Explaining the Role of Mediating Ambidextrous Organizational Culture in the Relationship Between Knowledge Absorptive Capacity and Organizational Ambidexterity

Document Type : Research Article

Authors

1 Ph.D. in Information Technology Management, Faculty of Management and Economics, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

2 Assistant Professor in Industrial Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

3 Associate Professor in Production and Operations Management, Faculty of Management and Economic, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

Organizational ambidexterity (OA) is a new concept in management that means paying attention to two non-conforming organizational goals. This concept results in high performance in the business environment. Also, the availability of knowledge absorptive capacity (KAC), which means the ability to discover new knowledge, is effective in improving OA and corporate performance. Ambidextrous organizational culture (AOC) can play an important role in the relationship between KAC and OA. Considering the importance of this issue in manufacturing companies, the purpose of this paper is to investigate the effect of KAC on OA and explain the role of mediating AOC in this regard. The statistical population of the research is directors of manufacturing companies in Qom province that 93 of them participated in this survey based on Cochran's formula. Three questionnaires (KAC, OA, AOC) were used to collect data. The validity of the questionnaires was verified formally and contently. Reliability was gained by calculating the Cronbach's value of 0.81. The analyses were performed by using the LISREL software to evaluate the structural equation model. Findings indicate that there is a positive and significant relationship between research variables, and Ambidextrous Organizational Culture has a mediating role in the relationship between knowledge absorptive capacity and Organizational Ambidexterity.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. ابراهیم‌پور، مصطفی و محمود مرادی، یعقوب ممبینی (1393). «تأثیر دوسوتوانی سازمانی بر عملکرد صنایع تولیدی: بررسی نقش پویایی‌های محیطی»، فصلنامة علوم مدیریت ایران، د 9، ش 36، ص 53 ـ 76.
  2. بوشهری، علی‌رضا و ابوالفضل باقری، کمال طبائیان، و کاوه نامور (1395). «نقش ظرفیت جذب در ارتقای دوسوتوانی نوآوری (اکتشافی و بهره‌بردارانه)»، فصلنامة علمی ـ پژوهشی توسعة فناوری، د 3، ش 4، ص 77 ـ 96.
  3. شوماخر، رندال ای. و ریچارد جی. لومکس (1388). مقدمه‌ای بر مدل‌سازی معادلة ساختاری، مترجم: وحید قاسمی، تهران، جامعه‌شناسان.
  4. مختارزاده، نیما و متین رشیدی‌آستانه (1395). «بررسی اثر معنابخشی فناورانه و توانمندی سازمانی بر عملکرد نوآورانه با تأکید بر نقش میانجی ظرفیت جذب»، فصلنامة علمی ـ پژوهشی توسعة فناوری، د 4، ش 1، ص 9 ـ 39.
  5. مرادی، محمود و کی‌خسرو یاکیده،  فاطمه مدنی (1394). «فرهنگ‌سازمانی دوسوتوان و عملکرد: نقش حیاتی دوسوتوانی سازمانی»، مدیریت فرهنگ‌سازمانی، د 13، ش 4، ص 1245 ـ 1266.
  6. وکیلی، یوسف و سلطان‌علی شهریاری (1395). «تبیین نقش اشتراک دانش بر دوسوتوانی سازمانی: نقش میانجی ظرفیت جذب شرکت (مورد مطالعه: شرکت‌های تولیددارو)»، فصلنامة علمی ـ پژوهشی توسعة کارآفرینی، د 9، ش 3، شماره پیاپی 33، ص 573 ـ 591.
    1. Adler, J. H. (1965). Absorptive Capacity: The Concept and its Determinants. Brookings Institution, Washington.
    2. Adler, P. & Brgan, B. (1996). TWD Types of Bureaucracy: Enabling and Coercive. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41 (1), pp. 61-89.
    3. Baron, R. M. & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of personality and social psychology, 51 (6), pp. 1173-1182.

10. Batt, G. (2002). A Resource–Based Perspective of Developing Organizational Capabilities for BusinessTransformation. Knowledge and Process Management, 7 (2), pp. 119-129.

11. Benner, M. J. & Tushman, M. L. (2003). Exploitation, exploration, and process management: The productivity dilemma revisited. The Academy of Management Review, 28 (2), pp. 238-256.

12. Bharati, P., Zhang, W., & Chaudhury, A. (2015). Better Knowledge with Social Media? Exploring the Roles of Social Capital and Organizational Knowledge Management. Journal of Knowledge Management, 19 (3), pp. 456-475.

13. Birkinshaw, J. & Gupta, K. (2013). Clarifying the distinctive contribution of ambidexterity to the field of organization studies. The Academy of Management Perspectives, 27 (4), pp. 287–298.

14. Bolivar- Ramos, M. T., García-Morales, V. J., & Garcia-Sanchez, E. (2012). Technological distinctive competencies and organizational learning: Effects on organizational innovation to improve firm performance. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 29 (3), pp. 331-357.

