Ambidexterity as practice : individual ambidexterity through paradoxical practices

Following the turn to practice in organization theory and the emerging interest in the microfoundations of ambidexterity, understanding the role of individuals in realizing ambidexterity approaches becomes crucial. Drawing insights from Greek philosophy on paradoxes, and practice theory on paradoxes and ambidexterity, we propose a view of individual ambidexterity grounded in paradoxical practices. Existing conceptualizations of ambidexterity are largely based on separation strategies. Contrary to this perspective, we argue that individual ambidexterity can be accomplished via paradoxical practices that renegotiate or transcend boundaries of exploration and exploitation. We identify three such paradoxical practices at the individual level that can advance understanding of ambidexterity: engaging in “hybrid tasks,” capitalizing cumulatively on previous learning, and adopting a mindset of seeking synergies between the competing demands of exploration and exploitation

Managing the tensions of innovation and efficiency in the pursuit of organizational ambidexterity

Whereas organizational ambidexterity is increasingly gaining ground in organizational theory, key issues regarding how ambidexterity is conceptualized, achieved and sustained offer partial insights or remain unexplored. Current approaches to ambidexterity so far have followed rather static and single level approaches to ambidexterity, without further exploring the underlying mechanisms of how ambidexterity is pursued in practice and through which mechanism and processes tensions are managed. In order to address this gap, this research adopts a holistic approach to the study of ambidexterity exploring tensions at different organizational levels. Based on a case study research in two organizations in pursuit of ambidexterity this research brings forward a view of ambidexterity that is complex and dynamic, as it involves the co-existence of different tensions and modes of balancing within different organizational groups. Research findings contribute to the study of ambidexterity at two main levels: tension manifestation (which tensions arise at each organizational group) and tension management (the mode of balance pursued in each case). Following a micro-level approach to the research of ambidexterity, findings bring forward the role of organizational actors in the management of tensions: based on how individuals perceived tensions (as complementary, conflicting, or interrelated), their organizational level and their strategic orientation different modes of balancing were pursued. As a result this research contributes to the theory of ambidexterity by identifying a path dependent process of managing tensions based on how individuals perceive the nature of the tensions. As literature on ambidexterity is shifting towards the importance of agency, gaining this understanding is a crucial step towards how ambidexterity is achieved

In pursuit of ambidexterity : managerial reactions to innovation-efficiency tensions

Whereas tensions arising from the pursuit of ambidexterity have been documented, how these are interpreted and managed by actors themselves remains largely unexplored. Based on in-depth case research in a large Scandinavian based telecommunications organization pursuing ambidexterity, we identify a path-dependent process of tension interpretation and tension management at different levels of the organization. Our findings suggest that in the context of an ambidextrous strategy, actors are actively involved in managing arising tensions based on their differing interpretations of these tensions (where ambidextrous demands are seen as complementary, conflicting or interrelated). We find that these interpretations are influenced by actors’ strategic orientation and organizational level. Our study extends understanding of the pursuit of ambidexterity in practice, offering a pluralist, path-dependent perspective of how actors perceive and deal with ambidexterity tensions

Organizational ambidexterity through the lens of paradox theory:Building a novel research agenda

The organizational ambidexterity literature conceptualizes exploration and exploitation as conflicting activities, and proposes separation-oriented approaches to accomplish ambidexterity; namely, structural and temporal separation. We argue that viewing ambidexterity from the lens of paradox theory enables us to move beyond separation-oriented prescriptions toward synthesis or transcendence of paradoxical poles; as well as toward longitudinal explorations of how paradoxical poles dynamically interrelate over time. In this way, the conceptual repertoire of ambidexterity theory is enriched and empirical research can more closely and pragmatically track practice

Logical incrementalism : small shifts to nowhere or paths to strategic agility? The case Of Nasa

How do large, complex organizations shift to accomplish new strategic alignments over time? Can incremental steps lead to transformational change? Whereas strategic agility as the ability to reach new strategic alignments over time is seen as key for sustainable competitive advantage, there is not enough clarity on how organizations can become strategically agile. Taking a longitudinal perspective we explore NASA’s journey to strategic agility through successively shifting to three different strategic alignments over the last six decades and suggest that logical incrementalism may be an unappreciated driver of this process. The three successive alignment models exhibit important shifts in technology strategy, competencies, and values of the organization. Zooming in the transition process, we uncover three phases of incremental changes in shifting from one alignment model to the next: the emergence of new approaches, the embeddedness of these approaches in particular contexts; and their expansion to other organizational contexts. These iterative phases (emerge-embed-expand) operate within the context of a stable purpose despite periodic shifts in the agency’s programs and they shed light on how strategic agility can be built incrementally and over a longer time horizon, contrary to perspectives such as punctuated equilibrium that posit short periods of revolutionary change to reach new equilibria

Data and Case Study Research in Accounting and Finance

No abstract available