Gibson & Birkinshaw, 2004
Ambidexterity Defined: Ambidexterity refers to a business unit's
ability to balance two essential activities - alignment and
adaptability. Alignment activities focus on improving short-term
performance, while adaptability activities are geared toward
enhancing long-term performance.
Tensions from Imbalance: If a business unit focuses too much on
one of these activities at the expense of the other, it can lead to
problems and tensions within the organization. This imbalance can
result from ambiguous messages and the suppression of one aspect
of the polarity, which intensifies pressure from the other.
Transcendence of Opposites: The passage suggests that the
most effective approach to managing these tensions involves seeing
opposites as complementary and interwoven rather than in conflict.
Transcendence of these tensions is proposed as a powerful strategy
for organizational success.
Contextual Ambidexterity: The concept of "contextual
ambidexterity" is introduced, where a business unit's context,
including factors like discipline, stretch, support, and trust, plays a
crucial role in developing the capacity for both alignment and
adaptability.
Attributes of Organization Context: The passage highlights four
attributes of organization context - discipline, stretch, support, and
trust. These attributes are seen as interdependent and
complementary. Discipline encourages commitment, stretch
motivates ambitious goals, support fosters assistance, and trust
relies on mutual commitments.
Development of Ambidexterity: The passage argues that when
these four attributes are present in a business unit's context, it
enables the development of ambidexterity. The simultaneous
cultivation of alignment and adaptability enhances organizational
performance.
Mediating Effect: The passage proposes that contextual
ambidexterity acts as a mediator in the relationship between the
attributes of organization context and business-unit performance. It
suggests that the attributes themselves may not directly impact
performance, but they influence performance through the
development of ambidexterity.
Qualitative Evidence: Qualitative interviews with business unit
members provide evidence that supports the role of context in
fostering ambidexterity. Examples of highly ambidextrous units
show a balance between alignment and adaptability, achieved
through systems that encourage discipline, stretch, support, and
trust. In contrast, less ambidextrous units suffered from inconsistent
management practices.
In summary, the passage argues that business units should aim to
develop ambidexterity by fostering a balanced organizational context
characterized by discipline, stretch, support, and trust. This, in turn, is
,expected to mediate the relationship between context and business-unit
performance, ultimately leading to sustainable success.
Results and Hypotheses Testing: The study tested several hypotheses
using regression analysis. Here are the key findings:
1. Ambidexterity and Performance: The research supported
Hypothesis 1, indicating that ambidexterity (the simultaneous
achievement of alignment and adaptability) was positively related to
business unit performance.
2. Context and Ambidexterity: Hypothesis 2 was also supported,
showing that organizational context (the interaction of various
elements of context) had a positive relationship with ambidexterity.
3. Mediation by Ambidexterity: Hypothesis 3, which proposed that
ambidexterity mediated the relationship between context and
performance, was supported. This means that organizational
context influenced ambidexterity, which, in turn, influenced
business unit performance.
Discussion: The study suggests that there is no trade-off between
alignment and adaptability, and successful business units can
simultaneously develop these capacities. It also highlights the
importance of senior executives in shaping a supportive context and
fostering ambidexterity.
4. The concept of "contextual ambidexterity" is emphasized as a
critical capability for organizations, allowing them to balance
alignment and adaptability effectively. The study encourages future
research to explore additional means of capturing contextual
ambidexterity and to investigate the behaviors of senior executives
in fostering it.
5. In summary, the research provides valuable insights into the
relationships between organizational context, ambidexterity, and
business unit performance, with practical implications for
organizational leaders aiming to excel in dynamic environments.
O’Connor, G. C. (2008)
The passage you've provided discusses the concept of dynamic
capabilities in the context of organizational management and competitive
advantage. Here are the key points and takeaways from the passage:
1. Dynamic Capabilities Framework: Dynamic capabilities are a
concept in organizational management that focuses on an
enterprise's ability to adapt, innovate, and respond to changing
market conditions. It is associated with a neo-Schumpeterian theory
of the firm, evolutionary economics, and the resource-based
approach.
, 2. Resource-Based Approach: The resource-based approach, while
inherently static, is relevant to dynamic capabilities. It emphasizes
the importance of controlling scarce resources and acquiring new
capabilities, such as skills and learning, to achieve economic profits.
3. Sensing, Seizing, and Transformational Activities: Dynamic
capabilities can be broken down into three main activities: sensing
opportunities, seizing opportunities, and engaging in
transformational activities. These activities require strategic
thinking and orchestration of assets both within and outside the
organization.
4. Meta-Competence: Dynamic capability is considered a meta-
competence that goes beyond operational competence. It enables
firms not only to invent but also to innovate profitably.
5. Integration and Synthesis: The dynamic capabilities framework
integrates concepts from various fields, including strategic
management, business history, industrial economics, and innovation
studies. It emphasizes the need for an integrated approach to
management.
6. Importance of Entrepreneurial Management: Maintaining
dynamic capabilities requires entrepreneurial management.
Entrepreneurial managers are essential for sensing and seizing
opportunities, creatively coordinating diverse elements, and staying
ahead in the market.
7. Three Classes of Capabilities: The passage identifies three
classes of capabilities - sensing, seizing, and reconfiguring. These
require different managerial skills and must be represented in top
management for an organization to succeed.
8. Strategic Decision-Making: Dynamic capabilities are not just
about positioning but also about strategic decision-making and the
ability to adapt to changing market and technological conditions.
9. Continuous Adaptation: Organizations must continuously refresh
their foundations and stay agile to generate economic surpluses
over time.
Overall, the passage underscores the idea that in a rapidly changing
business environment, organizations need to develop dynamic capabilities
to sense opportunities, seize them, and adapt to ongoing changes to
maintain a competitive advantage. Entrepreneurial management plays a
crucial role in this process.
The paper discusses major innovation (MI) as a dynamic capability and
introduces a systems approach to managing MI within established firms.
The primary focus is on understanding how companies can build a
sustainable capability for fostering major innovations, such as radical
innovations or innovations with significant impacts.
The proposed framework for building an MI dynamic capability consists of
seven key elements that together form a management system for major
innovation. These elements are:
, 1. Identifiable Organization Structure: The organization needs a
structure that supports and fosters major innovation efforts. It
should provide clear roles and responsibilities for innovation
activities.
2. Interface Mechanisms: These are the connections between the
innovation initiatives and the mainstream organization. Some
interfaces are tightly integrated with the core business, while others
are more loosely connected. These mechanisms help balance the
innovation process with the existing operations.
3. Exploratory Processes: The organization needs processes that
support the exploration of new ideas and technologies. This includes
mechanisms for identifying opportunities, experimentation, and
learning from failures.
4. Requisite Skills and Talent Development: Developing and
maintaining the necessary skills and talent for major innovation is
crucial. This may include training programs, hiring practices, and
talent development efforts.
5. Governance and Decision-Making Mechanisms: Effective
governance and decision-making structures are essential for guiding
major innovation efforts. This includes decisions at the project, MI
portfolio, and MI system levels.
6. Appropriate Performance Metrics: Organizations must define
relevant performance metrics for major innovation. These metrics
should align with the goals and outcomes of innovation efforts.
7. Appropriate Culture and Leadership Context: The
organizational culture and leadership context play a significant role
in fostering major innovation. They should support risk-taking,
creativity, and entrepreneurial behavior.
The systems theory perspective emphasizes that these elements are
interconnected and interdependent. Major innovation cannot be reduced
to a simple process or routine; instead, it requires a holistic approach that
considers the relationships between these elements and their impact on
the organization.
The article argues that dynamic capabilities for managing major
innovation should be considered as a comprehensive system rather than
isolated routines or processes. The focus is on building a parallel
management system within the organization that is dedicated to major
innovation. Systems theory provides a framework for understanding the
dynamics of this parallel system in relation to the larger organization.
The paper highlights that understanding major innovation in the context
of systems theory can help organizations develop a sustainable capability
for fostering major innovations and remaining competitive in an ever-
changing business environment. This systems approach emphasizes the
interdependence of elements and the need for adaptability in the face of
uncertainty.
