Dynamic capabilities, creative action and poetics

Research on dynamic capabilities explores how businesses change enables enterprises to remain competitive. However, theory on dynamic capabilities still struggles to capture novelty, the essence of change. This study argues that a full understanding of strategic change requires us to sharpen our focus on real people and experiences; in turn, we must incorporate other faculties, which almost always operate alongside our logical ones, into our theory. We must pay more attention to the "non-rational" sides of ourselves-including, but not limited to, our imaginations, intuitions, attractions, biographies, preferences, and aesthetic faculties and capabilities. We argue that all such faculties, on the one hand, are central to our abilities to comprehend and cope with complexity and, on the other hand, foster novel understandings, potential responses, and social creativity. This study introduces the possibility of an alternative form of inquiry that highlights the role of poetic faculties in strategic behavior and change

Boon or curse? A contingent view on the relationship between strategic planning and organizational ambidexterity

Numerous scholars have attempted to explain which factors allow for organizational ambidexterity. Strategic planning, as a possible antecedent, has not been considered so far. This is surprising because strategic planning is among the most widely used strategic decision-making tools in management practice and one of the most extensively studied concepts in management research. In addition, prior research has demonstrated the potential of strategic planning to impact innovation-related outcomes—both positively and negatively. Here, we investigate the association between strategic planning and organizational ambidexterity using a survey of 217 senior executives. We highlight the importance of considering how executives use strategic planning. Our results support the hypothesis that strategic planning's positive or negative association with organizational ambidexterity is contingent on other organizational factors. Our findings reveal that strategic planning is only positively associated with organizational ambidexterity when leaders' innovation orientation is extraordinarily high. We further contextualize this interaction effect by considering the environmental uncertainty perceived by the top management. This work contributes to the literature by examining the antecedents of organizational ambidexterity

Microfoundations of organizational paradox: The problem is how we think about the problem

Competing tensions and demands pervade our work lives. Accumulating research examines organizational and leadership approaches to leveraging these tensions. But what about individuals within firms? Although early paradox theory built upon micro-level insights from psychology and philosophy to understand the nature and management of varied competing demands, corresponding empirical studies are rare, offering scarce insights into why some individuals thrive with tensions while others struggle. In response, we contribute to the microfoundations of organizational paradox with a theoretical model and robust measures that help unpack individuals' varied approaches to tensions. Following rigorous scale development in Study 1, including samples from the US, UK, Israel, and China, we test our model in a large firm in the US using quantitative and qualitative methods. We identify resource scarcity (i.e. limited time and funding) as a source of tensions. We also demonstrate that a paradox mindset - the extent to which one is accepting of and energized by tensions - can help individuals leverage them to improve in-role job performance and innovation. Our results highlight paradox mindset as a key to unlocking the potential of everyday tensions

From creativity to innovation: The social network drivers of the four phases of the idea journey

This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from Academy of Management via the DOI in this record.Interest has burgeoned, in recent years, in how social networks influence individual creativity and innovation. From both the theoretical and empirical points of view, this increased attention has generated many inconsistencies. In this article we propose that a conceptualization of the idea journey encompassing phases that the literature has so far overlooked can help solve existing tensions. We conceptualize four phases of the journey of an idea, from conception to completion: idea generation, idea elaboration, idea championing, and idea implementation. We propose that a creator has distinct primary needs in each phase: cognitive flexibility, support, influence, and shared vision, respectively. Individual creators successfully move through a phase when the relational and structural elements of their networks match the distinct needs of the phase. The relational and structural elements that are beneficial for one phase, however, are detrimental for another. We propose that in order to solve this seeming contradiction and the associated paradoxes, individual creators have to change interpretations and frames throughout the different phases. This, in turn, allows them to activate different network characteristics at the appropriate moment and successfully complete the idea journey from novel concept to a tangible outcome that changes the field

Measuring the knowledge base of regional innovation systems in Sweden

Within the literature on innovation systems, there are a growing number of scholars emphasizing the importance of differentiated knowledge bases underlying innovation activities. The existing work on knowledge bases is largely grounded on in-depth case studies; while surprisingly little effort has been done so far to operationalize the concept in a more systematic manner. In this paper, an attempt is made to develop a scheme of analysis to identify the knowledge base of a regional economy. We suggest using occupation data in association with a location quotient analysis, to assess whether a regional economy has a particular strength in one (or more) knowledge bases. To bring the analytical scheme into practice and assess it, we apply it on the county level in Sweden. The results are explained and contrasted with insights on the regional economies taken from secondary sources. We conclude that the proposed scheme of analysis leads to fairly reliable results, and could stimulate further empirical research on differentiated knowledge bases.differentiated knowledge base; regional innovation system; Sweden

"We are always after that balance":managing innovation in the new digital media industry

The pressure to innovate is growing as technology cycles change more rapidly. Organisations need to balance exploration and exploitation effectively if they are to heed the innovation imperative. Organisational ambidexterity is proposed as a means to achieve such balance with structural or contextual ambidexterity as possible choices. Yet how organisations become ambidextrous is an as yet underresearched area, and different industry sectors may pose different innovation challenges. Using the case study method, this paper examines how a computer games company responds to an industry-specific innovation challenge and how it endeavours to balance exploration and exploitation. The findings suggest that ambidexterity is difficult to achieve, and is fraught with organisational tensions which might eventually jeopardise the innovation potential of a company. The paper suggests that more qualitative research is needed to further our understanding of innovation challenges, innovation management and organisational ambidexterity

Methods of Paradox

Despite growing scholarly interest in paradoxes, few studies have expressly engaged with the methodological mechanics of ‘doing’ paradox research. First, there are no clearly established guidelines regarding what should count as paradox in research endeavors. Second, there is uncertainty around who sees/thinks/experiences the paradox and what is relevant when it comes to the emergence, choice, interpretation and appropriation of paradoxes in empirical settings. Third, there is still confusion around where one can find evidence of paradoxes. This book chapter aims to shed some light on these methodological shortcomings. We suggest that paradox researchers can deal with these methodological challenges by 1) showing evidence of contradictory, interrelated, simultaneous and persistent paradoxical tensions in the empirical setting, 2) developing reliable and flexible protocols for paradox identification, 3) pushing for multi-level paradox studies, 4) practicing reflexivity, 5) staying close to the context, and 6) leveraging multi-modality

Methods of Paradox

Despite growing scholarly interest in paradoxes, few studies have expressly engaged with the methodological mechanics of ‘doing’ paradox research. First, there are no clearly established guidelines regarding what should count as paradox in research endeavors. Second, there is uncertainty around who sees/thinks/experiences the paradox and what is relevant when it comes to the emergence, choice, interpretation and appropriation of paradoxes in empirical settings. Third, there is still confusion around where one can find evidence of paradoxes. This book chapter aims to shed some light on these methodological shortcomings. We suggest that paradox researchers can deal with these methodological challenges by 1) showing evidence of contradictory, interrelated, simultaneous and persistent paradoxical tensions in the empirical setting, 2) developing reliable and flexible protocols for paradox identification, 3) pushing for multi-level paradox studies, 4) practicing reflexivity, 5) staying close to the context, and 6) leveraging multi-modality