IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jknowl/v9y2018i3d10.1007_s13132-016-0385-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sustaining Organizational Performance Through Organizational Ambidexterity by Adapting Social Technology

Author

Listed:
  • Mardi Mardi

    (Bina Nusantara University)

  • Mts Arief

    (Bina Nusantara University)

  • A. Furinto

    (Bina Nusantara University)

  • R. Kumaradjaja

    (Bina Nusantara University)

Abstract

This research discussed about the importance of organizational ambidexterity—defined as the balance of focus on exploitation (efficiency) and exploration (innovation) activities—towards organizational performance, especially in the emergence of social technology. There are limited previous empiric researches studied on the effect of social technology adoption towards ambidexterity. We hypothesize that social technology adoption can lead to ambidexterity directly and through rapid absorptive capacity and collectivism-based collaboration. Using quantitative method, this research was conducted to organizations that adopt social technology in various sectors in Indonesia. Data was processed by structural equation modeling (SEM). This research shows that ambidexterity positively affects organizational performance. It also shows that social technology adoption positively affects ambidexterity directly and through rapid absorptive capacity. However, this research does not support the hypothesis that social technology adoption will positively affect ambidexterity through collectivism-based collaboration. This research may give benefits to strategic management literature in finding the robust model to build an ambidextrous organization, especially through social technology adoption.

Suggested Citation

  • Mardi Mardi & Mts Arief & A. Furinto & R. Kumaradjaja, 2018. "Sustaining Organizational Performance Through Organizational Ambidexterity by Adapting Social Technology," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 9(3), pages 1049-1066, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:jknowl:v:9:y:2018:i:3:d:10.1007_s13132-016-0385-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s13132-016-0385-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s13132-016-0385-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s13132-016-0385-5?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. Sung‐Choon Kang & Scott A. Snell, 2009. "Intellectual Capital Architectures and Ambidextrous Learning: A Framework for Human Resource Management," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(1), pages 65-92, January.
    2. Gregory G. Dess & Richard B. Robinson, 1984. "Measuring organizational performance in the absence of objective measures: The case of the privately‐held firm and conglomerate business unit," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(3), pages 265-273, July.
    3. John Seely Brown & Paul Duguid, 2001. "Knowledge and Organization: A Social-Practice Perspective," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(2), pages 198-213, April.
    4. Bill McEvily & Akbar Zaheer, 1999. "Bridging ties: a source of firm heterogeneity in competitive capabilities," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(12), pages 1133-1156, December.
    5. Ashurst, Colin & Freer, Alison & Ekdahl, Jessica & Gibbons, Chris, 2012. "Exploring IT-enabled innovation: A new paradigm?," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 326-336.
    6. 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.
    7. Ulrich Lichtenthaler & Eckhard Lichtenthaler, 2009. "A Capability‐Based Framework for Open Innovation: Complementing Absorptive Capacity," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(8), pages 1315-1338, December.
    8. Jay J. Ebben & Alec C. Johnson, 2005. "Efficiency, flexibility, or both? Evidence linking strategy to performance in small firms," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(13), pages 1249-1259, December.
    9. 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.
    10. Katz, Michael L & Shapiro, Carl, 1985. "Network Externalities, Competition, and Compatibility," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(3), pages 424-440, June.
    11. Bradley L Kirkman & Kevin B Lowe & Cristina B Gibson, 2006. "A quarter century of Culture's Consequences: a review of empirical research incorporating Hofstede's cultural values framework," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 37(3), pages 285-320, May.
    12. Qing Cao & Zeki Simsek & Hongping Zhang, 2010. "Modelling the Joint Impact of the CEO and the TMT on Organizational Ambidexterity," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(7), pages 1272-1296, November.
    13. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    14. Kathleen M. Eisenhardt & Claudia Bird Schoonhoven, 1996. "Resource-based View of Strategic Alliance Formation: Strategic and Social Effects in Entrepreneurial Firms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(2), pages 136-150, April.
    15. 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.
    16. Daniel A. Levinthal & James G. March, 1993. "The myopia of learning," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(S2), pages 95-112, December.
    17. 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.
    18. 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.
    19. 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.
    20. David J. Teece & Gary Pisano & Amy Shuen, 1997. "Dynamic capabilities and strategic management," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(7), pages 509-533, August.
    21. Shane, Scott, 1993. "Cultural influences on national rates of innovation," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 59-73, January.
    22. Richard B. Robinson & John A Pearce, 1988. "Planned patterns of strategic behavior and their relationship to business‐unit performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(1), pages 43-60, January.
    23. Peter Boumgarden & Jackson Nickerson & Todd R. Zenger, 2012. "Sailing into the wind: Exploring the relationships among ambidexterity, vacillation, and organizational performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(6), pages 587-610, 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. Astadi Pangarso, 2020. "A New Theoretical Framework of Organizational Effectiveness from Knowledge and Ambidexterity Perspectives," GATR Journals jmmr257, Global Academy of Training and Research (GATR) Enterprise.
    2. Leonie Schulte, 2022. "Integrating immediate gains with sustainable performance: systematic review of paradox at the intersection of strategic management and innovation," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 72(4), pages 1209-1247, December.

    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. O'Reilly, Charles A., III & Tushman, Michael L., 2013. "Organizational Ambidexterity: Past, Present and Future," Research Papers 2130, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    2. Lin, H.E., 2010. "Effects of strategy, context and antecedents and capabilities on the outcomes of ambidexterity : A multiple country case study of the US, China and Taiwan," Other publications TiSEM c0eab7d6-d6c7-4b55-9822-1, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    3. Olga Kassotaki, 2022. "Review of Organizational Ambidexterity Research," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(1), pages 21582440221, March.
    4. 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.
    5. Telma Mendes & Vítor Braga & Carina Silva & Vanessa Ratten, 2023. "Taking a closer look at the regionally clustered firms: How can ambidexterity explain the link between management, entrepreneurship, and innovation in a post-industrialized world?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(6), pages 2007-2053, December.
    6. 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.
    7. Solís-Molina, Miguel & Hernández-Espallardo, Miguel & Rodríguez-Orejuela, Augusto, 2018. "Performance implications of organizational ambidexterity versus specialization in exploitation or exploration: The role of absorptive capacity," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 181-194.
    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. 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.
    10. Vahlne, Jan-Erik & Jonsson, Anna, 2017. "Ambidexterity as a dynamic capability in the globalization of the multinational business enterprise (MBE): Case studies of AB Volvo and IKEA," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 57-70.
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. Ferreira, Jorge & Coelho, Arnaldo & Moutinho, Luiz, 2020. "Dynamic capabilities, creativity and innovation capability and their impact on competitive advantage and firm performance: The moderating role of entrepreneurial orientation," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 92.
    15. 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).
    16. Michael Yao-Ping Peng & Ku-Ho Lin & Dennis Liute Peng & Peihua Chen, 2019. "Linking Organizational Ambidexterity and Performance: The Drivers of Sustainability in High-Tech Firms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-17, July.
    17. Wenke, Kathrin & Zapkau, Florian B. & Schwens, Christian, 2021. "Too small to do it all? A meta-analysis on the relative relationships of exploration, exploitation, and ambidexterity with SME performance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 653-665.
    18. 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.
    19. 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).
    20. 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.

    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:spr:jknowl:v:9:y:2018:i:3:d:10.1007_s13132-016-0385-5. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.