IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/teinso/v65y2021ics0160791x21000154.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Extension of the strategic renewal journey framework: The changing role of middle management

Author

Listed:
  • Hortovanyi, Lilla
  • Szabo, Roland Zs
  • Fuzes, Peter

Abstract

This paper presents the findings of a longitudinal study of a large corporation's journey towards becoming an ambidextrous organisation in the face of emerging technology. By investigating the interplay between the top and middle management, the results show that business intelligence systems allowed the firm to pursue a controlled renewal journey that was data-driven, automated, and supported fast organisational learning. This substituted for active frontline and middle managers. The change in organisational direction was driven by a small and powerful strategic top management group, even though this was a multi-unit firm with more than 100,000 employees. The main advantage of this type of journey is that the organisation can fully realize the advantage of highly centralised formal planning and control while becoming resilient and ambidextrous. A well-functioning decision support system, organisational policies and communication strategy can substitute for collective sense-making and shared strategic schemas. The results also suggest that management control systems can have a profound impact on developing organisational ambidexterity. The article also provides further details on the nature and implications of the rhetorical tactics used by the top management team to focus on organisational attention and action.

Suggested Citation

  • Hortovanyi, Lilla & Szabo, Roland Zs & Fuzes, Peter, 2021. "Extension of the strategic renewal journey framework: The changing role of middle management," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:65:y:2021:i:c:s0160791x21000154
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101540
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X21000154
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101540?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. Martin-Rios, Carlos & Parga-Dans, Eva, 2016. "Service response to economic decline: Innovation actions for achieving strategic renewal," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 2890-2900.
    2. Chang, Yi-Ying & Hughes, Mathew, 2012. "Drivers of innovation ambidexterity in small- to medium-sized firms," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 1-17.
    3. William Ocasio, 2011. "Attention to Attention," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1286-1296, October.
    4. Alva Taylor & Constance E. Helfat, 2009. "Organizational Linkages for Surviving Technological Change: Complementary Assets, Middle Management, and Ambidexterity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 718-739, August.
    5. William Ocasio & Tomi Laamanen & Eero Vaara, 2018. "Communication and attention dynamics: An attention‐based view of strategic change," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(1), pages 155-167, January.
    6. Christopher S. Tuggle & David G. Sirmon & Christopher R. Reutzel & Leonard Bierman, 2010. "Commanding board of director attention: investigating how organizational performance and CEO duality affect board members' attention to monitoring," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(9), pages 946-968, September.
    7. Kim, Bongsun & Kim, Eonsoo & Foss, Nicolai J., 2016. "Balancing absorptive capacity and inbound open innovation for sustained innovative performance: An attention-based view," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 80-90.
    8. Amit Nigam & William Ocasio, 2010. "Event Attention, Environmental Sensemaking, and Change in Institutional Logics: An Inductive Analysis of the Effects of Public Attention to Clinton's Health Care Reform Initiative," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(4), pages 823-841, August.
    9. Karen J. Jansen, 2004. "From Persistence to Pursuit: A Longitudinal Examination of Momentum During the Early Stages of Strategic Change," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(3), pages 276-294, June.
    10. Erik Strauß & Christina Zecher, 2013. "Management control systems: a review," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 233-268, February.
    11. Jatinder S. Sidhu & Harry R. Commandeur & Henk W. Volberda, 2007. "The Multifaceted Nature of Exploration and Exploitation: Value of Supply, Demand, and Spatial Search for Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(1), pages 20-38, February.
    12. Hornsby, Jeffrey S. & Kuratko, Donald F. & Zahra, Shaker A., 2002. "Middle managers' perception of the internal environment for corporate entrepreneurship: assessing a measurement scale," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 253-273, May.
    13. Robert A. Burgelman & Steven W. Floyd & Tomi Laamanen & Saku Mantere & Eero Vaara & Richard Whittington, 2018. "Strategy processes and practices : Dialogues and intersections," Post-Print hal-02312126, HAL.
    14. Ikujiro Nonaka, 1994. "A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(1), pages 14-37, February.
    15. Erwin Danneels, 2007. "The process of technological competence leveraging," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(5), pages 511-533, May.
    16. 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.
    17. O'Reilly, Charles A., III & Tushman, Michael L., 2013. "Organizational Ambidexterity: Past, Present and Future," Research Papers 2130, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    18. William Ocasio & Tomi Laamanen & Eero Vaara, 2018. "Communication and Attention Dynamics : an Attention-Based View of Strategic Change," Post-Print hal-02312047, HAL.
    19. Tom J. M. Mom & Frans A. J. van den Bosch & Henk W. Volberda, 2009. "Understanding Variation in Managers' Ambidexterity: Investigating Direct and Interaction Effects of Formal Structural and Personal Coordination Mechanisms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 812-828, August.
    20. Alexander Zimmermann & Sebastian Raisch & Laura B. Cardinal, 2018. "Managing Persistent Tensions on the Frontline: A Configurational Perspective on Ambidexterity," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(5), pages 739-769, July.
    21. Alexander Zimmermann & Sebastian Raisch & Julian Birkinshaw, 2015. "How Is Ambidexterity Initiated? The Emergent Charter Definition Process," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(4), pages 1119-1139, August.
    22. Stefanie Gschwantner & Martin R. W. Hiebl, 2016. "Management control systems and organizational ambidexterity," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 27(4), pages 371-404, November.
    23. Constantine Andriopoulos & Marianne W. Lewis, 2009. "Exploitation-Exploration Tensions and Organizational Ambidexterity: Managing Paradoxes of Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 696-717, August.
    24. Robert A. Burgelman & Steven W. Floyd & Tomi Laamanen & Saku Mantere & Eero Vaara & Richard Whittington, 2018. "Strategy processes and practices: Dialogues and intersections," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(3), pages 531-558, March.
    25. Abernethy, Margaret A. & Brownell, Peter, 1997. "Management control systems in research and development organizations: The role of accounting, behavior and personnel controls," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 22(3-4), pages 233-248.
    26. Robert Simons, 1991. "Strategic orientation and top management attention to control systems," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(1), pages 49-62, January.
    27. Forbes, Daniel P. & Kirsch, David A., 2011. "The study of emerging industries: Recognizing and responding to some central problems," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 26(5), pages 589-602, September.
    28. Simons, Robert, 1987. "Accounting control systems and business strategy: An empirical analysis," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 357-374, June.
    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. Priyanka, & Jain, Mahima & Dhir, Sanjay, 2022. "Antecedents of organization ambidexterity: A comparative study of public and private sector organizations," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).

