Organizational Ambidexterity in SMEs including Distribution Firms: An Investigation of Firms’ Entrepreneurial and Managerial Efforts

Lee,, W. (2019). Organizational Ambidexterity in SMEs including Distribution Firms: An Investigation of Firms’ Entrepreneurial and Managerial Efforts. The Journal of Distribution Science, 17(2), 13-23, https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.15722/jds.17.2.201902.13

copy

Downloaded
Viewed

PDF Download

Abstract

Purpose - Corporate activities for enhancing and improving corporate performance can largely be divided into exploration and exploitation. The purpose of this study is to examine the impact of implementing organizational ambidexterity in SMEs, including distribution firms, by reviewing the extant literature and deriving the basis on which this strategy affects the managerial performance. Research, design, and methodology - The study uses a systematic review methodology, which employs a structured process to discern trends and meaningful themes across a wide body of literature on specific subjects and research questions. This qualitative study examined the influence of ambidextrous strategies of SMEs on firm performance, and the results were synthesized from the literature. Results - Organizational ambidexterity in SMEs is related to the firm's managerial performance. However, it is crucial to know that there are many ways to generate an ambidextrous organization, and decisions about what method to choose should be based on the environmental aspects of the enterprise. Conclusions - The following aspects should be considered for execution; : making practical decisions based on accurate information about the resources the firm has, considering the organizational level of human resources for implementing organizational ambidexterity, and sharing specific performance goals.

keywords: Organizational Ambidexterity, Organizational Learning Theory, Exploitation, Exploration, Entrepreneurial Orientation

Reference

Audretsch, D. B., & Belitski, M. (2017). Entrepreneurial ecosystems in cities: Establishing the framework conditions. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 42(5), 1030-1051. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-016-9473-8

Baker, T., & Nelson, R. E. (2005). Creating something from nothing: Resource construction through entrepreneurial bricolage. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50(3), 329-366. https://doi.org/10.2189/asqu.2005.50.3.329

Carayannis, E. G., Provance, M., & Grigoroudis, E. J. (2016). Entrepreneurship ecosystems: An agent-based simulation approach. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 41(3), 631–653. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-016-9466-7

Chang, Y. Y., & Hughes, M. (2012). Drivers of innovation ambidexterity in small-to medium-sized firms. European Management Journal, 30(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2011.08.003

Chen, R. R., & Kannan‐Narasimhan, R. P. (2015). Formal integration archetypes in ambidextrous organizations. R&D Management, 45(3), 267-286. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12083

Christensen, C. M., Raynor, M. E., & McDonald, R. (2015). What is disruptive innovation. Harvard Business Review, 93(12), 44-53.

Covin, J. G., & Miles, M. P. (1999). Corporate entrepreneurship and the pursuit of competitive advantage. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 23(3), 47-63. https://doi.org/10.1177/104225879902300304

Covin, J. G., & Slevin, D. P. (1989). Strategic management of small firms in hostile and benign environments. Strategic Management Journal, 10(1), 75-87. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250100107

Covin, J. G., & Slevin, D. P. (1991). A conceptual model of entrepreneurship as firm behavior. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 16(1), 7-26. https://doi.org/10.1177/104225879101600102

10.

De Clercq, D., Thongpapanl, N., & Dimov, D. (2014). Contextual ambidexterity in SMEs: the roles of internal and external rivalry. Small Business Economics, 42(1), 191-205. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-013-9471-2

11.

Ferrary, M. (2011). Specialized organizations and ambidextrous clusters in the open innovation paradigm. European Management Journal, 29(3), 181-192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2010.10.007

12.

Gedajlovic, E., Cao, Q., & Zhang, H. (2012). Corporate shareholdings and organizational ambidexterity in high-tech SMEs: Evidence from a transitional economy. Journal of Business Venturing, 27(6), 652-665. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2011.06.001

13.

Gibson, C. B., & Birkinshaw, J. (2004). The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. Academy of Management Journal, 47(2), 209-226. https://doi.org/10.5465/20159573

14.

Gobble, M. M. (2016). Defining disruptive innovation. Research-Technology Management, 59(4), 66-71. https://doi.org/10.1080/08956308.2016.1185347

15.

Han, M., & Celly, N. (2008). Strategic ambidexterity and performance in international new ventures. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences/Revue. Canadienne des Sciences de l'Administration, 25(4), 335-349. https://doi.org/10.1002/cjas.84

16.

He, Z. L., & Wong, P. K. (2004). Exploration vs. exploitation: An empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis. Organization Science, 15(4), 481-494. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1040.0078

17.

Hsu, C. W., Lien, Y. C., & Chen, H. (2013). International ambidexterity and firm performance in small emerging economies. Journal of World Business, 48(1), 58-67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2012.06.007

18.

