IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/orisre/v23y2012i2p323-339.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ambidexterity in Agile Distributed Development: An Empirical Investigation

Author

Listed:
  • Balasubramaniam Ramesh

    (Computer Information Systems Department, Georgia State University, Atlanta, Georgia 30302)

  • Kannan Mohan

    (Department of Statistics and Computer Information Systems, Zicklin School of Business, Baruch College, City University of New York, New York, New York, 10010)

  • Lan Cao

    (Department of Information Technology and Decision Sciences, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, Virginia 23529)

Abstract

Distributed software development has become a common reality with the advent of off-shore development and the need to be close to markets. Also, the dynamic nature of the environment in which businesses operate suggests the use of agile development methods. Whereas distributed software development requires the use of formal processes advocated by plan-driven approaches, rapidly changing environments are appropriate candidates for the use of agile development methods. This tension in agile distributed development poses conflicting demands between alignment and adaptability in the software development process. We conducted a multisite case study of three projects that use agile distributed development to examine how these organizations developed contextual ambidexterity---the ability to pursue conflicting demands simultaneously. Our findings, presented as a conceptual framework, indicate that conflicting demands between alignment and adaptability posed by agile distributed development can be addressed by a set of balanced practices that shape performance management and social context---two important antecedents of contextual ambidexterity.

Suggested Citation

  • Balasubramaniam Ramesh & Kannan Mohan & Lan Cao, 2012. "Ambidexterity in Agile Distributed Development: An Empirical Investigation," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 23(2), pages 323-339, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:orisre:v:23:y:2012:i:2:p:323-339
    DOI: 10.1287/isre.1110.0351
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/isre.1110.0351
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/isre.1110.0351?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    2. Michael Lubatkin & Zeki Simsek & Yan Ling & John F. Veiga, 2006. "Ambidexterity and Performance in Small-to Medium-Sized Firms : The Pivotal Role of Top Management Team Behavioral Integration," Post-Print hal-02311781, HAL.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Sumantra Ghoshal & Christopher A. Bartlett, 1994. "Linking organizational context and managerial action: The dimensions of quality of management," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(S2), pages 91-112, June.
    6. Ghiyoung Im & Arun Rai, 2008. "Knowledge Sharing Ambidexterity in Long-Term Interorganizational Relationships," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(7), pages 1281-1296, July.
    7. Amrit Tiwana, 2008. "Do bridging ties complement strong ties? An empirical examination of alliance ambidexterity," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(3), pages 251-272, March.
    8. Orlikowski, Wanda J. (Wanda Janina), 1993. "CASE tools as organizational change : investigating incremental and radical changes in systems development," Working papers WP 3579-93., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    9. Zi-Lin He & Poh-Kam Wong, 2004. "Exploration vs. Exploitation: An Empirical Test of the Ambidexterity Hypothesis," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 481-494, August.
    10. Paul S. Adler & Barbara Goldoftas & David I. Levine, 1999. "Flexibility Versus Efficiency? A Case Study of Model Changeovers in the Toyota Production System," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(1), pages 43-68, February.
    11. Robert A. Burgelman, 1991. "Intraorganizational Ecology of Strategy Making and Organizational Adaptation: Theory and Field Research," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 239-262, August.
    12. Qing Cao & Eric Gedajlovic & Hongping Zhang, 2009. "Unpacking Organizational Ambidexterity: Dimensions, Contingencies, and Synergistic Effects," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 781-796, August.
    13. 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.
    14. 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.
    15. Nancy B. Kurland & Terri D. Egan, 1999. "Telecommuting: Justice and Control in the Virtual Organization," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(4), pages 500-513, August.
    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. Ashay Saxena & Shankar Venkatagiri & Rajendra K. Bandi, 2023. "Conflict management in agile distributed development: evidence from product development and services engagements," Information Technology and Management, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 247-266, September.
    2. Thomas Kude & Sunil Mithas & Christoph T. Schmidt & Armin Heinzl, 2019. "How Pair Programming Influences Team Performance: The Role of Backup Behavior, Shared Mental Models, and Task Novelty," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(4), pages 1145-1163, December.
    3. Yixin Qiu & Anandasivam Gopal & Il-Horn Hann, 2017. "Logic Pluralism in Mobile Platform Ecosystems: A Study of Indie App Developers on the iOS App Store," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 28(2), pages 225-249, June.
    4. Hongjiang Lv & Xinghua Zhao & Man Cao & Jingjing Ding, 2023. "How can managers, acting as brokers, be ambidextrous? The effect of trust brokerage on managers’ ambidexterity," Asian Business & Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 22(3), pages 1008-1034, July.
    5. Lill, Philipp A. & Wald, Andreas, 2021. "The agility-control-nexus: A levers of control approach on the consequences of agility in innovation projects," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    6. Shahla Ghobadi & John Campbell & Stewart Clegg, 2017. "Pair programming teams and high-quality knowledge sharing: A comparative study of coopetitive reward structures," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 397-409, April.
    7. Robert Wayne Gregory & Mark Keil & Jan Muntermann & Magnus Mähring, 2015. "Paradoxes and the Nature of Ambidexterity in IT Transformation Programs," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 26(1), pages 57-80, March.
    8. Alexander Benlian, 2022. "Sprint Zeal or Sprint Fatigue? The Benefits and Burdens of Agile ISD Practices Use for Developer Well-Being," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(2), pages 557-578, June.
    9. Kausar-Nasreen Khattak & Zohaib Hassan & Syed Shehryar Ali Naqvi & Muhammad Abbas Khan & Faiza Qayyum & Inam Ullah, 2024. "A Conceptual Framework Based on PLS-SEM Approach for Sustainable Customer Relationship Management in Enterprise Software Development: Insights from Developers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(6), pages 1-31, March.
    10. Markus Hummel & Christoph Rosenkranz & Roland Holten, 2013. "The Role of Communication in Agile Systems Development," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 5(5), pages 343-355, October.
    11. 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.
    12. Vanita Yadav, 2016. "A Flexible Management Approach for Globally Distributed Software Projects," Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, Springer;Global Institute of Flexible Systems Management, vol. 17(1), pages 29-40, March.
    13. Shahla Ghobadi & John Campbell & Stewart Clegg, 0. "Pair programming teams and high-quality knowledge sharing: A comparative study of coopetitive reward structures," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-13.

    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. Sebastian Raisch & Julian Birkinshaw & Gilbert Probst & Michael L. Tushman, 2009. "Organizational Ambidexterity: Balancing Exploitation and Exploration for Sustained Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 685-695, August.
    2. 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).
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Christine Chou & Steven O. Kimbrough, 2016. "An agent-based model of organizational ambidexterity decisions and strategies in new product development," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 4-46, March.
    6. Ali, Murad & Shujahat, Muhammad & Ali, Zulfiqar & Kianto, Aino & Wang, Minhong & Bontis, Nick, 2022. "The neglected role of knowledge assets interplay in the pursuit of organisational ambidexterity," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    7. Demetris Vrontis & Alkis Thrassou & Gabriele Santoro & Armando Papa, 2017. "Ambidexterity, external knowledge and performance in knowledge-intensive firms," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 374-388, April.
    8. Gayoung Kim & Woo Jin Lee & Hoshik Shim, 2022. "Managerial Dilemmas and Entrepreneurial Challenges in the Ambidexterity of SMEs: A Systematic Review for Execution System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-22, December.
    9. Lin, Liang-Hung & Ho, Yu-Ling, 2021. "Ambidextrous governance and alliance performance under dynamic environments: An empirical investigation of Taiwanese technology alliances," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    10. Schnellbächer, Benedikt & Heidenreich, Sven & Wald, Andreas, 2019. "Antecedents and effects of individual ambidexterity – A cross-level investigation of exploration and exploitation activities at the employee level," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 442-454.
    11. 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.
    12. Sabyasachi Sinha, 2015. "The Exploration–Exploitation Dilemma: A Review in the Context of Managing Growth of New Ventures," Vikalpa: The Journal for Decision Makers, , vol. 40(3), pages 313-323, September.
    13. Vinit Parida & Tom Lahti & Joakim Wincent, 2016. "Exploration and exploitation and firm performance variability: a study of ambidexterity in entrepreneurial firms," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 12(4), pages 1147-1164, December.
    14. Glenn B. Voss & Zannie Giraud Voss, 2013. "Strategic Ambidexterity in Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises: Implementing Exploration and Exploitation in Product and Market Domains," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(5), pages 1459-1477, October.
    15. 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.
    16. 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.
    17. Juha Uotila, 2018. "Punctuated equilibrium or ambidexterity: dynamics of incremental and radical organizational change over time," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 27(1), pages 131-148.
    18. 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).
    19. Fourné, Sebastian P.L. & Rosenbusch, Nina & Heyden, Mariano L.M. & Jansen, Justin J.P., 2019. "Structural and contextual approaches to ambidexterity: A meta-analysis of organizational and environmental contingencies," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 564-576.
    20. Klaus Möller & Flavia Schmid & Theresa Maria Seehofer & Philipp Wenig, 2022. "How the Design of an Organizational Context Helps to Attain Contextual Ambidexterity," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 74(4), pages 603-629, December.

    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:inm:orisre:v:23:y:2012:i:2:p:323-339. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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.