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.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
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.
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.
Bateson, G. 1972. Steps to an Ecology of Mind. New York: Ballantine Books.
Bennis, W. G. & O’Toole, J. 2005. How business schools lost their way. Harvard Business Review, 83(5): 96-104.
Bercovitz, J. & Feldman, M. 2003. Technology transfer and the academic department: who participates and why? Working Paper, DRUID, Copenhagen.
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.
Collins, J. C. & Porras, J. I. 1994. Built to Last: Successful Habits of Visionary Companies. New York: Harper Business.
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.
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.
Gibson, C. & Birkinshaw, J. 2004. The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexerity. Academy of Management Journal, 47(2): 209-226.
Goldfarb, B. & Henrekson, M. 2003. Bottom-up versus top-down policies towards the commercialization of university intellectual property. Research Policy, 32(4): 639-658.
Granovetter, M. S.1973. The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6): 1360-1380.
Gupta, A. K., Smith, K. & Shalley, C. E. 2006. The interplay between exploration and exploitation, Academy of Management Journal, 49(4): 693-706.
Klimecki, R., Probst, G. J. B. & Eberl, P. 1994. Entwicklungsorientiertes Management. Stuttgart: Schaeffer-Poeschel.
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.
March, J. G.1991. Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1): 71-87.
Markides, C. 2007. In search of ambidextrous professors. Academy of Management Journal, 50(4): 762-768.
McDonough, E. F. & Leifer, R. 1983. Using simultaneous structures to cope with uncertainty. Academy of Management Journal, 26(4): 727-735.
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.
Porter, M. E. 1980. Competitive strategy. Techniques for analyzing industries and competitors. Free Press: New York.
Probst, G. J. B. 1987. Selbstorganisation – Ordnungsprozesse in sozialen Systemen aus ganzheitlicher Sicht. Berlin, Hamburg: Haupt Verlag.
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.
Raisch, S., Probst, G. J. B. & Gomez, P. 2007. Wege zum Wachstum. Wie Sie nachhaltigen Unternehmenserfolg erzielen. Wiesbaden: Gabler Betriebswirtschaftlicher Verlag.
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.
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.
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.
Zmud, R. W. 1996. Editor’s comment. MIS Quarterly, 20 (3): xxxvii-xi.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights 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
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-8349-8945-1_17
Publisher Name: Gabler
Print ISBN: 978-3-8349-2580-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-8349-8945-1
eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsBusiness and Management (R0)