IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v50y2021i1s0048733320301931.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How firms undertake organizational changes to shift to more-exploratory strategies: A process perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Vedel, Jane Bjørn
  • Kokshagina, Olga

Abstract

Firms’ organization of exploratory research has interested scholars of both research policy and organization theory, yet we still know too little about how firms undertake organizational changes to shift to more-exploratory strategies. Adopting a process perspective, we explore this question through a longitudinal, comparative case study of a Danish pharmaceutical firm and a French-Italian semiconductor firm. We demonstrate how firms adjust their organizational structures to increase exploration, a process of constantly addressing countervailing organizational and interorganizational demands by deploying, combining, and changing balancing mechanisms at the organizational and managerial levels. Moreover, our findings show that firms’ different organizational structures affect their adaptations to exploratory outcomes. These findings advance theory because they illuminate the dynamic interplay between firms’ adjustments of organizational structures and their movements toward more exploration. We use a recursive process model to theorize our findings.

Suggested Citation

  • Vedel, Jane Bjørn & Kokshagina, Olga, 2021. "How firms undertake organizational changes to shift to more-exploratory strategies: A process perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:50:y:2021:i:1:s0048733320301931
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2020.104118
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733320301931
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2020.104118?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. Uriel Stettner & Dovev Lavie, 2014. "Ambidexterity under scrutiny: Exploration and exploitation via internal organization, alliances, and acquisitions," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(13), pages 1903-1929, December.
    2. Brice Dattée & Oliver Alexy & Erkko Autio, 2018. "Maneuvering in Poor Visibility : How Firms Play the Ecosystem Game when Uncertainty is High," Post-Print hal-02312003, HAL.
    3. Tzabbar, Daniel & Aharonson, Barak S. & Amburgey, Terry L., 2013. "When does tapping external sources of knowledge result in knowledge integration?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 481-494.
    4. Dovev Lavie & Jingoo Kang & Lori Rosenkopf, 2011. "Balance Within and Across Domains: The Performance Implications of Exploration and Exploitation in Alliances," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(6), pages 1517-1538, December.
    5. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    6. Hart E. Posen & Daniel A. Levinthal, 2012. "Chasing a Moving Target: Exploitation and Exploration in Dynamic Environments," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(3), pages 587-601, March.
    7. Azagra-Caro, Joaquín M. & Barberá-Tomás, David & Edwards-Schachter, Mónica & Tur, Elena M., 2017. "Dynamic interactions between university-industry knowledge transfer channels: A case study of the most highly cited academic patent," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 463-474.
    8. Janssen, M. & Stoopendaal, A.M.V. & Putters, K., 2015. "Situated novelty: Introducing a process perspective on the study of innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(10), pages 1974-1984.
    9. Estrada, Isabel & Faems, Dries & Martin Cruz, Natalia & Perez Santana, Pilar, 2016. "The role of interpartner dissimilarities in Industry-University alliances: Insights from a comparative case study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(10), pages 2008-2022.
    10. Marlo Raveendran, 2020. "Seeds of change: How current structure shapes the type and timing of reorganizations," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(1), pages 27-54, January.
    11. Bahemia, Hanna & Sillince, John & Vanhaverbeke, Wim, 2018. "The timing of openness in a radical innovation project, a temporal and loose coupling perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(10), pages 2066-2076.
    12. Kathleen M. Eisenhardt & Nathan R. Furr & Christopher B. Bingham, 2010. "CROSSROADS---Microfoundations of Performance: Balancing Efficiency and Flexibility in Dynamic Environments," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(6), pages 1263-1273, December.
    13. Crescenzi, Riccardo & Gagliardi, Luisa, 2018. "The innovative performance of firms in heterogeneous environments: The interplay between external knowledge and internal absorptive capacities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(4), pages 782-795.
