Skip to main content
  • 1095 Accesses

Abstract

Business professors today face multiple challenges and trade-offs which often seem irreconcilable. For instance, they need to balance rigor and relevance in academic research, manage the production and commercialization of outputs, and develop managerial astuteness while training themselves in sophisticated research skills. Doing all of this at the same time has long been considered difficult, if not impossible. Thus, typical academic careers follow the principle of ‘temporal ambidexterity’ where specific sets of tasks are followed by others. But this pattern often falls short in capturing the full potential of academics, and it is suggested that professors balance conflicting requirements and challenge the presumed incompatibility of divergent tasks. The notion of ‘international ambidexterity’ is proposed to engage professors in multi-cultural context shifting and frame-breaking exercises that potentially disrupt dominant mindsets and better prepare them for the challenges and opportunities of their profession.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Adner, R. & Levinthal, D. 2002. Demand heterogeneity and technology evolution: Implications for product and process innovation. Management Science, 47(5): 611-628.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ambos, T. C., Mäkelä, K., Birkinshaw, J. & D’Este, P. 2008. When does university research get commercialized? Creating ambidexterity in research institutions. Journal of Management Studies, 45(8): 1424-1447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bateson, G. 1972. Steps to an Ecology of Mind. New York: Ballantine Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennis, W. G. & O’Toole, J. 2005. How business schools lost their way. Harvard Business Review, 83(5): 96-104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bercovitz, J. & Feldman, M. 2003. Technology transfer and the academic department: who participates and why? Working Paper, DRUID, Copenhagen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarysse, B. & Moray, N. 2004. A process study of entrepreneurial team formation: the case of a research-based spin-off. Journal of Business Venturing, 19(1): 55-79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collins, J. C. & Porras, J. I. 1994. Built to Last: Successful Habits of Visionary Companies. New York: Harper Business.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duncan, R. B. 1976. The ambidextrous organization: designing dual structures for innovation. In: Kilmann, R. H., Loius, P. R. & Slevin, D. P. (Eds.). The Management of Organization Design (pp. 167-188). New York: Elsevier North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frost, R. 1914. Mending wall. www.answers.com/topics/mending-wall, accessed: 10.01.2010

  • Gibbert, M., Probst, G. J. B. & Davenport, T. H. 2003. Cooperative Case Writing: A New Approach for Bridging Theoretical Significance and Theoretical Research. Working Paper HEC-Genève, 2003.22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, C. & Birkinshaw, J. 2004. The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexerity. Academy of Management Journal, 47(2): 209-226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldfarb, B. & Henrekson, M. 2003. Bottom-up versus top-down policies towards the commercialization of university intellectual property. Research Policy, 32(4): 639-658.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Granovetter, M. S.1973. The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6): 1360-1380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, A. K., Smith, K. & Shalley, C. E. 2006. The interplay between exploration and exploitation, Academy of Management Journal, 49(4): 693-706.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klimecki, R., Probst, G. J. B. & Eberl, P. 1994. Entwicklungsorientiertes Management. Stuttgart: Schaeffer-Poeschel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lubatkin, M. H., Simek, Z., Ling, Y. & Veiga, J. F.2006. Ambidexerity and performance in small- to medium-sized firms: The pivotal role of top management team behavioral integration. Journal of Management, 32(5): 646-672.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • March, J. G.1991. Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1): 71-87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markides, C. 2007. In search of ambidextrous professors. Academy of Management Journal, 50(4): 762-768.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDonough, E. F. & Leifer, R. 1983. Using simultaneous structures to cope with uncertainty. Academy of Management Journal, 26(4): 727-735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meeker, J. W. 1975. Ambidextrous education or: How universities can come unskewed and learn to live in the wilderness. The North American Review, 260(2): 41-48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E. 1980. Competitive strategy. Techniques for analyzing industries and competitors. Free Press: New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Probst, G. J. B. 1987. Selbstorganisation – Ordnungsprozesse in sozialen Systemen aus ganzheitlicher Sicht. Berlin, Hamburg: Haupt Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raisch, S., Birkinshaw, J., Probst, G. J. B. & Tushman, M. 2009. Organizational ambidexterity: Balancing exploitation and exploration for sustained performance. Organization Science, 20 (4): 685-695.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raisch, S., Probst, G. J. B. & Gomez, P. 2007. Wege zum Wachstum. Wie Sie nachhaltigen Unternehmenserfolg erzielen. Wiesbaden: Gabler Betriebswirtschaftlicher Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, D. L., Kirkman, B. L. & Courtney, H. G. 2007. Perceived causes and solutions of the translation problem in management research. Academy of Management Journal, 50 (2): 245-266.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shome, P., Moreno, C. J. & Rao, K. 1996. Quantitative and qualitative methods to social science enquiry: Econometric methods and interdisciplinarity. Economic and Political Weekly, 31(1): PE87-PE92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, K. W. & Tymon, W. G. 1982. Necessary properties of relevant research: Lessons from recent criticisms of the organization sciences. Academy of Management Review, 7(3): 345-352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zmud, R. W. 1996. Editor’s comment. MIS Quarterly, 20 (3): xxxvii-xi.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Gabler Verlag | Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Prange, C. (2010). International Ambidexterity: An Extant Challenge for Business Professors?. In: More than Bricks in the Wall: Organizational Perspectives for Sustainable Success. Gabler. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-8349-8945-1_17

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics