Case study of contextual ambidexterity in business units of a medium-sized (1000 employees) research-intensive firm, based on researcher's interactions over several years (1999, 2005, 2006, 2008).
Determined if a unit was mono- or ambidextrous with contextual indicators (eg. number of patents, publications, etc.) and whether "a significant percentage of individuals switch between exploratory and exploitative activities." Identified "performance orientation and group norms", and "an integrative frame of reference" as important cultural aspects of contextual ambidexterity.
Implication for management is that contextual ambidexterity can provide competitive advantages in dynamic environments because knowledge is quickly created and transferred between different domains.
"Contextual ambidexterity is much like hanging by a thread, since one learning mode could crowd out the other, leading to a collapse of the ambidextrous business model."
Error: Contact form not found.
There is a workplace evolution underway, lots of people are signalling it. Dan Pink came-up with the label ‘Motivation 3.0’ in Drive; Jurgen Appelo followed suit with ‘Management 3.0’; and many of us speak of a move towards a Lean or Agile enterprise. Earlier this year, Frederic Laloux published Reinventing Organisations in which he not […]
Contrary to popular belief, managers are not there to ‘make difficult decisions’. What makes a decision difficult usually, is a lack of information. What makes a decision dangerous is the lack of knowledge of how to use that information. If a manager selects one item from a list of choices or approves an initiative instead […]
Every organisation has a particular set of problems created by the thinking system employed by its managers.Humble leaders seek ways to improve themselves and their management teams. By opening themselves to learning and self-discovery, they see the flaws in their systems. This brings understanding, which makes what needs to change quite obvious.This is the normal […]