    14. Gilsing, Victor & Nooteboom, Bart, 2006. "Exploration and exploitation in innovation systems: The case of pharmaceutical biotechnology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 1-23, February.
    15. Julien Clement & Phanish Puranam, 2018. "Searching for Structure: Formal Organization Design as a Guide to Network Evolution," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(8), pages 3879-3895, August.
    16. Bishop, Kate & D'Este, Pablo & Neely, Andy, 2011. "Gaining from interactions with universities: Multiple methods for nurturing absorptive capacity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 30-40, February.
    17. Cassiman, Bruno & Di Guardo, Maria Chiara & Valentini, Giovanni, 2010. "Organizing links with science: Cooperate or contract?: A project-level analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 882-892, September.
    18. Cui, Victor & Ding, Waverly W. & Yanadori, Yoshio, 2019. "Exploration versus exploitation in technology firms: The role of compensation structure for R&D workforce," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(6), pages 1534-1549.
    19. Yamakawa, Yasuhiro & Yang, Haibin & Lin, Zhiang (John), 2011. "Exploration versus exploitation in alliance portfolio: Performance implications of organizational, strategic, and environmental fit," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 287-296, March.
    20. Henrik Bresman & Mary Zellmer-Bruhn, 2013. "The Structural Context of Team Learning: Effects of Organizational and Team Structure on Internal and External Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(4), pages 1120-1139, August.
    21. Revilla, Elena & Rodríguez-Prado, Beatriz, 2018. "Bulding ambidexterity through creativity mechanisms: Contextual drivers of innovation success," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1611-1625.
    22. Brice Dattée & Oliver Alexy & Erkko Autio, 2018. "Maneuvering in Poor Visibility : How Firms Play the Ecosystem Game when Uncertainty is High," Post-Print hal-02276702, HAL.
    23. Laursen, Keld & Salter, Ammon, 2004. "Searching high and low: what types of firms use universities as a source of innovation?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(8), pages 1201-1215, October.
    24. Kobarg, Sebastian & Stumpf-Wollersheim, Jutta & Welpe, Isabell M., 2019. "More is not always better: Effects of collaboration breadth and depth on radical and incremental innovation performance at the project level," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 1-10.
    25. Anne-Sophie Fernandez & Paul Chiambaretto, 2016. "Managing tensions related to information in coopetition," Post-Print hal-02011849, HAL.
    26. Järvi, Kati & Almpanopoulou, Argyro & Ritala, Paavo, 2018. "Organization of knowledge ecosystems: Prefigurative and partial forms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(8), pages 1523-1537.
    27. Douglas P. Hannah & Kathleen M. Eisenhardt, 2018. "How firms navigate cooperation and competition in nascent ecosystems," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(12), pages 3163-3192, December.
    28. Ulrich Wassmer, 2010. "Alliance Portfolios : A Review and Research Agenda," Post-Print hal-02313048, HAL.
    29. Andrew M. Pettigrew, 1990. "Longitudinal Field Research on Change: Theory and Practice," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 1(3), pages 267-292, August.
    30. de Leeuw, Tim & Gilsing, Victor & Duysters, Geert, 2019. "Greater adaptivity or greater control? Adaptation of IOR portfolios in response to technological change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(6), pages 1586-1600.
    31. Koryak, Oksana & Lockett, Andy & Hayton, James & Nicolaou, Nicos & Mole, Kevin, 2018. "Disentangling the antecedents of ambidexterity: Exploration and exploitation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 413-427.
    32. Rekha Krishnan & Inge Geyskens & Jan-Benedict E. M. Steenkamp, 2016. "The effectiveness of contractual and trust-based governance in strategic alliances under behavioral and environmental uncertainty," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(12), pages 2521-2542, December.
    33. Georg Schreyögg & Jörg Sydow, 2010. "CROSSROADS---Organizing for Fluidity? Dilemmas of New Organizational Forms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(6), pages 1251-1262, December.
    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. Cai, Ying & Lin, Jun & Zhang, Ruxin, 2023. "When and how to implement design thinking in the innovation process: A longitudinal case study," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    2. Xiao, Fenglong & Shen, Yinjie, 2024. "Wolves at the door to the unknown: Innovation search and hedge fund activism," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(2).

