This chapter explains the problem statement, which concerns the balancing of exploitation and exploration and this in an environment or culture where innovation can be critical or event fatal. This usually goes along with employees that are trained not to be innovative at all where such implementation is especially challenging. Later the research questions and propositions are defined that aim at finding out how the interactions between key players from the explorative and exploitative side and how boundary activities can improve the implementation of innovations in such industries. Finally, the current gap in the theory is defined and explained how this dissertation is being structured.
- James K (2016a) What is the safest way to travel – by plane, car, train… space shuttle? Retrieved July 11, 2016, from http://961theeagle.com/what-is-the-safest-way-to-travel-by-plane-car-train-space-shuttle/
- Jansen JJP, George G, Van Den Bosch FAJ, Volberda HW (2008) Senior team attributes and organizational ambidexterity : the moderating role of transformational leadership. J Manag Stud 45(July):983–1007Google Scholar
- Raisch S, Tushman ML (2011) A dynamic perspective on ambidexterity : structural differentiation and boundary activitiesGoogle Scholar
- Yin RK (2003) Case study research: design and methods, 3rd edn. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CAGoogle Scholar
- Yin RK (2014) Case study research: design and methods, 5th edn. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CAGoogle Scholar
References from the Web
- James K (2016b) What is the safest way to travel – by plane, car, train… space shuttle? Retrieved July 11, 2016, from http://961theeagle.com/what-is-the-safest-way-to-travel-by-plane-car-train-space-shuttle/