IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/proeco/v204y2018icp70-82.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Supply chain organizational learning, exploration, exploitation, and firm performance: A creation-dispersion perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Ojha, Divesh
  • Struckell, Elisabeth
  • Acharya, Chandan
  • Patel, Pankaj C.

Abstract

We introduce and empirically test the creation-dispersion model of supply chain organizational learning to align learning orientations in a supply chain context. Our paper seeks to advance the knowledge on supply chain organizational learning by showing that four distinct supply chain learning orientations (team, learning, memory, and systems), previously studied only as a collective, can be parsed strategically. We parse these four learning orientations into creation capacity (team and learning orientations) and dispersion capacity (memory and system orientations). The creation and dispersion capacity can enhance exploration (long-term) and exploitation (short-term) practices respectively in supply chain organizations. We used a survey questionnaire to collect data from 128 respondents belonging to firms of various sizes and different industries. We find that creation capacity is positively associated with exploration and indirectly associated with exploitation through exploration. Dispersion capacity is associated with exploitation and indirectly influences market share and profitability through exploitation. The findings demonstrate that creation and dispersion-based combinations of supply chain learning orientations coalesce to influence exploration and exploitation practices. We discuss the implications for supply chain organizational learning literature.

Suggested Citation

  • Ojha, Divesh & Struckell, Elisabeth & Acharya, Chandan & Patel, Pankaj C., 2018. "Supply chain organizational learning, exploration, exploitation, and firm performance: A creation-dispersion perspective," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(C), pages 70-82.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:proeco:v:204:y:2018:i:c:p:70-82
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2018.07.025
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925527318302913
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ijpe.2018.07.025?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anis Khedhaouria & Francesco Montani & Roy Thurik, 2017. "Time pressure and team member creativity within R&D projects: The role of learning orientation and knowledge sourcing," Post-Print hal-02048734, HAL.
    2. David J. TEECE, 2008. "Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Transfer And Licensing Of Know-How And Intellectual Property Understanding the Multinational Enterprise in the Modern World, chapter 5, pages 67-87, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    3. Justin J. P. Jansen & Frans A. J. Van Den Bosch & Henk W. Volberda, 2006. "Exploratory Innovation, Exploitative Innovation, and Performance: Effects of Organizational Antecedents and Environmental Moderators," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(11), pages 1661-1674, November.
    4. Argote, L. & Epple, D., 1990. "Learning Curves In Manufacturing," GSIA Working Papers 89-90-02, Carnegie Mellon University, Tepper School of Business.
    5. Ojha, Divesh & Acharya, Chandan & Cooper, Danielle, 2018. "Transformational leadership and supply chain ambidexterity: Mediating role of supply chain organizational learning and moderating role of uncertainty," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 197(C), pages 215-231.
    6. Gerald C. Kane & Maryam Alavi, 2007. "Information Technology and Organizational Learning: An Investigation of Exploration and Exploitation Processes," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(5), pages 796-812, October.
    7. Mary M. Crossan & Iris Berdrow, 2003. "Organizational learning and strategic renewal," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(11), pages 1087-1105, November.
    8. Ron Adner & Rahul Kapoor, 2010. "Value creation in innovation ecosystems: how the structure of technological interdependence affects firm performance in new technology generations," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(3), pages 306-333, March.
    9. Hult, G. Tomas M. & Ferrell, O. C., 1997. "Global organizational learning capacity in purchasing: Construct and measurement," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 97-111, October.
    10. Hock‐Hai Teo & Xinwei Wang & Kwok‐Kee Wei & Choon‐Ling Sia & Matthew K. O. Lee, 2006. "Organizational learning capacity and attitude toward complex technological innovations: An empirical study," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 57(2), pages 264-279, January.
    11. Jensen, Are & Clausen, Tommy H., 2017. "Origins and emergence of exploration and exploitation capabilities in new technology-based firms," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 163-175.
    12. C. Lanier Benkard, 2000. "Learning and Forgetting: The Dynamics of Aircraft Production," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(4), pages 1034-1054, September.
    13. Johannes Luger & Sebastian Raisch & Markus Schimmer, 2018. "Dynamic Balancing of Exploration and Exploitation: The Contingent Benefits of Ambidexterity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(3), pages 449-470, June.
    14. Frank T. Rothaermel & David L. Deeds, 2004. "Exploration and exploitation alliances in biotechnology: a system of new product development," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(3), pages 201-221, March.
    15. Christina E. Shalley & Lucy L. Gilson, 2017. "Creativity and the Management of Technology: Balancing Creativity and Standardization," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 26(4), pages 605-616, April.
    16. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    17. Sebastian Raisch & Michael L. Tushman, 2016. "Growing New Corporate Businesses: From Initiation to Graduation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(5), pages 1237-1257, October.
    18. Ikujiro Nonaka, 1994. "A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(1), pages 14-37, February.
    19. Sanderson, Susan & Uzumeri, Mustafa, 1995. "Managing product families: The case of the Sony Walkman," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 761-782, September.
    20. Justin J. P. Jansen & Michiel P. Tempelaar & Frans A. J. van den Bosch & Henk W. Volberda, 2009. "Structural Differentiation and Ambidexterity: The Mediating Role of Integration Mechanisms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 797-811, August.
    21. Linda Argote & Ella Miron-Spektor, 2011. "Organizational Learning: From Experience to Knowledge," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1123-1137, October.
    22. Anne S. Miner & Stephen J. Mezias, 1996. "Ugly Duckling No More: Pasts and Futures of Organizational Learning Research," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(1), pages 88-99, February.
    23. O'Reilly, Charles A., III & Tushman, Michael L., 2013. "Organizational Ambidexterity: Past, Present and Future," Research Papers 2130, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    24. Daniel A. Levinthal & James G. March, 1993. "The myopia of learning," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(S2), pages 95-112, December.
    25. Fisher, Robert J, 1993. "Social Desirability Bias and the Validity of Indirect Questioning," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 20(2), pages 303-315, September.
    26. Auh, Seigyoung & Menguc, Bulent, 2005. "Balancing exploration and exploitation: The moderating role of competitive intensity," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 58(12), pages 1652-1661, December.
    27. George P. Huber, 1991. "Organizational Learning: The Contributing Processes and the Literatures," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 88-115, February.
    28. Mark Easterby‐Smith & Mary Crossan & Davide Nicolini, 2000. "Organizational Learning: Debates Past, Present And Future," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(6), pages 783-796, September.
    29. Robert M. Grant & Charles Baden‐Fuller, 2004. "A Knowledge Accessing Theory of Strategic Alliances," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(1), pages 61-84, January.
    30. Christina Fang & Jeho Lee & Melissa A. Schilling, 2010. "Balancing Exploration and Exploitation Through Structural Design: The Isolation of Subgroups and Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(3), pages 625-642, June.
    31. Helena Yli‐Renko & Erkko Autio & Harry J. Sapienza, 2001. "Social capital, knowledge acquisition, and knowledge exploitation in young technology‐based firms," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(6‐7), pages 587-613, June.
    32. Atul Nerkar, 2003. "Old Is Gold? The Value of Temporal Exploration in the Creation of New Knowledge," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(2), pages 211-229, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sahi, Gurjeet Kaur & Gupta, Mahesh C. & Cheng, T.C.E. & Mantok, Stanzin, 2021. "Mitigating the tension in pursuit of operational ambidexterity: The roles of knowledge development and bricolage," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 239(C).
    2. Zahoor, Nadia & Adomako, Samuel, 2023. "Be open to failure: Open innovation failure in dynamic environments," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    3. Rong Wu & Jian Zhang & Yubing Yu & Sajjad M. Jasimuddin & Justin Zuopeng Zhang, 2023. "The Impact of Value Cocreation on CSR Innovation and Economic Performance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-22, February.
    4. Xuemei Xie & Qiwei Zhu, 2020. "Exploring an innovative pivot: How green training can spur corporate sustainability performance," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(6), pages 2432-2449, September.
    5. Gu, Minhao & Yang, Lu & Huo, Baofeng, 2021. "The impact of information technology usage on supply chain resilience and performance: An ambidexterous view," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 232(C).
    6. Partanen, Jukka & Kohtamäki, Marko & Patel, Pankaj C. & Parida, Vinit, 2020. "Supply chain ambidexterity and manufacturing SME performance: The moderating roles of network capability and strategic information flow," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 221(C).
    7. Alev Ozer Torgaloz & Mehmet Fatih Acar & Cemil Kuzey, 2023. "The effects of organizational learning culture and decentralization upon supply chain collaboration: analysis of covid-19 period," Operations Management Research, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 511-530, March.
    8. Sheng, Margaret L. & Saide, Saide, 2021. "Supply chain survivability in crisis times through a viable system perspective: Big data, knowledge ambidexterity, and the mediating role of virtual enterprise," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 567-578.
    9. Ahammad, Mohammad Faisal & Basu, Shubhabrata & Munjal, Surender & Clegg, Jeremy & Shoham, Ofra Bazel, 2021. "Strategic agility, environmental uncertainties and international performance: The perspective of Indian firms," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 56(4).
    10. Li, Lingjia & Shan, Shuo & Dai, Jing & Che, Wen & Shou, Yongyi, 2022. "The impact of green supply chain management on green innovation: A meta-analysis from the inter-organizational learning perspective," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 250(C).
    11. José Roberto Mendoza-Fong & Jorge Luis García-Alcaraz & José Roberto Díaz-Reza & Emilio Jiménez-Macías & Julio Blanco-Fernández, 2019. "The Role of Green Attributes in Production Processes as Well as Their Impact on Operational, Commercial, and Economic Benefits," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-23, March.
    12. Singh, Nitya P. & Hong, Paul C., 2020. "Impact of strategic and operational risk management practices on firm performance: An empirical investigation," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 723-735.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Linda Argote & Sunkee Lee & Jisoo Park, 2021. "Organizational Learning Processes and Outcomes: Major Findings and Future Research Directions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(9), pages 5399-5429, September.
    2. Linda Argote & Ella Miron-Spektor, 2011. "Organizational Learning: From Experience to Knowledge," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1123-1137, October.
    3. Carolina Rojas-Córdova & Amanda J. Williamson & Julio A. Pertuze & Gustavo Calvo, 2023. "Why one strategy does not fit all: a systematic review on exploration–exploitation in different organizational archetypes," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 17(7), pages 2251-2295, October.
    4. Shuwaikh, Fatima & Brintte, Souad & Khemiri, Sabrina, 2022. "The impact of dynamic ambidexterity on the performance of organizations: Evidence from corporate venture capital investing in North America," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 991-1009.
    5. YoungKi Park & Paul A. Pavlou & Nilesh Saraf, 2020. "Configurations for Achieving Organizational Ambidexterity with Digitization," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 31(4), pages 1376-1397, December.
    6. Mavroudi, Eva & Kesidou, Effie & Pandza, Krsto, 2020. "Shifting back and forth: How does the temporal cycling between exploratory and exploitative R&D influence firm performance?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 386-396.
    7. Olga Kassotaki, 2022. "Review of Organizational Ambidexterity Research," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(1), pages 21582440221, March.
    8. Partanen, Jukka & Kohtamäki, Marko & Patel, Pankaj C. & Parida, Vinit, 2020. "Supply chain ambidexterity and manufacturing SME performance: The moderating roles of network capability and strategic information flow," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 221(C).
    9. Yasser Alizadeh & Antonie J. Jetter, 2019. "Pathways for Balancing Exploration and Exploitation in Innovations: A Review and Expansion of Ambidexterity Theory," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(05), pages 1-33, August.
    10. Mavroudi, Eva & Kesidou, Effie & Pandza, Krsto, 2023. "Effects of ambidextrous and specialized R&D strategies on firm performance: The contingent role of industry orientation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    11. Lori Rosenkopf & Patia McGrath, 2011. "Advancing the Conceptualization and Operationalization of Novelty in Organizational Research," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1297-1311, October.
    12. Katou, Anastasia A. & Budhwar, Pawan S. & Patel, Charmi, 2021. "A trilogy of organizational ambidexterity: Leader’s social intelligence, employee work engagement and environmental changes," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 688-700.
    13. François Constant & Richard Calvi & Thomas Johnsen, 2020. "Managing tensions between exploitative and exploratory innovation through purchasing function ambidexterity Managing tensions between exploitative and exploratory innovation through purchasing functio," Post-Print hal-02891790, HAL.
    14. McCarthy, Killian J & Aalbers, Hendrik Leendert, 2022. "Alliance-to-acquisition transitions: The technological performance implications of acquiring one's alliance partners," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(6).
    15. Mohammad Keyhani & Yuval Deutsch & Anoop Madhok & Moren Lévesque, 2022. "Exploration-exploitation and acquisition likelihood in new ventures," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 58(3), pages 1475-1496, March.
    16. Vishal K. Gupta & Suman Niranjan & Erik Markin, 2020. "Entrepreneurial orientation and firm performance: the mediating role of generative and acquisitive learning through customer relationships," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 14(5), pages 1123-1147, October.
    17. Frank T. Rothaermel & Maria Tereza Alexandre, 2009. "Ambidexterity in Technology Sourcing: The Moderating Role of Absorptive Capacity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 759-780, August.
    18. Jing Zhang & Justin Tan & Poh Wong, 2015. "When does investment in political ties improve firm performance? The contingent effect of innovation activities," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 32(2), pages 363-387, June.
    19. Andreea N. Kiss & Dirk Libaers & Pamela S. Barr & Tang Wang & Miles A. Zachary, 2020. "CEO cognitive flexibility, information search, and organizational ambidexterity," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(12), pages 2200-2233, December.
    20. Tulin Dzhengiz, 2020. "A Literature Review of Inter-Organizational Sustainability Learning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-52, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:proeco:v:204:y:2018:i:c:p:70-82. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ijpe .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.