ORGANIZATIONAL AMBIDEXTERITY AT INTRA-NPD LEVEL OF ANALYSIS WITH QUALITY – INNOVATION MATRIX
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32890/jtom2017.12.1.4Keywords:
Dynamic capabilities, exploitative NPD, explorative NPD, sequential ambidexterity, simultaneous ambidexterity, sustainable competitive advantageAbstract
Organizational ambidexterity refers to the firm’s capacity to simultaneously exploit existing product offerings with familiar knowledge, and explore new product opportunities with unfamiliar knowledge. Due to this definition, ambidexterity has been commonly studied at inter-new product development (NPD) level. As such, studies at the intra-NPD (in a single NPD) are still rare. Although both exploitative and explorative are critical capabilities for NPDs, with limited resources at hands, most firms will have to do a trade-off between them. As a result, while some firms preferred exploitative NPD, some others have adventured into explorative NPD. Therefore, a single NPD project is the feasible option to most firms at any one time. Although quality is the focus in exploitative NPD, while innovation is the emphasis in explorative NPD, both are imperative to any types of NPD. Thus, it was suggested firm that is capable of creating balance between quality and innovation in a single NPD will be more successful than the others at sustaining competitive advantage. However, creating a balance between quality and innovation in a single NPD is a challenging effort. As a result, this article proposed a quality-innovation (Q-I) matrix to demonstrate the concept of organizational ambidexterity for creating balance between quality and innovation in a single NPD. The Q-I matrix will enhance our understanding on the concept of organizational ambidexterity at intra-NPD level, which is still rarely studied in contrast to the inter-NPD level of analysis.
Metrics
References
Andriopoulos, C., & Lewis, M. W. (2009). Exploitation-Exploration Tensions and Organizational Ambidexterity: Managing Paradoxes of Innovation. Organization Science, 22(4), 696-717.
Atuahene-Gima, K., & Li, H. (2004). Strategic Decision Comprehensiveness and New Product Development Outcomes in New Technology Ventures. Academy of Management Journal, 47(4), 583-597.
Atuahene-Gima, K., & Murray, J. Y. (2007). Exploratory and Exploitative Learning in New Product Development: A Social Capital Perspective on New Technology Ventures in China. Journal of Inter. Marketing, 15(2), 1-29.
Birkinshaw, J., & Gibson, C. (2004). Building Ambidexterity into an Organization. MIT Sloan Management Review, 47-55.
Chen, E. L., & Katila, R. (2008). Rival Interpretations of Balancing Exploration and Exploitation: Simultaneous or Sequential? In S. Shane (Editor), Handbook of Technology and Innovation Management (pp. 197-214): John Wiley & Sons.
Cho, H.-J., & Pucik, V. (2005). Relationship between Innovativeness, Quality, Growth, Profitability, and Market Value. SMJ, 26, 555-575.
Chu, C.-P., Li, C.-R., & Lin, C.-J. (2011). The Joint Effect of Project-Level Exploratory and Exploitative Learning in New Product Development. European Journal of Marketing, 45(4), 531-550.
Danneels, E. (2008). Organizational Antecedents of Second-order Competences. SMJ, 9(5), 519-543.
Garcia, R., & Calantone, R. (2002). A Critical Look at Technological Innovation Typology and Innovativeness Terminology: A Literature Review. The Journal of Product Innovation Management, 19, 110-132.
Gibson, C. B., & Birkinshaw, J. (2004). The Antecedents, Consequences, and Mediating Role of Organizational Ambidexterity. The Academy of Management Journal, 47(2), 209-226.
Gitlow, H.S., Oppenheim, A.J., Oppenhein, R. & Levine, D.M. (2005). Quality Management (3rd ed.). Boston: McGraw Hill International Edition.
Gonzales, F. J. M., & Palacios, T. M. B. (2002). The Effect of New Product Development Techniques on New Product Success in Spanish Firms. Industrial Marketing Management, 31, 261-271.
Greve, H. R. (2007). Exploration and Exploitation in Product Innovation. Industrial and Corporate Change, 1-31.
Griffin, A. (2002). Product Development Cycle Time for Business-to-Business Products. International Marketing Management, 31, 291-304.
He, Z.-L., & Wong, P.-K. (2004). Exploration vs. Exploitation: An Empirical Test of the Ambidexterity Hypothesis. Organization Science, 15(4), 481-494.
