (1999) 10(1):43–68Link, Google Scholar
• Agerfalk P. J., Fitzgerald B. Flexible and distributed software processes: Old petunias in new bowls? Comm. ACM (2006) 49(10):27–34Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ambler S. W., Nizami K. Agile strategies for geographically distributed quality management. Agile J. (2007) . http://www.agilejournal.com/articles/columns/column-articles/720-agile-strategies-for-geographically-distributed-quality-managementGoogle Scholar
• Andriopoulos C., Lewis M. W. Exploitation-exploration tensions and organizational ambidexterity: Managing paradoxes of innovation. Organ. Sci. (2009) 20(4):696–717Link, Google Scholar
• Benner M. J., Tushman M. L. Exploitation, exploration, and process management: The productivity dilemma revisited. Acad. Management Rev. (2003) 28(2):238–256Crossref, Google Scholar
• Boehm B., Turner R.Balancing Agility and Discipline: A Guide for the Perplexed (2003) (Addison-Wesley, Boston) Google Scholar
• Burgelman R. A. Intra-organizational ecology of strategy making and organizational adaptation: Theory and field research. Organ. Sci. (1991) 2(3):239–262Link, Google Scholar
• Cao Q., Gedajlovic E., Zhang H. Unpacking organizational ambidexterity: Dimensions, contingencies, and synergistic effects. Organ. Sci. (2009) 20(4):781–796Link, Google Scholar
• Cockburn A., Highsmith J. Agile software development: The people factor. IEEE Comput. (2001) 34(11):131–133Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cramton C. D. Information problems in dispersed teams. Proc. Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management (1997) BostonCrossref, Google Scholar
• Duncan R., Killman R. H., Pondy L. R., Sleven D. The ambidextrous organization: Designing dual structures for innovation. The Management of Organization Design (1976) (North-Holland, New York) 167–188Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt K. M. Building theories from case study research. Acad. Management Rev. (1989) 14(4):532–550Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ghoshal S., Bartlett C. A. Linking organizational context and managerial action: The dimensions of quality of management. Strategic Management J. (1994) 15(5):91–112Google Scholar
• Gibson C. B., Birkinshaw J. The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. Acad. Management J. (2004) 47(2):209Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gupta A. K., Smith K. G., Shalley C. E. The interplay between exploration and exploitation. Acad. Management J. (2006) 49(4):693–706Crossref, Google Scholar
• Handy C. Trust and the virtual organization. Harvard Bus. Rev. (1995) 73(3):40–50Google Scholar
• He Z.-L., Wong P.-K. Exploration vs. exploitation: An empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis. Organ. Sci. (2004) 15(4):481–494Link, Google Scholar
• Herbsleb J. D., Mockus A. An empirical study of speed and communication in globally distributed software development. IEEE Trans. Software Engrg. (2003) 29(6):481–494Crossref, Google Scholar
• Herbsleb J. D., Paulish D. J., Bass M. Global software development at Siemens: Experience from nine projects. 27th Internat. Conf. Software Engrg. (2005) (Association for Computing Machinery, St. Louis) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Highsmith J.Adaptive Software Development: A Collaborative Approach to Managing Complex Systems (1999) (Dorset House Publishing Company, New York) Google Scholar
• Highsmith J., Cockburn A. Agile software development: The business of innovation. IEEE Comput. (2001) 9(34):120–122Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hinds P. J., Bailey D. E. Virtual teams: Anticipating the impact of virtuality on team process and performance. Annual Meeting Academy of Management (2000) (Toronto, Canada) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Im G., Rai A. Knowledge sharing ambidexterity in long-term interorganizational relationships. Management Sci. (2008) 54(7):1281–1296Link, Google Scholar
• Jansen J. J. P., Bosch F. A. J. V. D., Volberda H. W. Exploratory innovation, exploitative innovation, and ambidexterity: The impact of environmental and organizational antecedents. Management Sci. (2006) 52(11):1661–1674Link, Google Scholar
• Jansen J. J. P., Tempelaar M. P., Bosch F. A. J. V. D., Volberda H. W. Structural differentiation and ambidexterity: The mediating role of integration mechanisms. Organ. Sci. (2009) 20(4):797–811Link, Google Scholar
• Jarvenpaa S. L., Leidner D. E. Communication and trust in global virtual teams. Organ. Sci. (1998) 10(6):791–815Link, Google Scholar
• Komi-Sirvio S., Tihinen M. Lessons learned by participants of distributed software development. Knowledge and Process Management (2005) 12(2):108–122Crossref, Google Scholar
• Komi-Sirvio S., Abrahamsson P., Huomo T. Guest editorial for the special section on distributed software development. Inform. Software Tech. (2006) 48(9):765–766Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kurland N. B., Egan T. D. Telecommuting: Justice and control in the virtual organization. Organ. Sci. (1999) 10(4):500–513Link, Google Scholar
• Layman L., Williams L., Damian D., Bures H. Essential communication practices for extreme programming in a global software development team. Inform. Software Tech. (2006) 48(9):781–794Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lee G., Delone W., Espinosa J. A. Ambidextrous coping strategies in globally distributed software development projects. Comm. ACM (2006) 49(10):35–40Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lindvall M., Basili V., Boehm B., Costa P., Dangle K., Shull F., Tesoriero R., Williams L., Zelkowitz M., Wells D., Williams L. Empirical findings in agile methods. Proc. XP/Agile Universe 2002: Second XP Universe and First Agile Universe Conf. (2002) (Springer-Verlag GmbH, Chicago) 197–207Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lubatkin M. H., Simsek Z., Yan L., Veiga J. F. Ambidexterity and performance in small- to medium-sized firms: The pivotal role of top management team behavioral integration. J. Management (2006) 32(5):646–672Crossref, Google Scholar
• March J. G. Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organ. Sci. (1991) 2(1):71–87Link, Google Scholar
• Mason J.Qualitative Researching (2002) 2nd ed.(Sage Publications, London) Google Scholar
• Matloff N. Offshoring: What can go wrong? IT Professional (2005) 7(4):39–45Crossref, Google Scholar
• Meadows C. J. Globalizing software development. J. Global Inform. Management (1996) 4(1):5–14Crossref, Google Scholar
• Miles M. B., Huberman A. M.Qualitative Data Analysis (1994) 2nd ed.(Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA) Google Scholar
• Miller A. (2008) . Distributed agile development at Microsoft patterns and practices, http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?displaylang=en&FamilyID=2143646d-bcc1-4d97-b9a1-96820191-7baaGoogle Scholar
• Mockus A., Herbsleb J. Challenges of global software development. 7th IEEE Internat. Software Metrics Sympos. (METRICS 2001) (2001) (IEEE Computer Society, London) 182–184Google Scholar
• Mom T. J. M., Bosch F. A. J. V. D., Volberda H. W. Understanding variation in managers' ambidexterity: Investigating direct and interaction effects of formal structural and personal coordination mechanisms. Organ. Sci. (2009) 20(4):812–828Link, Google Scholar
• O'Reilly C. A., Tushman M. L. The ambidextrous organization. Harvard Bus. Rev. (2004) 82(4):74–81Google Scholar
• Orlikowski W. J. Case tools as organizational change: Investigating incremental and radical changes in systems development. MIS Quart. (1993) 17(3):309–340Crossref, Google Scholar
• Orlikowski W. J., Baroudi J. Studying IT in organizations: Research approaches and assumptions. Inform. Systems Res. (1991) 2(1):1–28Link, Google Scholar
• Oshri I., Kotlarsky J., Willcocks L. P. Global software development: Exploring socialization in distributed strategic projects. J. Strategic Inform. Systems (2007) 16(1):25–49Crossref, Google Scholar
• Paré G. Investigating information systems with positivist case study research. Comm. AIS (2004) 2004(13):233–264Google Scholar
• Parnas D. Agile methods and GSD: The wrong solution to an old but real problem. Comm. ACM (2006) 49(10):26–34Crossref, Google Scholar
• Patton M. P.Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods (1990) 2nd ed.(Sage, London) Google Scholar
• Pawlowski S., Robey D. Bridging user organizations: Knowledge brokering and the work of information technology professionals. MIS Quart. (2004) 28(4):645–672Crossref, Google Scholar
• Raisch S., Birkinshaw J. Organizational ambidexterity: Antecedents, outcomes, and moderators. J. Management (2008) 34(3):375–409Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ramesh B., Cao L., Baskerville R. Agile requirements engineering practices and challenges: An empirical study. Inform. Systems J. (2007) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ramesh B., Cao L., Mohan K., Peng X. Can distributed software development be agile? Comm. ACM (2006) 49(10):41–46Crossref, Google Scholar
• Redmiles D., Van Der Hoek A., Al-Ani B., Hildenbrand T., Quirk S., Sarma A., Silva R., De Souza C., Trainer E. A new paradigm to support globally distributed software development projects. Wirtschaftsinformatik (2007) 49:28–38Google Scholar
• Repenning A., Ioannidou A., Payton M., Ye W., Roschelle J. Using components for rapid distributed software development. IEEE Software (2001) 18(2):38–45Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rothaermel F. T., Alexandre M. T. Ambidexterity in technology sourcing: The moderating role of absorptive capacity. Organ. Sci. (2009) 20(4):759–780Link, Google Scholar
• Simons M. Global software development: A hard problem requiring a host of solutions. Comm. ACM (2006) 49(10):32–33Google Scholar
• Slaughter S. A., Levine L., Ramesh B., Pries-Heje J., Baskerville R. Aligning software processes with strategy. MIS Quart. (2006) 30(4):891–918Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stank T. P., Goldsby T. J., Vickery S. K. Effect of service supplier performance on satisfaction and loyalty of store managers in the fast food industry. J. Oper. Management (1999) 17(4):429–447Crossref, Google Scholar
• Strauss A., Corbin J.Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques (1990) (Sage Publication, London) Google Scholar
• Tiwana A. Do bridging ties complement strong ties? An empirical examination of alliance ambidexterity. Strategic Management J. (2008) 29(3):251–272Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tushman M. L., O'Reilly C. A. Ambidextrous organizations: Managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. California Management Rev. (1996) 38(4):8–30Crossref, Google Scholar
• Vinekar V., Slinkman C. W., Nerur S. Can agile and traditional systems development approaches coexist? An ambidextrous view. Inform. Systems Management (2006) 23(3):31–42Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wiesenfeld B. M., Raghuram S., Garud R. Communication patterns as determinants of organizational identification in a virtual organization. J. Comput.-Mediated Comm. (1998) 3(4). http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1083-6101.1998.tb00081.x/abstractCrossref, Google Scholar
• Wongthongtham P., Chang E., Dillon T. S., Sommerville I. Ontology-based multi-site software development methodology and tools. J. Systems Architecture (2006) 52(11):640–653Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yin R. K.Case Study Research: Design and Methods (2003) 3rd ed.(Sage Publications, London) Google Scholar