Advertisement

Structuring Ambidextrous Organizations: Exploitation and Exploration as a Key for Long-Term Success

  • Gaëtan Devins
  • Caroline N. Kähr

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Argyris, C. 1977. Double loop learning in organizations. Harvard Business Review, 55(5): 115-125.Google Scholar
  2. Beckman, C. M. 2006. The Influence of Founding Team Company Affilations on Firm Behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4): 741-758.Google Scholar
  3. Benner, M. J., & Tushman, M. L. 2003. Eploitation, Exploration, and Process Management: The Productivity Dilemma Revisited. Academy of Management Review, 28(2): 238-256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Burns, T., & Stalker, G. 1961. The Management of Innovation. London: Tavistock.Google Scholar
  5. Bushe, G. R., & Shani, A. B. 1988. A Review of the Literature on the Use of Parallel Learning Structure Interventions in Bureaucratic Organizations. Academy of Management Best Papers Proceedings, 258-262.Google Scholar
  6. Christensen, C.M. 1997. The Innovator’s Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail illustrated edition. Mcgraw-Hill Professional, Columbus.Google Scholar
  7. Collins, J. C., & Porras, J. I. 1994. Companies need not hire outside CEOs to stimulate fundamental change. Directorship, 19(9): 8-10.Google Scholar
  8. D’Aveni, R. A. 1994. Hypercompetition. New York, Free Press.Google Scholar
  9. Dewar, R. D., & Dutton, J.E. 1986. The Adoption of Radical and Incremental Innovations: An Empirical Analysis. Management Science, 32(11): 1422-1433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Duncan, R. B. 1976. The ambidextrous organization: Designing dual structures for innovation. In R. H. Kilmann, L. R. Pondy, & D. Slevin (Eds.): The management of organization (pp. 167-188). North-Holland, New York.Google Scholar
  11. Farjaudon, A., & Saulerot, M. 2006. Les implications du dilemme exploitation / exploration sur le contrôle de gestion: le cas d’une entreprise de produits de grande consommation. Research Paper.Google Scholar
  12. Floyd, S. W., & Lane, P. J. 2000. Strategizing throughout the Organization: Managing Role Conflict in Strategic Renewals. Academy of Management Review, 25(1): 154-177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Foster, R. N., & Kaplan, S. 2001. Creative destruction. New Yersey, Financial Times Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  14. 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
  15. Goldstein, S. G. 1985. Organizational Dualism and Quality Circles. Academy of Management Review, 10(3): 504-517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Grant, R. M. 1996. Prospering in Dynamically-competitive Environments: Organizational Capability as Knowledge Integration. Organization Science, 7(4): 375-387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hage, J. T. 1999. Organizational Innovation and Organizational Change. Annual Review of Sociology, 25: 597-622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hambrick, D. C. 1983. Some Tests of the Effectiveness and Functional Attributes of Miles and Snow’s Strategic Types. Academy of Management Journal, 26(1): 5-26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. He, Z., Wong. 2004. Exploration vs. Exploitation: An Empirical Test of the Ambidexterity Hypothesis. Organization Science, 15(4): 481-494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jansen, J. 2005. Ambidextrous Organizations - A Multiple-level Study of Absorptive Capacity, Exploratory and Exploitative Innovation, and Performance. NL: Erasmus University Rotterdam.Google Scholar
  21. Levinthal, D. A., & March, J. G. 1993. The Myopia of Learning. Strategic Management Journal, 14: 95-112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lubatkin, M. H., Simsek, Z., Yan Ling, & Veiga, J.F. 2006. Ambidexterity and Performance in Smallto Medium-Sized Firms: The Pivotal Role of Top Management Team Behavioral Integration. Journal of Management, 32(5): 646-672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. March, J. G. 1991. Exploration and Exploitaiton in Organizational Learning. Organization Science, 2(1): 71-87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Miles, R. E., Snow, C. C., Meyer, A. D. & Coleman, J. 1978. Organizational Strategy, Structure, and Process. Academy of Management Review, 3(3): 546-562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. O’Reilly, M. L., & Tushman, C. A. 2004. The Ambidextrous Organization. Harvard Business Review, 82(4): 74-81.Google Scholar
  26. O’Reilly, M. L., & Tushman, C. A. 2007. Ambidexterity as a Dynamic Capability: Resolving the Innovator’s Dilemma. Research Paper.Google Scholar
  27. Peters, T. J., & Waterman Jr., R. H.1982. How the best-run companies turn so-so performers into big winners. Management Review, 71(11): 8-16.Google Scholar
  28. Prahalad, C. 1998. Growth strategies. Executive Excellence, 15(1): 6-7.Google Scholar
  29. Raisch, S. 2008. Balanced Structures: Designing Organizations for Profitable Growth. Long Range Planning, 41(5): 483-508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Raisch, S., & Birkinshaw, J. 2008. Organizational Ambidexterity: Antecedents, Outcomes, and Moderators. Journal of Management, 34(3): 375-409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 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
  32. Raisch, S., Probst, G. & Gomez, P. 2007. Wege zum Wachstum: Wie Sie nachhaltigen Unternehmenserfolg erzielen 1. Aufl. Gabler, Betriebswirt.-Vlg, Wiesbaden.Google Scholar
  33. Smith, W. K., & Tushman, M. L. 2005. Managing Strategic Contradictions: A Top Management Model for Managing Innovation Streams. Organization Science, 16(5): 522-536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Tushman, M. L., & Anderson, P. 1986. Technological Discontinuities and Organizational Environments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 31(3): 439-465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Tushman, M. L., & O’Reilly, C. A. 1996. Ambidextrous Organizations: Managing Evolutionary and Revolutionary Change. California Management Review, 38(4): 8-30.Google Scholar
  36. Tushman, M. L., Smith, W. K., Wood, R. C., Westerman, G., & O’Reilly, C. 2006. Organizational Desings and Innovation Streams. Research Paper.Google Scholar
  37. Vanhaverbeke, W., & Peeters, N. 2005. Embracing Innovation as Strategy: Corporate Venturing, Competence Building and Corporate Strategy Making. Creativity & Innovation Management, 14(3): 246-257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Volberda, H. W. 1996. Toward the Flexible Form: How to Remain Vital in Hypercompetitive Environments. Organization Science, 7(4): 359-374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wiggins, R. R., & Ruefli, T. W. 2002. Sustained Competitive Advantage: Temporal Dynamics and the Incidence and Persistence of Superior Economic Performance. Organization Science, 13(1): 82-105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Zand, D. 1974. Collateral Organization: A New Change Strategy. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 10(1): 63-89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Gabler Verlag | Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gaëtan Devins
    • 1
  • Caroline N. Kähr
    • 1
  1. 1.HECUniversity of GenevaGeneva

Personalised recommendations