Advertisement

Embracing the Tension

  • Aaron C. T. SmithEmail author
  • Fiona Sutherland
  • David H. Gilbert
Chapter
  • 609 Downloads

Abstract

This chapter furthers the book’s proposition that at the heart of duality theory resides the explore—exploit problem, which is concerned with how firms can stimulate innovation for the future while maintaining a high return upon existing opportunities. It also addresses how to build ambidexterity capability. Based on longitudinal case study data, the chapter suggests that one productive method for developing ambidexterity capability involves pursuing a dual organizational identity embracing innovation and efficiency as mutually inclusive pursuits. The chapter draws on the case evidence to show that a leader sensegiving/sensemaking communications strategy needs to shift from one formulated around constancy, efficiency, and control to one imbued with duality thinking. The chapter also connects the case evidence with theory.

Keywords

Case study Sensegiving Sensemaking Identity 

References

  1. Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1967). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. New York: Anchor Books.Google Scholar
  2. Birkinshaw, J., & Gibson, C. (2004). Building ambidexterity into an organization. Sloan Management Review, 45(4), 47–55.Google Scholar
  3. Boden, D. (1994). The business of talk: Organizations in action. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  4. Boreham, N., & Morgan, C. (2004). A social cultural analysis of organizational learning. Oxford Review of Education, 30(3), 307–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brown, A. D., Gabriel, Y., & Gherardi, S. (2009). Storytelling and change: An unfolding story. Organization, 16(3), 323–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bruner, J. (1991). The narrative construction of reality. Critical Inquiry, 18, 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Crossley, M. (2007). Narrative analysis. In E. Lyons & A. Coyle (Eds.), Analysing qualitative data in psychology (pp. 131–144). Los Angeles: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Denis, J.-L., Lamothe, L., & Langley, A. (2001). The dynamics of collective leadership and strategic change in pluralistic organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 44(4), 809–837.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dunford, R., & Jones, D. (2000). Narrative in strategic change. Human Relations, 53(9), 1207–1226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Farquhar, J. D. (2012). Case study research for business. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fiss, P. C., & Zajac, E. J. (2006). The symbolic management of strategic change: Sensegiving via framing and decoupling. Academy of Management Journal, 49(6), 1173–1193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fleming, D. (2001). Narrative leadership: Using the power of stories. Strategy & Leadership, 29(4), 34–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gibson, C. B., & Birkinshaw, J. (2004). The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. Academy of Management Journal, 47(2), 209–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gillham, B. (2000). Case study research methods. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  15. Gioia, D. A., & Chittipeddi, K. (1991). Sensemaking and sensegiving in strategic change initiation. Strategic Management Journal, 12(6), 433–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gioia, D. A., & Thomas, J. B. (1996). Identity, image, and issue interpretation: Sensemaking during strategic change in academia. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(3), 370–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Graetz, F., & Smith, A. (2008). The role of dualities in arbitrating continuity and change in forms of organizing. International Journal of Management Reviews, 10(4), 265–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hill, R. C., & Levenhagen, M. (1995). Metaphors and mental models: Sensemaking and sensegiving in innovative and entrepreneurial activities. Journal of Management, 21(6), 1057–1074.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jansen, J. J. P., George, G., Van den Bosch, F. A. J., & Volberda, H. W. (2008). Senior team attributes and organizational ambidexterity: The moderating role of transformational leadership. Journal of Management Studies, 45(5), 982–1007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jennings, G. (2001). Tourism research. Milton, Australia: Wiley.Google Scholar
  21. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  22. Lubatkin, M. H., Simsek, Z., Ling, Y., & Veiga, J. F. (2006). Ambidexterity and performance in small-to medium-sized firms: The pivotal role of top management team behavioral integration. Journal of Management, 32(5), 646–672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Maitlis, S., & Lawrence, T. B. (2007). Triggers and enablers of sensegiving in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 57–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Orlikowski, W. J. (2007). Sociomaterial practices: Exploring technology at work. Organization Studies, 28(9), 1435–1448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Peirano-Vejo, M. E., & Stablein, R. E. (2009). Constituting change and stability: Sense-making stories in a farming organization. Organization, 16(3), 443–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Raisch, S., Birkinshaw, J., Probst, G., & Tushman, M. L. (2009). Organizational ambidexterity: Balancing exploitation and exploration for sustained performance. Organization Science, 20(4), 685–695.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Riessman, C. (2008). Narrative methods for the social sciences. Los Angeles: Sage.Google Scholar
  28. Robinson, J. A. (1981). Personal narratives reconsidered. Journal of American Folklore, 94(371), 58–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Simsek, Z., Veiga, J. F., Lubatkin, M. H., & Dino, R. N. (2005). Modeling the multilevel determinants of top management team behavioral integration. Academy of Management Journal, 48(1), 69–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. (2011). Toward a theory of paradox: A dynamic equilibrium model of organizing. Academy of Management Review, 36(2), 381–403.Google Scholar
  31. Sonenshein, S. (2010). We’re changing—Or are we? Untangling the role of progressive, regressive, and stability narratives during strategic change implementation. Academy of Management Journal, 53(3), 477–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  33. Sutherland, F., & Smith, A. (2011). Duality theory and the management of the change-stability paradox. Journal of Management and Organization, 17(4), 534–547.Google Scholar
  34. Tsoukas, H., & Chia, R. (2002). On organizational becoming: Rethinking organizational change. Organization Science, 13(5), 567–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Turner, N., Swart, J., & Maylor, H. (2012). Mechanisms for managing ambidexterity: A review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 15(3), 317–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  37. Weick, K. E., Sutcliffe, K. M., & Obstfeld, D. (2005). Organizing and the process of sensemaking. Organization Science, 16(4), 409–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research—Design and methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Aaron C. T. Smith
    • 1
    Email author
  • Fiona Sutherland
    • 2
  • David H. Gilbert
    • 3
  1. 1.RMIT UniversityMelbourneAustralia
  2. 2.La Trobe UniversityMelbourneAustralia
  3. 3.RMIT UniversityMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations