Organizing for Ambidexterity: A Paradox-based Typology of Ambidexterity-related Organizational States
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2015 |
Outros Autores: | |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | BAR - Brazilian Administration Review |
Texto Completo: | http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1807-76922015000400004 |
Resumo: | This paper addresses the question of how organizations become ambidextrous over time, identifying requirements for organizations to become ambidextrous, understanding how ambidexterity may emerge as an organizational property, as well as exploring likely connections of the ambidexterity property and organizing a firm's activities and work. Conceptualizing the exploration-exploitation relationship as a paradoxical one, we advance two necessary conditions for organizing for ambidexterity: fostering paradox-coping tactics and precluding paradox-related traps. The interplay of these two conditions gives rise to a typology of four ambidexterity-related organizational states: ambidexterity-lacking organizations, monolithic organizations, short-term ambidextrous organizations and long-term ambidextrous organizations. The paper identifies each state's distinct strengths and challenges concerning organizing for ambidexterity, and discusses theoretical, practical and policy-making implications. |
id |
ANPAD-1_5bdce76378a3eb49744bb504d61ff877 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:scielo:S1807-76922015000400004 |
network_acronym_str |
ANPAD-1 |
network_name_str |
BAR - Brazilian Administration Review |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Organizing for Ambidexterity: A Paradox-based Typology of Ambidexterity-related Organizational Statesorganizational ambidexterityparadoxgrowthexploitationexplorationThis paper addresses the question of how organizations become ambidextrous over time, identifying requirements for organizations to become ambidextrous, understanding how ambidexterity may emerge as an organizational property, as well as exploring likely connections of the ambidexterity property and organizing a firm's activities and work. Conceptualizing the exploration-exploitation relationship as a paradoxical one, we advance two necessary conditions for organizing for ambidexterity: fostering paradox-coping tactics and precluding paradox-related traps. The interplay of these two conditions gives rise to a typology of four ambidexterity-related organizational states: ambidexterity-lacking organizations, monolithic organizations, short-term ambidextrous organizations and long-term ambidextrous organizations. The paper identifies each state's distinct strengths and challenges concerning organizing for ambidexterity, and discusses theoretical, practical and policy-making implications.ANPAD - Associação Nacional de Pós-Graduação e Pesquisa em Administração2015-12-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1807-76922015000400004BAR - Brazilian Administration Review v.12 n.4 2015reponame:BAR - Brazilian Administration Reviewinstname:Associação Nacional de Pós-Graduação e Pesquisa em Administração (ANPAD)instacron:ANPAD10.1590/1807-7692bar2015150029info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessKarrer,DanielFleck,Deniseeng2016-01-15T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S1807-76922015000400004Revistahttp://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_serial&pid=1807-7692&lng=pt&nrm=isohttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||bar@anpad.org.br1807-76921807-7692opendoar:2016-01-15T00:00BAR - Brazilian Administration Review - Associação Nacional de Pós-Graduação e Pesquisa em Administração (ANPAD)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Organizing for Ambidexterity: A Paradox-based Typology of Ambidexterity-related Organizational States |
title |
Organizing for Ambidexterity: A Paradox-based Typology of Ambidexterity-related Organizational States |
spellingShingle |
Organizing for Ambidexterity: A Paradox-based Typology of Ambidexterity-related Organizational States Karrer,Daniel organizational ambidexterity paradox growth exploitation exploration |
title_short |
Organizing for Ambidexterity: A Paradox-based Typology of Ambidexterity-related Organizational States |
title_full |
Organizing for Ambidexterity: A Paradox-based Typology of Ambidexterity-related Organizational States |
title_fullStr |
Organizing for Ambidexterity: A Paradox-based Typology of Ambidexterity-related Organizational States |
title_full_unstemmed |
Organizing for Ambidexterity: A Paradox-based Typology of Ambidexterity-related Organizational States |
title_sort |
Organizing for Ambidexterity: A Paradox-based Typology of Ambidexterity-related Organizational States |
author |
Karrer,Daniel |
author_facet |
Karrer,Daniel Fleck,Denise |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Fleck,Denise |
author2_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Karrer,Daniel Fleck,Denise |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
organizational ambidexterity paradox growth exploitation exploration |
topic |
organizational ambidexterity paradox growth exploitation exploration |
description |
This paper addresses the question of how organizations become ambidextrous over time, identifying requirements for organizations to become ambidextrous, understanding how ambidexterity may emerge as an organizational property, as well as exploring likely connections of the ambidexterity property and organizing a firm's activities and work. Conceptualizing the exploration-exploitation relationship as a paradoxical one, we advance two necessary conditions for organizing for ambidexterity: fostering paradox-coping tactics and precluding paradox-related traps. The interplay of these two conditions gives rise to a typology of four ambidexterity-related organizational states: ambidexterity-lacking organizations, monolithic organizations, short-term ambidextrous organizations and long-term ambidextrous organizations. The paper identifies each state's distinct strengths and challenges concerning organizing for ambidexterity, and discusses theoretical, practical and policy-making implications. |
publishDate |
2015 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2015-12-01 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1807-76922015000400004 |
url |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1807-76922015000400004 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
10.1590/1807-7692bar2015150029 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
text/html |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
ANPAD - Associação Nacional de Pós-Graduação e Pesquisa em Administração |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
ANPAD - Associação Nacional de Pós-Graduação e Pesquisa em Administração |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
BAR - Brazilian Administration Review v.12 n.4 2015 reponame:BAR - Brazilian Administration Review instname:Associação Nacional de Pós-Graduação e Pesquisa em Administração (ANPAD) instacron:ANPAD |
instname_str |
Associação Nacional de Pós-Graduação e Pesquisa em Administração (ANPAD) |
instacron_str |
ANPAD |
institution |
ANPAD |
reponame_str |
BAR - Brazilian Administration Review |
collection |
BAR - Brazilian Administration Review |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
BAR - Brazilian Administration Review - Associação Nacional de Pós-Graduação e Pesquisa em Administração (ANPAD) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
||bar@anpad.org.br |
_version_ |
1754209123770040320 |