Ambidexterity Defined: Ambidexterity refers to a business unit's
ability to balance two essential activities - alignment and
adaptability. Alignment activities focus on improving short-term
performance, while adaptability activities are geared toward
enhancing long-term performance.
Tensions from Imbalance: If a business unit focuses too much on
one of these activities at the expense of the other, it can lead to
problems and tensions within the organization. This imbalance can
result from ambiguous messages and the suppression of one aspect
of the polarity, which intensifies pressure from the other.
Transcendence of Opposites: The passage suggests that the
most effective approach to managing these tensions involves seeing
opposites as complementary and interwoven rather than in conflict.
Transcendence of these tensions is proposed as a powerful strategy
for organizational success.
Contextual Ambidexterity: The concept of "contextual
ambidexterity" is introduced, where a business unit's context,
including factors like discipline, stretch, support, and trust, plays a
crucial role in developing the capacity for both alignment and
adaptability.
Attributes of Organization Context: The passage highlights four
attributes of organization context - discipline, stretch, support, and
trust. These attributes are seen as interdependent and
complementary. Discipline encourages commitment, stretch
motivates ambitious goals, support fosters assistance, and trust
relies on mutual commitments.
Development of Ambidexterity: The passage argues that when
these four attributes are present in a business unit's context, it
enables the development of ambidexterity. The simultaneous
cultivation of alignment and adaptability enhances organizational
performance.
Mediating Effect: The passage proposes that contextual
ambidexterity acts as a mediator in the relationship between the
attributes of organization context and business-unit performance. It
suggests that the attributes themselves may not directly impact
performance, but they influence performance through the
development of ambidexterity.
Qualitative Evidence: Qualitative interviews with business unit
members provide evidence that supports the role of context in
fostering ambidexterity. Examples of highly ambidextrous units
show a balance between alignment and adaptability, achieved
through systems that encourage discipline, stretch, support, and
trust. In contrast, less ambidextrous units suffered from inconsistent
management practices.
In summary, the passage argues that business units should aim to
develop ambidexterity by fostering a balanced organizational context
characterized by discipline, stretch, support, and trust. This, in turn, is
,expected to mediate the relationship between context and business-unit
performance, ultimately leading to sustainable success.
Results and Hypotheses Testing: The study tested several hypotheses
using regression analysis. Here are the key findings:
1. Ambidexterity and Performance: The research supported
Hypothesis 1, indicating that ambidexterity (the simultaneous
achievement of alignment and adaptability) was positively related to
business unit performance.
2. Context and Ambidexterity: Hypothesis 2 was also supported,
showing that organizational context (the interaction of various
elements of context) had a positive relationship with ambidexterity.
3. Mediation by Ambidexterity: Hypothesis 3, which proposed that
ambidexterity mediated the relationship between context and
performance, was supported. This means that organizational
context influenced ambidexterity, which, in turn, influenced
business unit performance.
Discussion: The study suggests that there is no trade-off between
alignment and adaptability, and successful business units can
simultaneously develop these capacities. It also highlights the
importance of senior executives in shaping a supportive context and
fostering ambidexterity.
4. The concept of "contextual ambidexterity" is emphasized as a
critical capability for organizations, allowing them to balance
alignment and adaptability effectively. The study encourages future
research to explore additional means of capturing contextual
ambidexterity and to investigate the behaviors of senior executives
in fostering it.
5. In summary, the research provides valuable insights into the
relationships between organizational context, ambidexterity, and
business unit performance, with practical implications for
organizational leaders aiming to excel in dynamic environments.
O’Connor, G. C. (2008)
The passage you've provided discusses the concept of dynamic
capabilities in the context of organizational management and competitive
advantage. Here are the key points and takeaways from the passage:
1. Dynamic Capabilities Framework: Dynamic capabilities are a
concept in organizational management that focuses on an
enterprise's ability to adapt, innovate, and respond to changing
market conditions. It is associated with a neo-Schumpeterian theory
of the firm, evolutionary economics, and the resource-based
approach.
