Advertisement

The Efficient Innovator

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

Abstract

This chapter reviews the contents of the book and its central arguments. It acknowledges that external change operates as a consistent presence rather than as an exception, but that a productive organizational response incorporates both instability and stability. This culminates in a paradox of sorts, wherein sustainable success demands a commitment to simultaneously high levels of both innovation and control. It is at this energetic intersection of both where ambidexterity capability receives its impetus. The chapter highlights the book’s proposition that success requires simultaneous exploration and exploitation in high doses, encouraging tension and discontinuity. Finally, the chapter summarizes the argument for a duality ecosystem fostering ambidexterity because it augments the conversion of ideas into commercial implementation without compromising speed.

Keywords

Paradox Duality ecosystem Conversion Discontinuity 

References

  1. Chen, M.-J. (2008). Reconceptualizing the competition-cooperation relationship: A transparadox perspective. Journal of Management Inquiry, 17(4), 288–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Clegg, S. R., da Cunha, J. V., & e Cunha, M. P. (2002). Management paradoxes: A relational view. Human Relations, 55(5), 483–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cyert, R. M., & March, J. G. (1992). A behavioral theory of the firm (2nd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  4. Eisenhardt, K. E. (2000). Paradox, spirals, ambivalence: The new language of change and pluralism. Academy of Management Review, 25(4), 703–705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Evans, P. (1999). HRM on the edge: A duality perspective. Organization, 6(2), 325–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Evans, P., & Doz, Y. (1989). The dualistic organization. In P. Evans, Y. Doz, & A. Laurent (Eds.), Human resource management in international firms: Change, globalization, innovation (pp. 219–242). London, UK: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  7. Farjoun, M. (2010). Beyond dualism: Stability and change as a duality. Academy of Management Review, 35(2), 202–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gordon, R. D. (2005). An empirical investigation into the power behind empowerment. Organization Management Journal, 2(3), 144–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. He, Z. L., & Wong, P. K. (2004). Exploration vs. exploitation: An empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis. Organization Science, 15(4), 481–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hedberg, B., Nystrom, P., & Starbuck, W. H. (1976). Camping on seesaws: Prescriptions for a self designing organization. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21(1), 41–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lewis, M. W. (2000). Exploring paradox: Toward a more comprehensive guide. Academy of Management Review, 25(4), 760–776.Google Scholar
  12. Mitroff, I. I., & Linstone, H. A. (1993). The unbounded mind: Breaking the chains of traditional business thinking. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Molinsky, A. L. (1999). Sanding down the edges paradoxical impediments to organizational change. The Journal of Applied Behavioural Science, 35(1), 8–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Palmer, I., & Dunford, R. (2002). Out with the old and in with the new? The relationship between traditional and new organizational practices. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 10(3), 209–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Pettigrew, A. M., & Fenton, E. M. (2000). Complexities and dualities in innovative forms of organizing. In A. M. Pettigrew & E. M. Fenton (Eds.), The innovative organization (pp. 279–300). London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Pettigrew, A. M., Whittington, R. L., Melin, L., Sanchez-Runde, C., Van Den Bosch, F. A. J., Ruigrok, W., et al. (2003). Innovative forms of organizing. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  17. Quinn, R. E., & Cameron, K. S. (1988). Paradox and transformation: Toward a theory of change in organization and management. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger Publishing.Google Scholar
  18. Salem, P. (2002). Assessment, change, and complexity. Management Communication Quarterly, 15(3), 442–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Sanchez-Runde, C. J., & Pettigrew, A. M. (2003). Managing dualities. In A. M. Pettigrew, R. L. Whittington, L. Melin, C. Sanchez-Runde, F. A. J. Van Den Bosch, W. Ruigrok, & T. Numagami (Eds.), Innovative forms of organizing (pp. 243–250). London, UK: Sage.Google Scholar
  20. Stace, D., & Dunphy, D. (2001). Beyond the boundaries: Leading and recreating the successful enterprise (2nd ed.). Sydney: McGraw-Hill.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