How Is Ambidexterity Initiated? The Emergent Charter Definition Process

References

• Adler PS, Goldoftas B, Levine DI (1999) Flexibility versus efficiency? A case study of model changeovers in the Toyota production system. Organ. Sci. 10(1):43–68.Link, Google Scholar
• Ahmadjian CL, Lincoln JR (2001) Keiretsu, governance, and learning: Case studies in change from the Japanese automotive industry. Organ. Sci. 12(6):683–701.Link, Google Scholar
• Ancona D, Malone TW, Orlikowski WJ, Senge PM (2007) In praise of the incomplete leader. Harvard Bus. Rev. 85(2):92–100.Google Scholar
• Ariño A, de la Torre J (1998) Learning from failure: Towards an evolutionary model of collaborative ventures. Organ. Sci. 9(3): 306–325.Link, Google Scholar
• Auh S, Menguc B (2005) Balancing exploration and exploitation: The moderating role of competitive intensity. J. Bus. Res. 58(12): 1652–1661.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bacharach SB, Bamberger P, Sonnenstuhl WJ (1996) The organizational transformation process: The micropolitics of dissonance reduction and the alignment of logics of action. Admin. Sci. Quart. 41(3):477–506.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Birkinshaw JM (1997) Entrepreneurship in multinational corporations: The characteristics of subsidiary initiatives. Strategic Management J. 18(2):207–230.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Birkinshaw JM, Hood N (1998) Multinational subsidiary development: Capability evolution and charter change in foreign-owned subsidiary companies. Acad. Management Rev. 23(4):773–795.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Birkinshaw J, Lingblad M (2005) Intrafirm competition and charter evolution in the multibusiness firm. Organ. Sci. 16(6):674–686.Link, Google Scholar
• Boumgarden P, Nickerson J, Zenger TR (2012) Sailing into the wind: Exploring the relationships among ambidexterity, vacillation, and organizational performance. Strategic Management J. 33(6):587–610.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bower JL (1970) Managing the Resource Allocation Process: A Study of Corporate Planning and Investment (Harvard Business School Press, Boston).Google Scholar
• Brady T, Davies A (2004) Building project capabilities: From exploratory to exploitative learning. Organ. Stud. 25(9): 1601–1621.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Branzei O, Ursacki-Bryant TJ, Vertinsky I, Zhang W (2004) The formation of green strategies in Chinese firms: Matching corporate environmental responses to individual values and principles. Strategic Management J. 25(11):1075–1095.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burgelman RA (1983) A model of the interaction of strategic behavior, corporate context, and the concept of strategy. Acad. Management Rev. 8(1):61–70.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carmeli A, Halevi MY (2009) How top management team behavioral integration and behavioral complexity enable organizational ambidexterity: The moderating role of contextual ambidexterity. Leadership Quart. 20(2):207–218.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Das TK, Teng BS (2001) Trust, control, and risk in strategic alliances: An integrated framework. Organ. Stud. 22(2):251–283.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Doz YL (1996) The evolution of cooperation in strategic alliances: Initial conditions or learning processes? Strategic Management J. 17(S1):55–83.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dutton JE, Ashford SJ (1993) Selling issues to top management. Acad. Management Rev. 18(3):397–428.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dyer JH, Singh H (1998) The relational view: Cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. Acad. Management Rev. 23(4):660–679.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Edmondson AC, McManus SE (2007) Methodological fit in management field research. Acad. Management Rev. 32(4):1155–1179.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt KM (1989) Building theory from case study research. Acad. Management Rev. 14(4):532–550.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt KM, Graebner ME (2007) Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Acad. Management J. 50(1):25–32.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Faems D, Janssens M, Madhok A, Van Looy B (2008) Toward an integrative perspective on alliance governance: Connecting contract design, trust dynamics, and contract application. Acad. Management J. 51(6):1053–1078.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Farjoun M (2010) Beyond dualism: Stability and change as a duality. Acad. Management Rev. 35(2):202–225.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Festinger L (1957) A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance (Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Floyd SW, Lane PJ (2000) Strategizing throughout the organization: Managing role conflict in strategic renewal. Acad. Management Rev. 25(1):154–177.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fontana A, Frey JH (1998) Interviewing: The art of science. Denzin NK, Lincoln YS, eds. Collecting and Interpreting Qualitative Materials (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA), 47–78.Google Scholar
• Galunic DC, Eisenhardt KM (1996) The evolution of intracorporate domains: Divisional charter losses in high-technology, multidivisional corporations. Organ. Sci. 7(3):255–282.Link, Google Scholar
• Galunic DC, Eisenhardt KM (2001) Architectural innovation and modular corporate forms. Acad. Management J. 44(6):1229–1249.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ghoshal S, Bartlett CA (1994) Linking organizational context and managerial action: The dimensions of quality of management. Strategic Management J. 15(S2):91–112.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gibson CB, Birkinshaw J (2004) The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. Acad. Management J. 47(2):209–226.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gulati R, Puranam P (2009) Renewal through reorganization: The value of inconsistencies between formal and informal organization. Organ. Sci. 20(2):422–440.Link, Google Scholar
• Gupta AK, Smith KG, Shalley CE (2006) The interplay between exploration and exploitation. Acad. Management J. 49(4): 693–706.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Harryson SJ, Dudkowski R, Stern A (2008) Transformation networks in innovation alliances—The development of Volvo C70. J. Management Stud. 45(4):745–773.Crossref, Google Scholar
• He ZL, Wong P-K (2004) Exploration vs. exploitation: An empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis. Organ. Sci. 15(4):481–494.Link, Google Scholar
• Hill SA, Birkinshaw JM (2014) Ambidexterity and survival in corporate venture units. J. Management 40(7):1899–1931.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hoetker G, Mellewigt T (2009) Choice and performance of governance mechanisms: Matching alliance governance to asset type. Strategic Management J. 30(10):1025–1044.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Im G, Rai A (2008) Knowledge sharing ambidexterity in long-term interorganizational alliances. Management Sci. 54(7):1281–1296.Link, Google Scholar
• Jansen JJP, Simsek Z, Cao Q (2012) Ambidexterity and performance in multiunit contexts: Cross-level moderating effects of structural and resource attributes. Strategic Management J. 33(11): 1286–1303.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jansen JJP, Van den Bosch FAJ, Volberda HW (2006) Exploratory innovation, exploitative innovation, and performance: Effects of organizational antecedents and environmental moderators. Management Sci. 52(11):1661–1674.Link, Google Scholar
• Jansen JJP, George G, Van den Bosch FAJ, Volberda HW (2008) Senior team attributes and organizational ambidexterity: The moderating role of transformational leadership. J. Management Stud. 45(5):982–1007.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kim T, Rhee M (2009) Exploration and exploitation: Internal variety and environmental dynamism. Strategic Organ. 7(1):11–41.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Koza MP, Lewin AY (1998) The co-evolution of strategic alliances. Organ. Sci. 9(3):255–264.Link, Google Scholar
• Koza MP, Lewin AY (2000) Managing partnerships and strategic alliances: Raising the odds of success. Eur. Management J. 18(2): 146–151.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lavie D, Rosenkopf L (2006) Balancing exploration and exploitation in alliance formation. Acad. Management J. 49(4):797–818.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lavie D, Stettner U, Tushman ML (2010) Exploration and exploitation within and across organizations. Acad. Management Ann. 4(1):109–155.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lin ZJ, Yang H, Demirkan I (2007) The performance consequences of ambidexterity in strategic alliance formation: Empirical investigation and computational theorizing. Management Sci. 53(10):1645–1658.Link, Google Scholar
• Locke K (2001) Grounded Theory in Management Research (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA).Google Scholar
• Lovas B, Ghoshal S (2000) Strategy as guided evolution. Strategic Management J. 21(9):875–896.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lubatkin MH, Simsek Z, Ling Y, Veiga JF (2006) Ambidexterity and performance in small- to medium-sized firms: The pivotal role of top management team behavioral integration. J. Management 32(5):646–672.Crossref, Google Scholar
• March JG (1991) Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organ. Sci. 2(1):71–87.Link, Google Scholar
• Merton RK (1968) Social Theory and Social Structure (Free Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Mesquita LF, Lazzarini SG (2008) Horizontal and vertical alliances in developing economies: Implications for SMEs’ access to global markets. Acad. Management J. 51(2):359–380.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Miles MB, Huberman AM (1994) Qualitative Data Analyses: An Expanded Sourcebook, 2nd ed. (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA).Google Scholar
• Miller CC, Cardinal LB, Glick WH (1997) Retrospective reports in organizational research: A reexamination of recent evidence. Acad. Management J. 40(1):189–204.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mom TJM, Van den Bosch FAJ, Volberda HW (2007) Investigating managers’ exploration and exploitation activities: The influence of top-down, bottom-up, and horizontal knowledge inflows. J. Management Stud. 44(6):910–931.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mom TJM, Van den Bosch FAJ, Volberda HW (2009) Understanding variation in managers’ ambidexterity: Investigating direct and interaction effects of formal structural and personal coordination mechanisms. Organ. Sci. 20(4):812–828.Link, Google Scholar