, 2. Resource-Based Approach: The resource-based approach, while
inherently static, is relevant to dynamic capabilities. It emphasizes
the importance of controlling scarce resources and acquiring new
capabilities, such as skills and learning, to achieve economic profits.
3. Sensing, Seizing, and Transformational Activities: Dynamic
capabilities can be broken down into three main activities: sensing
opportunities, seizing opportunities, and engaging in
transformational activities. These activities require strategic
thinking and orchestration of assets both within and outside the
organization.
4. Meta-Competence: Dynamic capability is considered a meta-
competence that goes beyond operational competence. It enables
firms not only to invent but also to innovate profitably.
5. Integration and Synthesis: The dynamic capabilities framework
integrates concepts from various fields, including strategic
management, business history, industrial economics, and innovation
studies. It emphasizes the need for an integrated approach to
management.
6. Importance of Entrepreneurial Management: Maintaining
dynamic capabilities requires entrepreneurial management.
Entrepreneurial managers are essential for sensing and seizing
opportunities, creatively coordinating diverse elements, and staying
ahead in the market.
7. Three Classes of Capabilities: The passage identifies three
classes of capabilities - sensing, seizing, and reconfiguring. These
require different managerial skills and must be represented in top
management for an organization to succeed.
8. Strategic Decision-Making: Dynamic capabilities are not just
about positioning but also about strategic decision-making and the
ability to adapt to changing market and technological conditions.
9. Continuous Adaptation: Organizations must continuously refresh
their foundations and stay agile to generate economic surpluses
over time.
Overall, the passage underscores the idea that in a rapidly changing
business environment, organizations need to develop dynamic capabilities
to sense opportunities, seize them, and adapt to ongoing changes to
maintain a competitive advantage. Entrepreneurial management plays a
crucial role in this process.
The paper discusses major innovation (MI) as a dynamic capability and
introduces a systems approach to managing MI within established firms.
The primary focus is on understanding how companies can build a
sustainable capability for fostering major innovations, such as radical
innovations or innovations with significant impacts.
The proposed framework for building an MI dynamic capability consists of
seven key elements that together form a management system for major
innovation. These elements are:
, 1. Identifiable Organization Structure: The organization needs a
structure that supports and fosters major innovation efforts. It
should provide clear roles and responsibilities for innovation
activities.
2. Interface Mechanisms: These are the connections between the
innovation initiatives and the mainstream organization. Some
interfaces are tightly integrated with the core business, while others
are more loosely connected. These mechanisms help balance the
innovation process with the existing operations.
3. Exploratory Processes: The organization needs processes that
support the exploration of new ideas and technologies. This includes
mechanisms for identifying opportunities, experimentation, and
learning from failures.
4. Requisite Skills and Talent Development: Developing and
maintaining the necessary skills and talent for major innovation is
crucial. This may include training programs, hiring practices, and
talent development efforts.
5. Governance and Decision-Making Mechanisms: Effective
governance and decision-making structures are essential for guiding
major innovation efforts. This includes decisions at the project, MI
portfolio, and MI system levels.
6. Appropriate Performance Metrics: Organizations must define
relevant performance metrics for major innovation. These metrics
should align with the goals and outcomes of innovation efforts.
7. Appropriate Culture and Leadership Context: The
organizational culture and leadership context play a significant role
in fostering major innovation. They should support risk-taking,
creativity, and entrepreneurial behavior.
The systems theory perspective emphasizes that these elements are
interconnected and interdependent. Major innovation cannot be reduced
to a simple process or routine; instead, it requires a holistic approach that
considers the relationships between these elements and their impact on
the organization.
The article argues that dynamic capabilities for managing major
innovation should be considered as a comprehensive system rather than
isolated routines or processes. The focus is on building a parallel
management system within the organization that is dedicated to major
innovation. Systems theory provides a framework for understanding the
dynamics of this parallel system in relation to the larger organization.
The paper highlights that understanding major innovation in the context
of systems theory can help organizations develop a sustainable capability
for fostering major innovations and remaining competitive in an ever-
changing business environment. This systems approach emphasizes the
interdependence of elements and the need for adaptability in the face of
uncertainty.
