Knowledge Sharing Ambidexterity in Long-Term Interorganizational Relationships

Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1080.0902

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):43–68LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Argote L.Organizational Learning: Creating, Retaining and Transferring Knowledge (1999) (Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston) Google Scholar
  • Armstrong J. S., Overton T. S. Estimating nonresponse bias in mail surveys. J. Marketing Res. (1977) 14(3):396–402CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Bakos J. Y. Information links and electronic marketplaces: The role of interorganizational information systems in vertical markets. J. Management Inform. Systems (1991) 8(2):31–52CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Bala H., Venkatesh V. Assimilation of interorganizational business process standards. Inform. Systems Res. (2007) 18(3):340–362LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Benner M. J., Tushman M. Process management and technological innovation: A longitudinal study of the photography and paint industries. Admin. Sci. Quart. (2002) 47(4):676–706CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Benner M. J., Tushman M. L. Exploitation, exploration, and process management: The productivity dilemma revisited. Acad. Management Rev. (2003) 28(2):238–256CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Burgelman R. A. Designs for corporate entrepreneurship in established firms. Calif. Management Rev. (1984) 28:154–166CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Carlile P. R. A pragmatic view of knowledge and boundaries: Boundary objects in new product development. Organ. Sci. (2002) 13(4):442–455LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Chin W. W., Marcoulides G. A. The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. Modern Methods for Business Research (1998) (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ) 295–336Google Scholar
  • Chin W. W., Marcolin B. L., Newsted P. R. A partial least squares latent variable modeling approach for measuring interaction effects. Proc. 17th Internat. Conf. Inform. Systems (1996) Cleveland:21–41Google Scholar
  • Chin W. W., Marcolin B. L., Newsted P. R. A partial least squares latent variable modeling approach for measuring interaction effects: Results from a Monte Carlo simulation study and an electronic-mail emotion/adoption study. Inform. Systems Res. (2003) 14(2):189–217LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Cohen W. M., Levinthal D. A. Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1990) 35(1):128–152CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Diamantopoulos A., Winklhofer H. M. Index construction with formative indicators: An alternative to scale development. J. Marketing Res. (2001) 38(2):269–277CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Fichman M., Cummings J. N. Multiple imputation for missing data: Making the most of what you know. Organ. Res. Methods (2003) 6(3):282–308CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Fornell C., Larcker D. F. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J. Marketing Res. (1981) 18(1):39–50CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Gavetti G., Levinthal D. Looking forward and looking backward: Cognitive and experiential search. Admin. Sci. Quart. (2000) 45(1):113–137CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Gefen D., Straub D. A practical guide to factorial validity using PLS-graph: Tutorial and annotated example. Comm. Assoc. Inform. Systems (2005) 16:91–109Google Scholar
  • Gibson C. B., Birkinshaw J. The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. Acad. Management J. (2004) 47(2):209–226CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Goodhue D., Lewis W., Thompson R. Statistical power in analyzing interaction effects: Questioning the advantage of PLS with product indicators. Inform. Systems Res. (2007) 18(2):211–227LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Gupta A. K., Smith K. G., Shalley C. E. The interplay between exploration and exploitation. Acad. Management J. (2006) 49(4):693–706CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Hair J. F., Anderson R. E., Tatham R. L., Black W. C.Multivariate Data Analysis (1998) 5th ed.(Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ) Google Scholar
  • He Z.-L., Wong P.-K. Exploration vs. exploitation: An empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis. Organ. Sci. (2004) 15(4):481–494LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Hesseldahl A. Toshiba will have UPS fix its laptops. Forbes (2004) 173(9). (April 27)Google Scholar
  • Holmqvist M. Experiential learning processes of exploitation and exploration within and between organizations: An empirical study of product development. Organ. Sci. (2004) 15(1):70–81LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Jarvis C. B., MacKenzie S. B., Podsakoff P. M. A critical review of construct indicators and measurement model misspecification in marketing and consumer research. J. Consumer Res. (2003) 30(2):199–218CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Jauch L. R., Kraft K. L. Strategic management of uncertainty. Acad. Management Rev. (1986) 11(4):777CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Kalwani M. U., Narayandas N. Long-term manufacturer supplier relationships—Do they pay off for supplier firms. J. Marketing (1995) 59(1):1–16CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Klein R., Rai A., Straub D. W. Competitive and cooperative positioning in supply chain logistics relationships. Decision Sci. (2007) 38(4):611–646CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Krishnan M. S., Rai A., Zmud R. The digitally enabled extended enterprise in a global economy. Inform. Systems Res. (2007) 18(3):233–236LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Lavie D., Rosenkopf L. Balancing exploration and exploitation in alliance formation. Acad. Management J. (2006) 49(4):797–818CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Levinthal D. A., March J. G. The myopia of learning. Strategic Management J. (1993) 14(Special Issue):95–112CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Lewis M., Rai A. Four ways to build sustainable partnerships. MIT Supply Chain Strategy (2006) 2(7):9–10Google Scholar
  • Lewis M., Rai A., Forquer D., Quinter D.UPS and HP: Value Creation Through Supply Chain Partnerships (2007) (Ivey Case Publishing, London, Ontario, Canada) Google Scholar
  • Liang H., Saraf N., Hu Q., Xue Y. Assimilation of enterprise systems: The effect of institutional pressures and the mediating role of top management. MIS Quart. (2007) 31(1):59–87CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • MacKinnon D. P., Lockwood C. M., Hoffman J. M., West S. G., Sheets V. A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects. Psych. Methods (2002) 7(1):83–104CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Malhotra A., Gosain S., El Sawy O. A. Leveraging standard electronic business interfaces to enable adaptive supply chain partnerships. Inform. Systems Res. (2007) 18(3):260–279LinkGoogle Scholar
  • March J. G. Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organ. Sci. (1991) 2(1):71–87LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Pawlowski S. D., Robey D. Bridging user organizations: Knowledge brokering and the work of information technology professionals. MIS Quart. (2004) 28(4):645–672CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Petter S., Straub D., Rai A. Specifying formative constructs in information systems research. MIS Quart. (2007) 31(4):623–656CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Podasakoff P. M., MacKenzie S. B., Lee J.-Y., Podsakoff N. P. Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J. Appl. Psych. (2003) 88(5):879–903CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Pontrandolfo P. Global manufacturing: A review and a framework for planning in a global corporation. Internat. J. Production Res. (1999) 37(1):1–19CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Rai A., Sambamurthy V. Editorial notes-the growth of interest in services management: Opportunities for information systems scholars. Inform. Systems Res. (2006) 17(4):327–331LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Rai A., Patnayakuni R., Seth N. Firm performance impacts of digitally enabled supply chain integration capabilities. MIS Quart. (2006) 30(2):225–246CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Ramaprasad A., Rai A. Envisioning management of information. Omega (1996) 24(2):179–193CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Rodan S., Galunic C. More than network structure: How knowledge heterogeneity influences managerial performance and innovativeness. Strategic Management J. (2004) 25:541–562CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Scott J. E. Facilitating interorganizational learning with information technology. J. Management Inform. Systems (2000) 17(2):81–113CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Selnes F., Sallis J. Promoting relationship learning. J. Marketing (2003) 67(3):80–95CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Sheth J. N., Shah R. H. Till death do us part but not always: Six antecedents to a customer's relational preference in buyer-seller exchanges. Indust. Marketing Management (2003) 32(8):627–631CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Slack N., Chambers S., Harland C., Harrison A., Johnston R.Operations Management (1999) 2nd ed.(Financial Times, London) Google Scholar
  • Star S. L., Griesemer J. R. Institutional ecology, “translations” and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkeley's museum of vertebrate zoology, 1907–39. Soc. Stud. Sci. (1989) 19:387–420CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Straub D., Rai A., Klein R. Measuring firm performance at the network level: A nomology of the business impact of digital supply networks. J. Management Inform. Systems (2004) 21(1):83–114CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Subramani M. How do suppliers benefit from information technology use in supply chain relationships? MIS Quart. (2004) 28(1):45–73CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Swamidass P. M., Kotha S. Explaining manufacturing technology use, firm size and performance using a multidimensional view of technology. J. Oper. Management (1998) 17(1):23–37CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Uzzi B. Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1997) 42(1):35–67CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Vogt J., Pienaar W. J., de Wit P. W. C.Business Logistics Management: Theory and Practice (2005) 2nd ed.(Oxford University Press, Oxford, New York) Google Scholar
  • Winter S. G. The satisficing principle in capability learning. Strategic Management J. (2000) 21(10–11):981–996CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Wold H., Fornell C. Systems under indirect observation using PLS. A Second Generation of Multivariate Analysis, Vol. I: Methods (1982) (Praeger, New York) 325–347Google Scholar
  • Zollo M., Reuer J. J., Singh H. Interorganizational routines and performance in strategic alliances. Organ. Sci. (2002) 13(6):701LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Zollo M., Winter S. G. Deliberate learning and the evolution of dynamic capabilities. Organ. Sci. (2002) 13(3):339–351LinkGoogle Scholar
INFORMS site uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some are essential to make our site work; Others help us improve the user experience. By using this site, you consent to the placement of these cookies. Please read our Privacy Statement to learn more.