15. Camisón, C. & Forés, B. (2010). Knowledge absorptive capacity: New insights for its conceptualization and measurement. Journal of Business Research, 63 (7), pp. 707-715.

16. Chang, C. H., Chen, Y. S., & Lin, M. J. J. (2014). Determinants of absorptive capacity: contrasting manufacturing vs services enterprises. R & D Management, 44 (5), pp. 466-483.

17. Charles, H. (2002). International Business. New York: McGraw- Hill.

18. Cohen, W. M. & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly 35, pp. 128–152.

19. Cooper, V. A. & Molla, A. (2014). Absorptive Capacity and Contextual Factors that Influence Green IT Assimilation. Australasian Journal of Information Systems, 18 (3), pp. 271-288.

20. Datta, A. (2011). Review and extension on ambidexterity: A theoretical model integrating networks and absorptive capacity. Journal of Management and Strategy, 2 (1), pp. 1–22.

21. Dong, J. Q., McCarthy, K. J., & Schoenmakers, W. W. M. E. (2017). How central is too central? Organizing inter organizational collaboration networks for breakthrough innovation. J. Prod. Innov. Manag, (in press).

22. Dong, J. Q. & Yang, C. H. (2016). Being central is a double-edged sword: knowledge network centrality and new product development in U.S. pharmaceutical industry. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang, 113 (1B), pp. 379–385.

23. Dong, W., Zhongfeng, S., & Dongtao, Y. (2011). Organizational culture and knowledge creation capability. Journal of knowledge management, 15 (3), pp. 363-373.

24. Duncan, R. B. (1976). The ambidextrous organization: designing dual structures for innovation, in Killman, R. H., Pondy, L. R., Slevin, D., (Eds.). The Management of Organization, New York, North-Holland, pp. 167–188.

25. Flatten, T. C., Greve, G. I., & Brettel, M. (2011). Absorptive capacity and firm performance in SMEs: The mediating influence of strategic alliances. European Management Review, 8 (2), pp. 137–152.

26. Gibson, C. B. & Birkinshaw, J. (2004). The Antecedents, Consequences, and Mediating Role of Organizational Ambidexterity. Academy of Management Journal, 47 (2), pp. 209-226.

27. Gupta, A. K., Smith, K. G., & Shalley, C. E. (2006). The interplay between exploration and exploitation. The Academy of Management Journal Archive, 49 (4), pp. 693–706.

28. He, Z. L. & Wong, P. K. (2004). Exploration vs. exploitation: An empirical test of the  ambidexterity hypothesis. Organization science, 15 (4), pp. 481-494.

29. Jansen, J. J. P., Van den Bosch, F. A. J., & Volberda, H. W. (2005). Managing Potential and Realized Absorptive Capacity: How do Organizational Antecedents Matter?. Academy of Management Journal, 48 (6), pp. 999- 1015.

30. Jiménez-Barrionuevo, M. M., García-Morales, V. J., & Molina, L. M. (2011). Validation of an instrument to measure absorptive capacity. Technovation, 31 (5), pp. 190- 202.

31. Jing, F., Gayle, F., & Avery, C. (2008). Missing Links in Understanding the Relationship between Leadership and Organizational Performance. International Business & Economics Research Journal, 7 (5), pp. 65-78.

32. Klinger, N. (2016). Organizational Ambidexterity and Absorptive Capacity, Otago Management Graduate Review, 14, pp. 21-30.

33. Kyrgidou, L. P. & Petridou, E. (2011). The effect of competence exploration and competence exploitation on strategic entrepreneurship. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 23 (6), pp. 697-713.

34. Lane, P., Salk, J., & Lyles, A. (2001). IJV Learning and Performance. Strategic Management Journal, 22 (12), pp. 1139-1161.

35. Lau, A. K. W. & Lo, W. (2015). Regional innovation system, absorptive capacity and innovation, performance: An empirical study. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 92 (2), pp. 99–114.

36. Lavie, D., Stettner, U., & Tushman, M. L. (2010). Exploration and exploitation within and across organizations. The Academy of Management Annals, 4 (1), pp. 109–155.

37. Leal-Rodríguez, A. L., Ariza-Montes, A., Roldán, J. L., & Leal-Millán, A. (2014). Absorptive capacity, innovation and cultural barriers: a conditional mediation model. Journal of Business Research, 67, pp. 763–768.

38. Leal-Rodríguez, A. L., Leal-Millán, A., Roldán-Salgueiro, J. L., & Ortega-Gutiérrez, J. (2014). Knowledge management, relational learning and the effectiveness of innovation outcomes. Serv. Ind. J, 33, pp 1294–1311.

39. Leal-Rodríguez, A. L., Roldán, J. L., Leal, A. G., & Ortega-Gutierrez, J. (2013). Knowledgemanagement, relational learning, and the effectiveness of innovation outcomes. The Service Industries Journal, 33 (13), pp. 1294–1311.

40. Lee, V. H., Ooi, K. B., Chong, A. Y. L., & Seow, C. (2014). Creating Technological Innovation via Green Supply Chain Management: An Empirical Analysis, Expert Systemswith Applications, 41 (16), pp. 6983-6994.

41. Lei D, Hitt M., & Bettis R. (1996). Dynamic core competences through Meta – learning and strategic context. Journal of management. Vol. 22, pp. 433-455.

42. Levinthal, D. & March, J. (1993). The Myopia of Learning. Strategic Management Journal, 14 (52), 95-112.

43. Lin, H. -E. & McDonough, E. (2011). Investigating the role of leadership and organizational culture in fostering innovation ambidexterity. IEEE Trans-actions on Engineering Management, 58, pp. 497–509.

44. Lubatkin, H., simsek, Z., Ling, Y., & Veiga, F. (2006). Ambidexterity and Performance in SM Sized Firms: The Pivotal Role of Top Management Team Behavioral Integration. Journal of Management, 32 (5), pp. 646-672.

45. March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2 (1), pp. 71–87.

46. McGrath, R. G. (2001). Exploratory learning, innovative capacity and managerial oversight. Academy of Management Journal, 44 (1), pp. 118–131.

47. Murovec, N. & Prodan, I. (2009). Absorptive capacity, its determinants, and influence on innovation output: Cross-cultural validation of the structural model. Technovation, 29 (12), pp. 859-872.

48. O'Reilly, C. A. & Tushman, M. L. (2013). Organizational ambidexterity: Past, present, and future. Academy of Management Perspectives, 27 (4), pp. 324-338.

49. Patterson, M. G., West, M. A., Shackleton, V. J., Dawson, J. F., Lawthom, R., Maitlis, S., Robinson, D. L., & Wallace, A. M. (2005). Validating the organizational climate measure: links to managerial practices productivity and innovation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, pp. 379–408.

50. Preacher, K. & Hayes, A. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36 (4), pp. 717-731.

51. Raisch, S. & Birkinshaw, J. (2008). Organizational ambidexterity: Antecedents outcomes and moderators. Journal of Management, 34 (3), pp. 275–409.

52. Roskin, R. (1986). corporate culture revolution: the management development imperative. Journal of Managerial Psychology. 1 (2), pp. 3-9.

53. Savino, T., Messeni Petruzzelli, A. M., & Albino, V. (2017). Search and recombination process to innovate: a review of the empirical evidence and a research agenda. Int. J. Manag. Rev, 19 (1), pp. 54–75.

54. Schein, E. H. (1990). Organizational culture. American Psychologist, 45, 109–119.

55. Schulze, P., Heinemann, F., & Abedin, A. (2008). Balancing exploitation and exploration: Organizational antecedents and performance effects of ambidexterity. Best Paper Proceedings of the Academy of Management. 23 (3), pp. 123-136.

56. Senge, P. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. New York. Doubleday.

57. Simsek, Z., Heavey, C., Veiga, J. F., & Souder, D. (2009). A typology for aligning organizational ambidexterity's conceptualizations, antecedents, and outcomes. Journal of Management Studies, 46 (5), pp. 864-894.

58. Sinkula, J. M., Baker, W. E., & Noordewier, T. (1997). A framework for market-based organizational learning: linking values, knowledge, and behavior. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 25, pp. 305–318.

59. Sollberger, B. A. (2006). Wissenskultur: Erfolgsfaktor für ein ganzheitliches Wissensmanagement. Journal of Research in Human Resource Management, 21 (4), pp. 408-411.

60. Spithoven, A., Clarysse, B., & Knockaert, M. (2011). Building absorptive capacity to organize inbound openinnovation in traditional industries. Technovation, 31, pp. 10–21.

61. Tsai, W. (2001). Knowledge transfer in intraorganisational networks: Effects of network position and absorptive capacity on business-unit innovation and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 44 (5), pp. 996–1004.

62. Van den Bosch, F. A., Volberda, H. W., & de Boer, M. (1999). Coevolution of Firm Absorptive Capacity and Knowledge Environment: Organizational Forms and Combinative Capabilities. Organization Science, pp. 551-568.

63. Wang, C. L. & Rafiq, M. (2014). Ambidextrous Organizational Culture, Contextual Ambidexterity and New Product Innovation: A Comparative Study of UK and Chinese High‐tech Firms. British Journal of management, 25 (1), pp. 58-76.

64. Young Lee, J., Kim, J., & Jeung, W. (2016). How Ambidextrous Organizational Culture Affects Job Performance. Academy Of Management Proceedings, 13 (2), pp. 23-39.

65. Zahra, S. A. & George, G. (2002). Absorptive capacity: A review, reconceptualization and extension. Academy of Management Review, 27 (2), pp. 185–203.

Organizational Culture Management
Volume 16, Issue 4
January 2019
Pages 871-898

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics