Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

How does the evolution of an organization's multiple-dominant-logic system affect its ambidextrous innovation?

How does the evolution of an organization's multiple-dominant-logic system affect its... This paper aims to address how an organization's multiple-dominant-logic system evolves as it grows and how does this evolution affect the way managers choose to balance ambidextrous innovation.Design/methodology/approachThis paper adopts an interpretive and exploratory case study on the mechanism of how the multiple-dominant-logic system influences the decision of balanced ambidextrous innovation. Considering that the multiple-dominant-logic system will change with the development of a firm, this paper focuses on exploring how the evolution of multiple-dominant-logic system affects the way managers choose to balance ambidextrous innovation. The authors spent almost two years collecting data from M-grass Ecology and following the evolution and innovation through semi-structured interviews, archival data and observation. Then they set up a framework showing the influence mechanism by analyzing the data through a four-step process.FindingsThis research points out that an organization's multiple-dominant-logic system may change for several times in its growth. It provides a model for the evolution of a multiple-dominant-logic system. It confirms that firms' multiple-dominant-logic system is not immutable, but evolves with the change of the firm's internal resources and external environment. Also, it finds that under the influence of different multiple-dominant-logic architectures, mangers choose different ways to balance ambidextrous innovation. In this process, appropriate entrepreneurial bricolage plays a significant role in balancing ambidextrous innovation.Originality/valueThe findings offer some valuable insights for further research on dominant logics and ambidextrous innovation and hold important implications for managers making a decision. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Organizational Change Management Emerald Publishing

How does the evolution of an organization's multiple-dominant-logic system affect its ambidextrous innovation?

Download PDF
25 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/how-does-the-evolution-of-an-organization-s-multiple-dominant-logic-jdnCU0SsLG
Publisher
Emerald Publishing
Copyright
© Emerald Publishing Limited
ISSN
0953-4814
DOI
10.1108/jocm-11-2020-0340
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

This paper aims to address how an organization's multiple-dominant-logic system evolves as it grows and how does this evolution affect the way managers choose to balance ambidextrous innovation.Design/methodology/approachThis paper adopts an interpretive and exploratory case study on the mechanism of how the multiple-dominant-logic system influences the decision of balanced ambidextrous innovation. Considering that the multiple-dominant-logic system will change with the development of a firm, this paper focuses on exploring how the evolution of multiple-dominant-logic system affects the way managers choose to balance ambidextrous innovation. The authors spent almost two years collecting data from M-grass Ecology and following the evolution and innovation through semi-structured interviews, archival data and observation. Then they set up a framework showing the influence mechanism by analyzing the data through a four-step process.FindingsThis research points out that an organization's multiple-dominant-logic system may change for several times in its growth. It provides a model for the evolution of a multiple-dominant-logic system. It confirms that firms' multiple-dominant-logic system is not immutable, but evolves with the change of the firm's internal resources and external environment. Also, it finds that under the influence of different multiple-dominant-logic architectures, mangers choose different ways to balance ambidextrous innovation. In this process, appropriate entrepreneurial bricolage plays a significant role in balancing ambidextrous innovation.Originality/valueThe findings offer some valuable insights for further research on dominant logics and ambidextrous innovation and hold important implications for managers making a decision.

Journal

Journal of Organizational Change Management – Emerald Publishing

Published: Apr 28, 2021

Keywords: Multiple dominant logics; Ambidextrous innovation; Decision-making; Case study

References

  • Exploitation exploration tensions and organizational ambidexterity: managing paradoxes of innovation
    Andriopoulos, C.; Lewis, M.W.
  • Sharing-dominant logic? Quantifying the association between consumer intelligence and choice of social access modes
    Aspara, J.; Wittkowski, K.
  • Resources in play: bricolage in the toy store(y)
    Baker, T.
  • Creating something from nothing: resource construction through entrepreneurial bricolage
    Baker, T.; Nelson, R.E.
  • Improvising firms: bricolage, account giving and improvisational competencies in the founding process
    Baker, T.; Miner, S.A.; Eesley, T.D.
  • New dominant logic and its implications for knowledge management: a study of the finish food industry
    Brännback, M.; Wiklund, P.A.
  • Evolution of service-dominant logic: towards a paradigm and metatheory of the market and value cocreation?
    Brodie, R.J.; Löbler, H.; Fehrer, J.A.
  • Building theories from case study research
    Eisenhardt, K.M.
  • Clarifying the dominant logic construct by disentangling and reassembling its dimension
    Engelmann, A.; Kump, B.; Schweiger, C.
  • Process learning in alliances developing radical versus incremental innovation
    Feller, J.; Parhankangas, A.; Smeds, R.
  • Quality dominant logic in big data analytics and firm performance
    Fosso; Wamba, S.; Akter, S.; de Bourmont, M.
  • Looking forward and looking backward: cognitive and experiential searc
    Gavetti, G.; Levinthal, D.
  • Optimization or bricolage? overcoming resource constraints in global social entrepreneurship
    Geoffrey, D.; Sandip, B.
  • Entrepreneurial orientation, ambidextrous innovation and enterprise competitive advantage
    Kiyabo, K.; Isaga, N.
  • Strategies for theorizing from process data
    Langley, A.
  • Re-testing and validating a triple bottom line dominant logic for business sustainability
    Laurell, H.; Karlsson, N.P.E.; Lindgren, J.; Andersson, S.; Svensson, G.
  • Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning
    March, J.G.
  • Rhetoric and the foundation of the service-dominant logic
    Miles, C.
  • Environmental context, managerial cognition, and strategic action: an integrated view
    Nadkarni, S.; Barr, P.S.
  • Re-examining the place of servicescape in marketing: a service-dominant logic perspective
    Nilsson, E.; Ballantyne, D.
  • Ambidexterity as a dynamic capability: resolving the innovator's dilemma
    O'Reilly, C.A.; Tushman, M.L.
  • Organizational ambidexterity: past, present, and future
    O'Reilly, C.A.; Tushman, M.L.
  • Achieving innovation through supplier collaboration: the role of the purchasing interface
    Patrucco, A.S.; Luzzini, D.; Ronchi, S.
  • Longitudinal field research on change: theory and practice
    Pettigrew, A.
  • The dominant logic: a new linkage between diversity and performance
    Prahalad, C.K.; Bettis, R.A.
  • The influence of CEO power on explorative and exploitative organizational innovation
    Sariol, A.M.; Abebe, M.A.
  • Resuming an unfinished tale: applying causal maps to analyze the dominant logics within an organization
    Schraven, D.F.J.; Hartmann, A.; Dewulf, GPMR
  • A dynamic capabilities-based framework of organizational sense making through combinative capabilities towards exploratory and exploitative product innovation in turbulent environments
    Sheng, M.L.
  • Managing firm resources in dynamic environments to create value: looking inside the black box
    Sirmon, D.G.; Hitt, M.A.; Ireland, R.D.
  • Toward a theory of paradox: a dynamic equilibrium model of organizing
    Smith, W.K.; Lewis, M.W.
  • Entrepreneurial alertness in the pursuit of new opportunities
    Tang, J.; Kacmar, K.M.; Busenitz, L.
  • Cognitive maps in rats and men
    Tolman, E.
  • Knowing what we know differently: knowledge heterogeneity and dynamically ambidextrous innovation
    Tsai, F.-S.S.
  • Technological discontinuities and organizational environments
    Tushman, M.L.; Anderson, P.
  • The evolution and prospects of service-dominant logic: an investigation of past, present, and future research
    Wilden, R.; Akaka, M.A.; Karpen, I.O.; Hohberger, J.
  • Collaborative ties and ambidextrous innovation: insights from internal and external knowledge acquisition
    Xie, X.; Gao, Y.; Zang, Z.P.; Meng, X.H.
  • Achieving demand side synergy from strategic diversification: how combining mundane assets can leverage consumer utilities
    Ye, G.L.; Richard, L.P.; Abdullah, A.A.
  • Managing strategic contradictions: a resource allocation mechanism for balancing ambidextrous innovation
    Zhang, W.; Liu, Z.Y.; Shi, X.; Chen, J.M.
  • Swinging a double-edged sword: the effect of slack on entrepreneurial management and growth
    Bradley, S.W.; Wiklund, J.; Shepherd, D.A.
  • Grounded theory research: procedures, canons and evaluative criteri
    Corbin, J.; Strauss, A.
  • The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity
    Gibson, C.B.; Birkinshaw, J.