Sequences of learning types for organizational ambidexterity

2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 381-396 ◽  
Author(s):  
Russell J. Seidle
Keyword(s):  
Organizational Learning ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Innovation Process ◽  
Organizational Ambidexterity ◽  
Exploration And Exploitation ◽  
Structural Differentiation ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Integration Mechanisms ◽  
Development Phases ◽  
Learning Types

Purpose This paper aims to examine how distinct sequences of organizational learning types (experiential and vicarious) underpin processes of exploratory versus exploitative innovation. Design/methodology/approach Data collection consists of 16 interviews conducted with senior personnel at two firms in the biopharmaceutical sector, with sequences of organizational learning types derived from the associated innovation projects. These sequences and their differential emphases on experiential or vicarious learning are used to construct a conceptual model. Propositions describe the structural differentiation and integration mechanisms useful to foster organizational ambidexterity. Findings Technological brokering emerges as a key means by which organizations can reconcile the learning sequences underlying exploration and exploitation. For exploration, a structure incorporating cross-industry technology brokerage during the initiation and development phases of innovation is posited. For exploitation, a structure harnessing intra-industry technology brokerage during the development phase of innovation is suggested. Integration of these projects can be accomplished through cross-unit interfaces incorporating both types of brokerage roles, with emphasis on their use during implementation. Originality/value This paper considers the ways in which organizations focus on separate types of organizational learning at different stages of the innovation process. Insights are provided into how firms mobilize internal and external knowledge to advance these projects independently, as well as to link these efforts and thereby facilitate ambidexterity.

scholarly journals Ambidexterity and organizational learning: revisiting and reconnecting the literatures

2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 337-351 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacob Brix
Keyword(s):  
Organizational Learning ◽  
Absorptive Capacity ◽  
Empirical Data ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Organizational Ambidexterity ◽  
Exploration And Exploitation ◽  
Seminal Paper ◽  
Content Type ◽  
New Model ◽  
Multiple Levels

PurposeThe purpose of the study is to investigate how the processes of exploration and exploitation have developed in parallel in the literature of organizational ambidexterity and organizational learning, since James March published his seminal paper in 1991. The goal of the paper is to provide a synthesis of exploration and exploitation based on the two areas of literature.Design/methodology/approachThe study is conceptual and no empirical data have been used.FindingsThe study advances current understanding of exploration and exploitation by building a new model for organizational ambidexterity that takes into account multiple levels of learning, perspectives from absorptive capacity and inter-organizational learning.Originality/valueThe study’s novelty lies in the creation and discussion of a synthesis of exploration and exploitation stemming from organizational ambidexterity and organizational learning.

Learning with startups: an empirically grounded typology

2020 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Annika Steiber ◽  
Sverker Alänge ◽  
Vincenzo Corvello
Keyword(s):  
Organizational Learning ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Learning Processes ◽  
Organizational Ambidexterity ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Organizational Learning Theory ◽  
Correct Model ◽  
Key Characteristics ◽  
Operational Models ◽  
Practical Implications

Purpose Corporate-startup collaboration is an opportunity for inter-organizational learning. This paper aims to develop an empirically grounded typology to guide researchers and managers in choosing a model that is coherent with the underlying learning processes. Design/methodology/approach The empirical research consisted of three phases. First, 30 large companies were interviewed to identify different models of interaction. Second, eight different models and cases were selected, and a list of key characteristics of each model was drawn based on the empirical data, obtaining a first typology. Third, the typology was tested, improved and validated on nine corporations. Findings The main result of the study is an empirically grounded typology of models for corporate-startup interaction and inter-organizational learning. Six dimensions distinguish each model from the others. Research limitations/implications The paper contributes to extend the literature on inter-organizational learning through different models of corporate-startups interaction. It also contributes to organizational ambidexterity theory, showing how collaboration with startups can improve exploitation and exploration. Practical implications The typology provides an instrument for analyzing and selecting operational models for corporate-startup collaboration and learning. The models can be modified or broadened, creating new hybrids. Originality/value The paper presents a novel way of looking at corporate-startup relations by studying them through the lens of organizational learning theory. It explains the existence of different inter-organizational arrangements and provides guidance in selecting the correct model.

Overcoming counter-knowledge through telemedicine communication technologies

2017 ◽  
Vol 31 (7/8) ◽  
pp. 730-745 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jorge Cegarra-Sanchez ◽  
Juan-Gabriel Cegarra-Navarro ◽  
Anthony Wensley ◽  
Jose Diaz Manzano
Keyword(s):  
Learning Process ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Communication Technologies ◽  
Regional Hospital ◽  
Potential Contribution ◽  
Exploration And Exploitation ◽  
Negative Effects ◽  
Content Type

Purpose Knowledge acquired from sources of unverified information such as gossip, partial truths or lies, in this paper it is termed as “counter-knowledge.” The purpose of this paper is to explore this topic through an exploration of the links between a Hospital-in-the-Home Units (HHUs) learning process (LP), counter-knowledge, and the utilization of communication technologies. The following two questions are addressed: Does the reduction of counter-knowledge result in the utilization of communication technologies? Does the development of counter-knowledge hinder the LP? Design/methodology/approach This paper examines the relevance of communication technologies to the exploration and exploitation of knowledge for 252 patients of a (HHU) within a Spanish regional hospital. The data collected was analyzed using the PLS-Graph. Findings To HHU managers, this study offers a set of guidelines to assist in their gaining an understanding of the role of counter-knowledge in organizational LPs and the potential contribution of communication technologies. Our findings support the proposition that the negative effects of counter-knowledge can be mitigated by using communication technologies. Originality/value It is argued in this paper that counter-knowledge may play a variety of different roles in the implementation of LPs. Specifically, the assignment of communication technologies to homecare units has given them the means to filter counter-knowledge and prevent users from any possible problems caused by such counter-knowledge.

Using action research in innovation project management: building legitimacy and organizational learning in an SME during a merger process

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Constance Elizabeth Kampf ◽  
Charlotte J. Brandt ◽  
Christopher G. Kampf
Keyword(s):  
Project Management ◽  
Organizational Learning ◽  
Action Research ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Innovation Process ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Organizational Level ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Innovation Project

PurposeThe purpose is to explore how the process of action research (AR) can support building legitimacy and organizational learning in innovation project management and portfolio practices in merger contexts.Design/methodology/approachMeta-reflection on method issues in Action Research through an action research case study with an innovation group during an organizational change process. This case demonstrates an example of an action research cycle focused on building practitioner legitimacy rather than problem-solving.FindingsKey findings include (1) demonstrating how AR can be used for building legitimacy through visualizing the innovation process, and embedding those visuals in top management practices of the organization; and (2) demonstrating how AR can work as an organizational learning tool in merger contexts.Research limitations/implicationsThis study focuses on an action research cooperation during a two-and-a-half-year period. Thus, findings offer the depth of a medium term case study. The processes of building legitimacy represent this particular case, and can be investigated in other organizational contexts to see the extent to which these issues can be generalized.Practical implicationsFor researchers, this paper offers an additional type of AR cycle to consider in their research design which can be seen as demonstrating a form of interplay between practitioner action and organizational level legitimacy. For practitioners, this paper demonstrates a connection between legitimacy and organizational learning in innovation contexts. The discussion of how visuals were co-created and used for building legitimacy for an innovation process that differs from the standard stage gate model demonstrates how engaging in AR research can contribute to developing visuals as resources for building legitimacy and organizational learning based on connections between theory and practice.Originality/valueThis case rethinks AR practice for innovation project management contexts to include legitimacy and organizational learning. This focus on legitimacy building from organizational learning and knowledge conversion contributes to our understanding of the soft side of innovation project management. Legitimacy is demonstrated to be a key concern for innovation project management practices.

Leadership and organizational ambidexterity

2016 ◽  
Vol 35 (6) ◽  
pp. 778-788 ◽  
Author(s):  
Saša Baškarada ◽  
Jamie Watson ◽  
Jason Cromarty
Keyword(s):  
Transformational Leadership ◽  
Leadership Styles ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Organizational Ambidexterity ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Senior Leaders ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Organizational Mechanisms ◽  
Exploratory Innovation ◽  
Transactional And Transformational Leadership

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to answer calls for more research on how leaders may promote organizational ambidexterity (i.e. exploitation and exploration), and how such behaviors relate to transactional and transformational leadership styles. Design/methodology/approach – The findings presented in this paper are based on semi-structured interviews with 11 senior leaders in Australian Defence. Findings – This paper identifies three organizational mechanisms that leaders rely on to promote exploitation, and five behaviors that leaders rely on to promote exploration. These mechanisms and behaviors closely match transactional and transformational leadership styles, respectively. Originality/value – This paper provides support for the leadership ambidexterity construct, and for the thesis that transformational leadership is appropriate in the context of exploratory innovation, while transactional leadership is appropriate in the context of exploitative innovation.

Technology brokering and innovation: linking strategy, practice, and people

2005 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 32-36 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Hargadon
Keyword(s):  
Design Methodology ◽  
Innovation Process ◽  
Innovation Strategy ◽  
Growth Opportunities ◽  
Main Method ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Corporate Leaders ◽  
Continuous Innovation ◽  
New Ideas ◽  
Practical Implications

PurposeThe author has spent the last ten years studying the innovation process in modern organizations and found that the most successful firms pursue an innovation strategy termed technology brokering.Design/methodology/approachHow are the objectives achieved? Include the main method(s) used for the research. What is the approach to the topic and what is the theoretical or subject scope of the paper?FindingsRather than chasing wholly new ideas, these successful firms focus on recombining old ideas in new ways. The results have sparked many technological revolutions and produced a steady stream of growth opportunities for existing businesses.Research limitations/implicationsNeeds cases showing that technology brokering, and the complementary work practices and people, can successfully execute such a strategy.Practical implicationsBy transforming traditional R&D organizations through a strategy of technology brokering firms can build competencies for continuous innovation..Originality/valueTo pursue a strategy of recombinant innovation, corporate leaders must put themselves in position to be the first to see how existing technologies in one market could be used to create breakthrough innovations in another.

On dialectics in theorizing: the contingent nature of organizational learning

2020 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 957-968
Author(s):  
Norman Meisinger
Keyword(s):  
Organizational Learning ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Core ◽  
The Past ◽  
Conceptual Study

Purpose During the past decades, numerous contributions to organizational learning have emerged. However, these theories are plagued by the same paradoxical core that prevents organizational learning from being unambiguously determined or stably located throughout the entire organization and its individuals. The purpose of this paper is to understand how researchers approach this issue. Design/methodology/approach Through a meta-lens, this conceptual study observes how researchers are taming the paradox of organizational learning, referring exclusively to the theories that deal with its inherent paradox. Findings The author distinguishes fundamentally different theorizing strategies. Therefore, the paper aims not to sharpen the elusive and fuzzy nature of organizational learning but to sharpen the elusive understanding that its nature is fuzzy. As a consequence, the study further emphasizes how challenging an instrumental use of the academic construct of organizational learning for practicing managers outside research laboratories is. Originality/value The paper contributes (first) to the core understanding of the inherently conflicting construct of organizational learning by (second) uncovering the dialectics of the theories concerning it – the former only becomes feasible as a result of the latter.

Reaching organizational ambidexterity in the merger process: a temporal switching

2019 ◽  
Vol 58 (5) ◽  
pp. 879-896
Author(s):  
Anne-Sophie Thelisson ◽  
Audrey Missonier ◽  
Gilles Guieu
Keyword(s):  
Participant Observation ◽  
Organizational Ambidexterity ◽  
Longitudinal Case Study ◽  
Exploration And Exploitation ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Merger Process ◽  
Post Merger Integration ◽  
And Control ◽  
Merger Integration ◽  
Parent Companies

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore how a company reaches organizational ambidexterity during a merger process. Organizational ambidexterity refers to the proactive adaptations of an organization to simultaneously explore and exploit. Design/methodology/approach The paper presents a longitudinal case study of a public-private merger of two listed French companies. The data were collected from participant observation, interviews and archival documentation over two years. Findings The balance between autonomy and control by the parent companies evolves during the post-merger integration. The findings reveal that there was no concordance between the oscillations between autonomy and control on the part of the parent companies and the new organization’s exploration/exploitation strategies. However, the progressive evolution of control and autonomy from the parent companies engendered organizational ambidexterity during the third phase integration. Practical implications The study adds insight into how organizations can develop ways to manage organizational ambidexterity dynamics by employing temporal mechanisms, referring to an organization’s shifting sequentially between exploration and exploitation. The case highlights how temporal switching between exploration and exploitation occurs to ultimately enable ambidexterity. Originality/value Although organizational ambidexterity is recognized as a key element for post-merger integration, how it is achieved over the course of the merger process has received little attention. The study highlights that in the case of public-private mergers, the parent companies influence exploration and/or exploitation strategies. The paper adds insights on whether exploration and exploitation can be differentiated over time and whether exploration and exploitation can be reconciled at the same time.

Creativity and forms of managerial control in innovation processes: tools, viewpoints and practices

2019 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 214-229 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sophie Raedersdorf Bollinger
Keyword(s):  
Information System ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Innovation Process ◽  
Management Control ◽  
Human Relationship ◽  
Managerial Control ◽  
Management Tools ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Innovation Activities ◽  
Innovation Processes

Purpose Innovation processes are inherently uncertain. They account for a high proportion of risks taken by companies and cause tensions. The purpose of this paper is to consider whether some management tools facilitate the smooth implementation of an innovation process. Does the relevance of these tools depend on the size of the company, its activity sector, the type of innovation expected or the viewpoint of the manager in charge? Design/methodology/approach The author answers these questions using a quantitative questionnaire survey of 169 companies. This survey allows the author to describe the tools and practices of management control of innovation processes and to highlight the specific needs of different sets of companies. Findings The collected data show a convergence of tools and practices used, which the literature on managerial control and creativity helps us to understand. Originality/value The paper also contributes to reconciling management control and innovation activities. In particular, it investigates how the use of management tools varies depending on managers’ viewpoints. A distinction is made between formal, information system-based tools and more informal, human relationship-based tools.

Leading innovation – resolving creativity’s paradoxes

2019 ◽  
Vol 47 (4) ◽  
pp. 12-19
Author(s):  
Brian Leavy
Keyword(s):  
Design Methodology ◽  
Innovation Process ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Corporate Innovation ◽  
Practical Implications

Purpose Corporate innovation is an often misunderstood process, largely because managing it successfully requires inherently contradictory aims, such as control and freedom. This article looks at a variety of approaches by leading authorities. Design/methodology/approach A number of recent books have examined the paradoxical tensions at the heart of the innovation process. The article assesses the guidance they offer practitioners on how to manage a process replete with conflict and contradictions. Findings Several authors suggest unconventional approaches to unleash the talents of individuals and groups in ways that are productive for the organization. Practical implications One of the main challenges in leading innovation is to cultivate both cohesion and dissent. Originality/value This masterclass is a useful primer for practitioners leading an innovation initiative.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document