Integrative ambidexterity: one paradoxical mode of learning

Exploration–Exploitation Duality with Both Tradeoff and Synergy: The Curvilinear Interaction Effects of Learning Modes on Innovation Types

How can a firm apply the appropriate interaction between exploration and exploitation with the goal of either radical or incremental innovation? In this study, we seek to answer this puzzling question by reframing exploitation and exploration as a duality of learning (i.e., two modes that are partial complementary for synergy as well as partial conflicting for tradeoff). Specifically, rather than assuming either a positive or negative interaction between exploration and exploitation as prior literature has done, our study highlights a novel pattern of inverted U-shaped interaction between exploration and exploitation for both radical and incremental innovations. With a Chinese sample of 508 firms, our empirical evidence supports our prediction of two patterns of inverted U-shaped interaction of exploration and exploitation. Such unique findings showcase the unique value of reframing paradox into duality from the meta-perspective of yin-yang balancing to shed new light on organizational ambidexterity and innovation management.

Combining Structural and Sequential Ambidexterity: A Configurational Approach Using fsQCA

Structural and sequential ambidexterity are proved to be two prevalent approaches in managing tension between exploration and exploitation. Dominant studies have treated the two approaches as mutually exclusive but have provided less insight about their combination, and the organizational configurations that advance such combination, which is a major meaningful gap explored in the current study. This study aims to explore the configurations of organization design choices to combine structural and sequential approaches from a holistic perspective. We apply fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) to analyze the empirical data collected from 102 firms in China. The results show that firms attain high ambidexterity with both separated and blended configurations. Blended ones demonstrate that the structural and sequential approaches can be combined in a way that one approach dominates and the other subordinates. Organizational design mechanisms regarding the configurations for combining structural and sequential approaches are concluded as multielements (complements and substitutes) and multilevels (fit and interaction). These findings are also interpreted through the Chinese ‘Yin-Yang’ framework, which introduces ‘Yin-Yang balancing’ into the ambidexterity literature.

An integrative learning approach: combining improvement methods and ambidexterity

Purpose

This paper aims to explore whether the principles behind improvement methods and the underlying learning orientations of ambidexterity have the potential to support the managing of ideas for implementation.

Design/methodology/approach

By combining improvement methods and ambidexterity, this study presents a pragmatic framework for innovative working with a scientific underpinning linked to organizational learning.

Findings

The descriptive stages in the plan-do-check-act method for improvement are instructive in their focus on progress and helpful in untangling the more explanatory nature of ambidexterity to frame innovative working.

Research limitations/implications

Although the framework’s usefulness for innovative working is subject to future studies, the implementation, validation and results of the framework in pilot research may contribute to the body of knowledge.

Practical implications

The proposed framework can be used in teaching the key role of strategic leadership to explore and exploit over time. The framework has the potential to guide innovative working in practice by making better use of the employees’ tacit knowledge in such a way that they are empowered to explore new ways of defining problems and searching for solutions to improve organizational performance. The results of the implementation will impact the employees’ quality of life.

Originality/value

This study advances the current understanding of how the seemingly contradictory activities of exploration and exploitation can model an integrative learning approach.

Learning with startups: an empirically grounded typology

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.

Reconciling temporal conflicts in innovation ambidexterity: the role of TMT temporal leadership

Purpose

This study aims to extend the temporal perspective on ambidexterity by investigating how and under what conditions top management team (TMT) temporal leadership improves innovation ambidexterity.

Design/methodology/approach

Using a questionnaire survey, data were collected from 165 small- and medium-sized enterprises in China. Ordinary least squares regression models were applied to test the hypotheses.

Findings

The findings show that TMT temporal leadership has a positive effect on innovation ambidexterity and temporal conflict mediates this relationship. Market dynamism and institutional support moderate the indirect effect of TMT temporal leadership on innovation ambidexterity.

Practical implications

Managers wishing to promote exploration and exploitation simultaneously should pay attention to the temporal aspects of their innovation strategy and improve their temporal leadership activities.

Originality/value

This study highlights the temporal conflicts in ambidexterity and clarifies the enabling role of TMT temporal leadership. It contributes new insights to the research on organizational ambidexterity and strategic leadership.

Organizational learning and bureaucracy: an alternative view

Purpose

This paper aims to reconceptualize the relationship between organizational learning and bureaucracy. Although the two are generally considered to be antithetical, this paper shows that, in some organizations, bureaucracy can be functional for organizational learning.

Design/methodology/approach

The central argument is theoretical and builds on two main ideas: firstly, the nature of knowledge creation and organizational learning is conditioned by the organization’s main technological characteristics; and secondly, bureaucracy has a dual nature as an instrument of managerial control and as a vehicle of large-scale collaboration. This study uses examples from process industries as empirical illustrations.

Findings

As products and production systems come to embody deeper and more diverse knowledge, their development takes on an increasingly collaborative character. The need to integrate differentiated knowledge and material artefacts calls for specialization, formalization, centralization and staff roles. Hence, technological complexity drives a bureaucratization of organizational learning.

Research limitations/implications

The core argument is developed with reference to industries where organizational learning involves the accumulation of knowledge, not its periodic replacement associated with technological shifts. Its relevance outside these industries remains to be assessed.

Practical implications

Organizations, whose knowledge creation fits the pattern of creative accumulation, should learn to harness formal structures for large-scale collaboration.

Originality/value

The main thesis runs counter to mainstream perspectives on organizational learning. This paper explores organizational learning in sectors that have received little attention in debates about organizational learning.