Helfat, C. E., Finkelstein, S., Mitchell, W., Peteraf, M. A., Singh, H., Teece, D. J., & Winter, S. G. (2007). Dynamic Capabilities: Understanding Strategic Change in Organizations. USA: Blackwell Publishing.
Jacobson, R., & Aaker, D. A. (1987). The Strategic Role of Product Quality. Journal of Marketing, 51, 31-44.
Jansen, J. J. P., Bosch, F. A. J. V. d., & Volberda, H. W. (2005). Exploratory Innovation, Exploitative Innovation, and Ambidexterity: The Impact of Environmental and Organizational Antecedents. Schmalenbach Business Review, 57, 351-363.
Kim, N., & Atuahene-Gima, K. (2010). Using Exploratory and Exploitative Market Learning for New Product Development. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 27, 519-536.
Kroll, M., Wright, P., & Heiens, R. A. (1999). The Contribution of Product Quality to Competitive Advantage: Impacts on Systematic Variance and Unexplained Variance in Returns. SMJ, 20(4), 375-384.
Kyriakopoulos, K., & Moorman, C. (2004). Tradeoffs on Marketing Exploitation and Exploration Strategies: The Overlooked Role of Market Orientation. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 21, 219-240.
Langerak, F., & Hultink, E. J. (2006). The Impact of Product Innovativeness on the Link between Development Speed and New Product Profitability. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 23, 203-214.
Levin, D. Z. (2000). Organizational Learning and the Transfer of Knowledge: An Investigation of Quality Improvement. Organization Science, 11(6), 630-647.
Levinthal, D. A., & March, J. G. (1993). The Myopia of Learning. SMJ, 14, 5-112.
March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71-87.
McNally, R. C., Cavusgil, E., & Calantone, R. J. (2010). Product Innovativeness Dimensions and Their Relationships with Product Advantage, Product Financial Performance, and Project Protocol. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 27, 991-1006.
Mohammadjafari, M., Dawal, S. Z. M., Ahmed, S., & Zayandehroodi, H. (2011). Toward a Theoretical Concept of E-Collaboration through Project Management in SMEs for Reducing Time and Cost in New Product: A Review. Journal of Applied Science, 11(1), 174-182.
Molina-Castillo, F.-J., Jimenez-Jimenez, D., & Munuera-Aleman, J.-L. (2011). Product Competence Exploitation and Exploration Strategies: The Impact on New Product Performance through Quality and Innovativeness. Industrial Marketing Management.
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.
Rothaermel, F. T., & Alexandre, M. T. (2009). Ambidexterity in Technology Sourcing: The Moderating Role of Absorptive Capacity. Organization Science, 20(4), 759–780.
Rothaermel, F. T., & Deeds, D. L. (2004). Exploration and Exploitation Alliances in Biotechnology: A System of New Product Development. SMJ, 25, 201-221.
Salomo, S., Talke, K., & Strecker, N. (2008). Innovation Field Orientation and Its Effect on Innovativeness and Firm Performance. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 25, 560-576.
Taylor, A., & Helfat, C. E. (2009). Organizational Linkages for Surviving Technological Change: Complementary Assets, Middle Management, and Ambidexterity. Organization Science, 20(4), 718–739.
Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating Dynamic Capabilities: The Nature and Microfoundations of (Sustainable) Enterprise Performance. SMJ.
Visser, M. d., Weerd-Nederhof, P. d., Faems, D., Song, M., Looy, B. v., & Visscher, K. (2010). Structural Ambidexterity in NPD Processes: A Firm-Level Assessment of the Impact of Differentiated Structures on Innovation Performance. Technovation, 30, 291-299.
Zaidi, M.F.A., & Othman, S.N. (2015). Structural Ambidexterity vs. Contextual Ambidexterity: Preliminary Evidence from Malaysia. The Social Sciences, 10(6), 1200-1207.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Disclaimer
The Journal of Technology and Operation Management (JTOM) has taken all reasonable measures to ensure that material contained in this website is the original work of the author(s). However, the Journal gives no warranty and accepts no responsibility for the accuracy or the completeness of the material; no reliance should be made by any user on the material. The user should check with the authors for confirmation. Articles published in the Journal of Technology and Operation Management (JTOM) do not represent the views held by the editors and members of the editorial board. Authors are responsible for all aspects of their articles except the editorial screen design.
