Hybrid Ambidexterity: How the Environment Shapes Incumbents’ Use of Structural and Contextual Approaches

References

• Adler PS, Goldoftas B, Levine DI (1999) Flexibility vs. efficiency? A case study of model changeovers in the Toyota production system. Organ. Sci. 10(1):43–68.Link, Google Scholar
• Andriopoulos C, Lewis MW (2009) Exploitation-exploration tensions and organizational ambidexterity: Managing paradoxes of innovation. Organ. Sci. 20(4):696–717.Link, Google Scholar
• Benner MJ, Tushman ML (2003) Exploitation, exploration, and process management: The productivity dilemma revisited. Acad. Management Rev. 28(2):238–256.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Birkinshaw J, Gibson C (2004) Building ambidexterity into an organization. MIT Sloan Management Rev. 45(4):47–55.Google Scholar
• Birkinshaw J, Gupta K (2013) Clarifying the distinctive contribution of ambidexterity to the field of organization studies. Acad. Management Perspect. 27(4):287–298.Crossref, 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
• Burgelman RA (1983) A process model of internal corporate venturing in the diversified major firm. Admin. Sci. Quart. 28(2):223–244.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burgelman RA, Grove AS (2007) Let chaos reign, then rein in chaos—repeatedly: Managing strategic dynamics for corporate longevity. Strategic Management J. 28(10):965–979.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burgers JH, Jansen JJ, Van den Bosch FA, Volberda HW (2009) Structural differentiation and corporate venturing: The moderating role of formal and informal integration mechanisms. J. Bus. Venturing 24(3):206–220.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cao Q, Gedajlovic E, Zhang H (2009) Unpacking organizational ambidexterity: Dimensions, contingencies, and synergistic effects. Organ. Sci. 20(4):781–796.Link, Google Scholar
• Chang YY, Hughes M (2012) Drivers of innovation ambidexterity in small-to medium-sized firms. Eur. Management J. 30(1):1–17.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chen EL, Katila R (2008) Rival interpretations of balancing exploration and exploitation: Simultaneous or sequential. Scott S, ed. Handbook of Technology and Innovation Management (John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ), 197–214.Google Scholar
• Cordery J, Sevastos P, Mueller W, Parker S (1993) Correlates of employee attitudes toward functional flexibility. Human Relations 46(6):705–723.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Denison DR (1990) Corporate Culture and Organizational Effectiveness (John Wiley & Sons, New York).Google Scholar
• Duncan RB (1976) The ambidextrous organization: Designing dual structures for innovation. Management Organ. 1:167–188.Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt KM (1989) Building theories 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
• Fang C, Lee J, Schilling MA (2010) Balancing exploration and exploitation through structural design: The isolation of subgroups and organizational learning. Organ. Sci. 21(3):625–642.Link, Google Scholar
• Flick U (2009) An Introduction to Qualitative Research (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA).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
• Gilbert CG (2006) Change in the presence of residual fit: Can competing frames coexist? Organ. Sci. 17(1):150–167.Link, Google Scholar
• Hambrick DC (1983) High profit strategies in mature capital goods industries: A contingency approach. Acad. Management J. 26(4):687–707.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Heavey C, Simsek Z (2017) Distributed cognition in top management teams and organizational ambidexterity: The influence of transactive memory systems. J. Management 43(3):919–945.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Henderson RM, Clark KB (1990) Architectural innovation: The reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms. Admin. Sci. Quart. 35:9–30.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hess AM, Rothaermel FT (2011) When are assets complementary? Star scientists, strategic alliances, and innovation in the pharmaceutical industry. Strategic Management J. 32(8):895–909.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hill SA, Birkinshaw J (2014) Ambidexterity and survival in corporate venture units. J. Management 40(7):1899–1931.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Holmqvist M (2004) Experiential learning processes of exploitation and exploration within and between organizations: An empirical study of product development. Organ. Sci. 15(1):70–81.Link, Google Scholar
• Hoppmann J, Huenteler J, Girod B (2014) Compulsive policy-making: The evolution of the German feed-in tariff for solar photovoltaic power. Res. Policy 43(8):1422–1441.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hoppmann J, Naegele F, Girod B (2019) Boards as a source of inertia: Examining the internal challenges and dynamics of boards of directors in times of environmental discontinuities. Acad. Management J. 62(2):437–468.Crossref, Google Scholar
• House CH, Price RL (2009) The HP Phenomenon (Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA).Google Scholar
• Jansen JJP, Andriopoulous C, Tushman M (2013) Organizing for ambidexterity: Founding, developing and revitalizing dynamic capabilities over time. Working paper, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, Netherlands.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, Vera D, Crossan M (2009b) Strategic leadership for exploration and exploitation: The moderating role of environmental dynamism. Leadership Quart. 20(1):5–18.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jansen JJP, Tempelaar MP, Van den Bosch FA, Volberda HW (2009a) Structural differentiation and ambidexterity: The mediating role of integration mechanisms. Organ. Sci. 20(4):797–811.Link, Google Scholar
• Junni P, Sarala RM, Taras V, Tarba SY (2013) Organizational ambidexterity and performance: A meta-analysis. Acad. Management Perspect. 27(4):299–312.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kauppila OP (2010) Creating ambidexterity by integrating and balancing structurally separate interorganizational partnerships. Strategic Organ. 8(4):283–312.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
• Lawrence PR, Lorsch JW, Garrison JS (1967) Organization and Environment: Managing Differentiation and Integration (Division of Research, Graduate School of Business Administration, Harvard University, Boston).Google Scholar
• Lin HE, McDonough EF III (2014) Cognitive frames, learning mechanisms, and innovation ambidexterity. J. Product Innovation Management 31(S1):170–188.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
• March JG, Simon HA (1958) Organizations (John Wiley & Sons, Oxford, UK).Google Scholar
• Markides CC (2013) Business model innovation: What can the ambidexterity literature teach us? Acad. Management Perspect. 27(4):313–323.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McDonough III EF, Leifer R (1983) Using simultaneous structures to cope with uncertainty. Acad. Management J. 26(4):727–735.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Miles MB, Huberman AM (1984) Drawing valid meaning from qualitative data: Toward a shared craft. Ed. Res. 13(5):20–30.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mitchell W, Singh K (1993) Death of the lethargic: Effects of expansion into new technical subfields on performance in a firm’s base business. Organ. Sci. 4(2):152–180.Link, Google Scholar
• Mom TJ, Fourné SP, Jansen JJ (2015) Managers’ work experience, ambidexterity, and performance: The contingency role of the work context. Human Resource Management 54(1):s133–s153.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mom TJ, Van Den Bosch FA, 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
• 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, Tushman ML (2004) The ambidextrous organization. Harvard Bus. Rev. 82(4):74–83.Google Scholar
• O’Reilly CA, Tushman ML (2008) Ambidexterity as a dynamic capability: Resolving the innovator’s dilemma. Res. Organ. Behav. 28:185–206.Crossref, Google Scholar
• O’Reilly CA, Tushman ML (2013) Organizational ambidexterity: Past, present, and future. Acad. Management Perspect. 27(4):324–338.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Patel PC, Messersmith JG, Lepak DP (2013) Walking the tightrope: An assessment of the relationship between high-performance work systems and organizational ambidexterity. Acad. Management J. 56(5):1420–1442.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Powell WW, Koput KW, Smith-Doerr L (1996) Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology. Admin. Sci. Quart. 41(1):116–145.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
• Sidhu JS, Commandeur HR, Volberda HW (2007) The multifaceted nature of exploration and exploitation: Value of supply, demand, and spatial search for innovation. Organ. Sci. 18(1):20–38.Link, Google Scholar
• Sidhu JS, Volberda HW, Commandeur HR (2004) Exploring exploration orientation and its determinants: Some empirical evidence. J. Management Stud. 41(6):913–932.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Siggelkow N (2007) Persuasion with case studies. Acad. Management J. 50(1):20–24.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: Toward a multilevel understanding. J. Management Stud. 46(4):597–624.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
• Stettner U, Lavie D (2013) Ambidexterity under scrutiny: Exploration and exploitation via internal organization, alliances, and acquisitions. Strategic Management J. 35(13):1903–1929.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tripsas M (1997) Unraveling the process of creative destruction: Complementary assets and incumbent survival in the typesetter industry. Strategic Management J. 18(S1):119–142.Google Scholar
• Tripsas M (2009) Technology, identity, and inertia through the lens of “The Digital Photography Company.” Organ. Sci. 20(2):441–460.Link, Google Scholar
• Tripsas M, Gavetti G (2000) Capabilities, cognition, and inertia: Evidence from digital imaging. Strategic Management J. 21(10–11):1147–1161.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tushman ML, O’Reilly CA (1996) Ambidextrous organizations: Managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. Calif. Management Rev. 38(4):8–30.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tushman ML, Rosenkopf L (1996) Executive succession, strategic reorientation and performance growth: A longitudinal study in the US cement industry. Management Sci. 42(7):939–953.Link, Google Scholar
• Tushman M, Smith WK, Wood RC, Westerman G, O’Reilly C (2010) Organizational designs and innovation streams. Indust. Corporate Change 19(5):1331–1366.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Weick KE, Quinn RE (1999) Organizational change and development. Annual Rev. Psych. 50(1):361–386.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wu B, Wan Z, Levinthal DA (2014) Complementary assets as pipes and prisms: Innovation incentives and trajectory choices. Strategic Management J. 35(9):1257–1278.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yin RK (2009) Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 4th ed. (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA).Google Scholar
• Zimmermann A, Raisch S, Birkinshaw J (2015) How is ambidexterity initiated? The emergent charter definition process. Organ. Sci. 26(4):1119–1139.Link, Google Scholar