• Ness H (2009) Governance, negotiations, and alliance dynamics: Explaining the evolution of relational practice. J. Management Stud. 46(3):451–480.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nickerson JA, Zenger TR (2002) Being efficiently fickle: A dynamic theory of organizational choice. Organ. Sci. 13(5):547–566.Link, Google Scholar
• O’Reilly CA III, Tushman ML (2008) Ambidexterity as a dynamic capability: Resolving the innovator’s dilemma. Res. Organ. Behav. 28(1):185–206.Crossref, Google Scholar
• O’Reilly CA III, Tushman ML (2013) Organizational ambidexterity: Past, present and future. Acad. Management Perspect. 27(4):324–338.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pratt MG (2009) For the lack of a boilerplate: Tips on writing up (and reviewing) qualitative research. Acad. Management J. 52(5): 856–862.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Probst G, Raisch S (2005) Organizational crisis: The logic of failure. Acad. Management Executive 19(1):90–105.Google Scholar
• Raes AML, Heijltjes MG, Glunk U, Roe RA (2011) The interface of the top management team and middle managers: A process model. Acad. Management Rev. 36(1):102–126.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Raisch S, Birkinshaw J (2008) Organizational ambidexterity: Antecedents, outcomes, and moderators. J. Management 34(3): 375–409.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Raisch S, Birkinshaw J, Probst G, Tushman ML (2009) Organizational ambidexterity: Balancing exploitation and exploration for sustained performance. Organ. Sci. 20(4):685–695.Link, Google Scholar
• Ring PS, Van de Ven AH (1994) Developmental processes of cooperative interorganizational relationships. Acad. Management Rev. 19(1):90–118.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rogan M, Mors ML (2014) A network perspective on individual-level ambidexterity in organizations. Organ. Sci. 25(6):1860–1877.Link, Google Scholar
• Rothaermel FT (2001) Incumbent’s advantage through exploiting complementary assets via interfirm cooperation. Strategic Management J. 22(6/7):687–699.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rothaermel FT, Deeds DL (2004) Exploration and exploitation alliances in biotechnology: A system of new product development. Strategic Management J. 25(3):201–221.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sheremata WA (2000) Centrifugal and centripetal forces in radical new product development under time pressure. Acad. Management Rev. 25(2):389–408.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Siggelkow N, Levinthal DA (2003) Temporarily divide to conquer: Centralized, decentralized, and reintegrated organizational approaches to exploration and adaptation. Organ. Sci. 14(6):650–669.Link, Google Scholar
• Simsek Z (2009) Organizational ambidexterity: Towards a multilevel understanding. J. Management Stud. 46(4):597–624.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simsek Z, Heavey C, Veiga JF, Souder D (2009) A typology for aligning organizational ambidexterity’s conceptualizations, antecedents, and outcomes. J. Management Stud. 46(5):864–894.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Smith WK, Lewis MW (2011) Toward a theory of paradox: A dynamic equilibrium model of organizing. Acad. Management Rev. 36(2):381–403.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Smith WK, Tushman ML (2005) Managing strategic contradictions: A top management model for managing innovation streams. Organ. Sci. 16(5):522–536.Link, Google Scholar
• Strauss A, Corbin J (1998) Basics of Qualitative Research Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory, 2nd ed. (Sage, London).Google Scholar
• Tushman ML, O’Reilly CA III (1996) Ambidextrous organizations: Managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. Calif. Management Rev. 38(4):8–30.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Umphress EE, Bingham JB (2011) When employees do bad things for good reasons: Examining unethical pro-organizational behaviors. Organ. Sci. 22(3):621–640.Link, Google Scholar
• Van de Ven AH (2007) Engaged Scholarship: A Guide for Organizational and Social Research (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Walsh IJ, Bartunek JM (2011) Cheating the fates: Organizational foundings in the wake of demise. Acad. Management J. 54(5): 1017–1044.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wooldridge B, Floyd SW (1990) The strategy process, middle management involvement and organizational performance. Strategic Management J. 11(3):231–24.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yin RK (2008) Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 4th ed. (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA).Google Scholar
• Zaheer A, Venkatraman N (1995) Relational governance as an interorganizational strategy: An empirical test of the role of trust in economic exchange. Strategic Management J. 16(5):373–392.Crossref, Google Scholar