Hughes, M., Martin, S. L., Morgan, R. E., & Robson, M. J. (2010). Realizing product-market advantage in high-technology international new ventures: The mediating role of ambidextrous innovation. Journal of International Marketing, 18(4), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1509/jimk.18.4.1

19.

Ikhsan, K., Almahendra, R., & Budiarto, T. (2017). Contextual ambidexterity in SMEs in Indonesia: A study on how it mediates organizational culture and firm performance and how market dynamism influences its role on firm performance. International Journal of Business and Society, 18(S2), 369-390.

20.

Jansen, J. J., Simsek, Z., & Cao, Q. (2012). Ambidexterity and performance in multiunit contexts:Cross‐level moderating effects of structural and resource attributes. Strategic Management Journal, 33(11), 1286-1303. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.1977

21.

Jansen, J. J., Van Den Bosch, F. A., & Volberda, H. W. (2006). Exploratory innovation, exploitative innovation, and performance: Effects of organizational antecedents and environmental moderators. Management Science, 52(11), 1661-1674. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1060.0576

22.

Junni, P., Sarala, R. M., Taras, V., & Tarba, S. Y. (2013). Organizational ambidexterity and performance:A meta-analysis. Academy of Management Perspectives, 27(4), 299-312. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2012.0015

23.

Kuran, T. (1988). The tenacious past: Theories of personal and collective conservatism. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 10(2), 143-171. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-2681(88)90043-1

24.

Levitt, B., & March, J. G. (1988). Organizational learning. Annual Review of Sociology, 14(1), 319-338.

25.

Lubatkin, M. H., Simsek, Z., Ling, Y., & Veiga, J. F. (2006). Ambidexterity and performance in small-to medium-sized firms: The pivotal role of top management team behavioral integration. Journal of Management, 32(5), 646-672. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206306290712

26.

Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. (1996). Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it to performance. Academy of Management Review, 21(1), 135-172. https://doi.org/10.2307/258632

27.

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

28.

Miller, D. (1983). The correlates of entrepreneurship in three types of firms, Management science, 29(7), 770-791. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.29.7.770

29.

Mom, T. J., Van Den Bosch, F. A., & Volberda, H. W. (2007). Investigating managers' exploration and exploitation activities: The influence of top‐down, bottom ‐up, and horizontal knowledge inflows. Journal of Management Studies, 44(6), 910-931. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2007.00697.x

30.

Newbert, S. L. (2006). Empirical research on the resource ‐based view of the firm: an assessment and suggestions for future research. Strategic Management Journal, 28(2), 121-146. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.573

31.

O'Reilly III, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2013). Organizational ambidexterity: Past, present, and future. Academy of management Perspectives, 27(4), 324-338. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2285704

32.

Parmentier, G., & Picq, T. (2016). Managing Creative Teams in Small Ambidextrous Organizations: The Case of Videogames. International Journal of Arts Management, 19(1).

33.

Patel, P. C., Messersmith, J. G., & Lepak, D. P. (2013). Walking the tightrope: An assessment of the relationship between high-performance work systems and organizational ambidexterity. Academy of Management Journal, 56(5), 1420-1442. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.0255

34.

Raisch, S., & Birkinshaw, J. (2008). Organizational ambidexterity: Antecedents, outcomes, and moderators. Journal of Management, 34(3), 375-409. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206308316058

35.

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. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1090.0428

36.

Sarasvathy, S. D. (2001). Causation and effectuation:Toward a theoretical shift from economic inevitability to entrepreneurial contingency. Academy of Management Review, 26(2), 243-263. https://doi.org/10.2307/259121

37.

Simsek, Z., Heavey, C., Veiga, J. F., & Souder, D. (2009). A typology for aligning organizational ambidexterity’s conceptualizations, antecedents, and outcomes. Journal of Management Studies, 46(5), 864-894. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2009.00841.x

38.

Tan, M., & Liu, Z. (2014). Paths to success: An ambidexterity perspective on how responsive and proactive market orientations affect SMEs' business performance. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 22(5), 420-441. https://doi.org/10.1080/0965254x.2013.876084

39.

Tushman, M. L., & O'Reilly III, C. A. (1996). Ambidextrous organizations: Managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. California Management Review, 38(4), 8-29. https://doi.org/10.2307/41165852

40.

Zahra, S. A., & Covin, J. G. (1995). Contextual influences on the corporate entrepreneurship-performance relationship: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Business Venturing, 10(1), 43-58. https://doi.org/10.1016/0883-9026(94)00004-e

바로가기메뉴

Article Contents

Vol.17 No.2

Organizational Ambidexterity in SMEs including Distribution Firms: An Investigation of Firms’ Entrepreneurial and Managerial Efforts

Abstract

Reference

The Journal of Distribution Science