    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. Tomi Laamanen, 2019. "Dynamic attention-based view of corporate headquarters in MNCs," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 8(1), pages 1-15, December.
    2. Jan Ossenbrink & Joern Hoppmann & Volker H. Hoffmann, 2019. "Hybrid Ambidexterity: How the Environment Shapes Incumbents’ Use of Structural and Contextual Approaches," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(6), pages 1319-1348, November.
    3. Olga Kassotaki, 2022. "Review of Organizational Ambidexterity Research," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(1), pages 21582440221, March.
    4. David B. Audretsch & Maribel Guerrero, 2023. "Is ambidexterity the missing link between entrepreneurship, management, and innovation?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(6), pages 1891-1918, December.
    5. Jan Ossenbrink & Joern Hoppmann, 2019. "Polytope Conditioning and Linear Convergence of the Frank–Wolfe Algorithm," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 44(1), pages 1319-1348, February.
    6. Bob Walrave & A Georges L Romme & Kim E van Oorschot & Fred Langerak, 2017. "Managerial attention to exploitation versus exploration: toward a dynamic perspective on ambidexterity," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 26(6), pages 1145-1160.
    7. Mohamed Mohiya & M. M. Sulphey, 2021. "Do Saudi Arabian Leaders Exhibit Ambidextrous Leadership: A Qualitative Examination," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(4), pages 21582440211, October.
    8. 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.
    9. Morgan, Todd & Anokhin, Sergey Alexander & Wincent, Joakim, 2019. "New service development by manufacturing firms: Effects of customer participation under environmental contingencies," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 497-505.
    10. Karl Aschenbrücker & Tobias Kretschmer, 2022. "Performance-based incentives and innovative activity in small firms: evidence from German manufacturing," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 11(2), pages 47-64, June.
    11. Emer Curtis & Breda Sweeney, 2017. "Managing different types of innovation: mutually reinforcing management control systems and the generation of dynamic tension," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(3), pages 313-343, April.
    12. Matti Mäntymäki & Sami Hyrynsalmi & Antti Koskenvoima, 2020. "How Do Small and Medium-Sized Game Companies Use Analytics? An Attention-Based View of Game Analytics," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 22(5), pages 1163-1178, October.
    13. Weiqi Dai & Mingqing Liao & Qiao Lin & Jincai Dong, 2022. "Does entrepreneurs’ proactive attention to government policies matter?," Asian Business & Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 21(3), pages 396-431, July.
    14. 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.
    15. 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).
    16. Eero Vaara & Laura Fritsch, 2022. "Strategy as language and communication: Theoretical and methodological advances and avenues for the future in strategy process and practice research," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(6), pages 1170-1181, June.
    17. Kleinknecht, Robert & Haq, Hammad Ul & Muller, Alan R. & Kraan, Karolus O., 2020. "An attention-based view of short-termism: The effects of organizational structure," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 244-254.
    18. José Andrade & Mário Franco & Luis Mendes, 2023. "Facilitating and Inhibiting Effects of Organisational Ambidexterity in SME: an Analysis Centred on SME Characteristics," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 14(1), pages 35-64, March.
    19. Arman Avadikyan & Gilles Lambert & Christophe Lerch, 2016. "A Multi-Level Perspective on Ambidexterity: The Case of a Synchrotron Research Facility," Working Papers of BETA 2016-44, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    20. Úbeda-García, Mercedes & Claver-Cortés, Enrique & Marco-Lajara, Bartolomé & Zaragoza-Sáez, Patrocinio, 2020. "Toward a dynamic construction of organizational ambidexterity: Exploring the synergies between structural differentiation, organizational context, and interorganizational relations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 363-372.

    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:teinso:v:65:y:2021:i:c:s0160791x21000154. 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: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/technology-in-society .

    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.