    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. Jane Bjørn Vedel & Olga Kokshagina, 2021. "How firms undertake organizational changes to shift to more-exploratory strategies: A process perspective," Post-Print hal-02943926, HAL.
    2. Shukla, Dhirendra Mani & Mital, Amita & Qureshi, Israr, 2024. "Effects of alliance portfolio breadth and depth on exploratory and exploitative innovation: Evidence from Indian high-tech sectors," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    3. Martínez-Noya, Andrea & García-Canal, Esteban, 2021. "Innovation performance feedback and technological alliance portfolio diversity: The moderating role of firms’ R&D intensity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    4. Osiyevskyy, Oleksiy & Shirokova, Galina & Ritala, Paavo, 2020. "Exploration and exploitation in crisis environment: Implications for level and variability of firm performance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 227-239.
    5. Bae, Joonhyung & Ozmel, Umit, 2024. "The interplay between product development failures and alliance portfolio properties in the formation of exploration versus exploitation alliances," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    6. Mingfeng Tang & Peng Xu & Patrick Llerena & Asghar Afshar Jahanshahi, 2019. "The Impact of the Openness of Firms’ External Search Strategies on Exploratory Innovation and Exploitative Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-20, September.
    7. 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.
    8. Manuel Guisado-González & Jennifer González-Blanco & José Luis Coca-Pérez, 2019. "Exploration, exploitation, and firm age in alliance portfolios," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 9(4), pages 387-406, December.
    9. Gomes, Leonardo Augusto de Vasconcelos & Flechas, Ximena Alejandra & Facin, Ana Lucia Figueiredo & Borini, Felipe Mendes, 2021. "Ecosystem management: Past achievements and future promises," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    10. Ardito, Lorenzo & Peruffo, Enzo & Natalicchio, Angelo, 2019. "The relationships between the internationalization of alliance portfolio diversity, individual incentives, and innovation ambidexterity: A microfoundational approach," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    11. Thomas, Llewellyn D.W. & Autio, Erkko & Gann, David M., 2022. "Processes of ecosystem emergence," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    12. Zhang, Zhu & Lyles, Marjorie A. & Wu, Changqi, 2020. "The stock market performance of exploration-oriented and exploitation-oriented cross-border mergers and acquisitions: Evidence from emerging market enterprises," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 29(4).
    13. Yanzhang Gu & Longying Hu & Hongjin Zhang & Chenxuan Hou, 2021. "Innovation Ecosystem Research: Emerging Trends and Future Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-21, October.
    14. Hanne Peeters & Julie Callaert & Bart Looy, 2020. "Do firms profit from involving academics when developing technology?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 494-521, April.
    15. 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).
    16. Shi, Xianwei & Liang, Xingkun & Luo, Yining, 2023. "Unpacking the intellectual structure of ecosystem research in innovation studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(6).
    17. L. M. Daphne Yiu & Hugo K. S. Lam & Andy C. L. Yeung & T. C. E. Cheng, 2020. "Enhancing the Financial Returns of R&D Investments through Operations Management," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 29(7), pages 1658-1678, July.
    18. Zhou, Lianxi & Xu, Shou-Ren & Xu, Hui & Barnes, Bradley R., 2020. "Unleashing the dynamics of product-market ambidexterity in the pursuit of international opportunities: Insights from emerging market firms," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 29(6).
    19. Shukla, Dhirendra Mani & Mital, Amita & Qureshi, Israr & Wang, Taiyuan, 2020. "Valuation effects of alliance portfolio expansion speed and strength: Evidence from high-tech firms," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 370-383.
    20. Hughes, Paul & Hughes, Matthew & Stokes, Peter & Lee, Hanna & Rodgers, Peter & Degbey, William Y., 2020. "Micro-foundations of organizational ambidexterity in the context of cross-border mergers and acquisitions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).

    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:respol:v:50:y:2021:i:1:s0048733320301931. 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/respol .

    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.