Ambidexterity and performance in small-to medium-sized firms: The pivotal role of top management team behavioral integration

Journal of Management

Volumn 32, Issue 5, 2006, Pages 646-672

  Lubatkin, Michael H ^a   Simsek, Zeki ^a   Ling, Yan ^b   Veiga, John F ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT   (United States)

^b GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Ambidexterity; Behavioral integration; Exploratory and exploitative orientation; Top management teams

Indexed keywords

EID: 33748446056     PISSN: 01492063     EISSN: 15571211     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0149206306290712     Document Type: Article

References (84)

1. Abernathy, W. J. 1978. The productivity dilemma. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
2. Adler, P. S., Goldoftas, B., & Levine, D. 1999. Flexibility versus efficiency? A case study of model changeovers in the Toyota production system. Organization Science, 10: 43-68.
3. Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. 1988. Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103: 411-423.
4. Barnett, W. P., & Freeman, J. 2001. Too much of a good thing? Product proliferation and organizational failure. Organization Science, 12: 539
5. Barney, J. B. 1991. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17: 99-120.
6. Benner, M. J., & Tushman, M. L. 2003. Exploration, exploitation, and process management: The productivity dilemma revisited. Academy of Management Review, 28: 238-256.
7. Bollen, K. A. 1989. Structural equations with latent variables. New York: John Wiley.
8. Brown, S. L., & Eisenhardt, K. M. 1997. The art of continuous change: Linking complexity theory and time-paced evolution in relentless shifting organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42: 1-34.
9. Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. 1993. Alternative ways of addressing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation, models: 136-162. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
10. Burgelman, R. A. 1991. Intraorganizational ecology of strategy making and organizational adaptation: Theory and field research. Organizational Science, 2: 239-262.
11. Busenitz, L. W., & Barney, J. B. 1997. Differences between entrepreneurs and managers in large organizations: Biases and heuristics in strategic decision-making. Journal of Business Venturing, 12: 9-30.
12. Carmeli, A., & Schaubroeck, J. in press. Top management team behavioral integration, decision quality, and organizational decline. Leadership Quarterly.
13. Chattopadhyay, P., Glick, W., & Huber, G. P. 2001. Organizational actions in response to threats and opportunities. Academy of Management Review, 44: 937-956.
14. Chua, J. H., Chrisman, J. J., & Sharma, P. 1999. Defining the family business by behavior. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 23: 19-39.
15. Coleman, J. S. 1990. Rational action, social networks, and the emergence of norms. In C. Calhoun, M. W. Meyer, & W. R. Scott (Eds.), Structures of power and constraint: 91-112. New York: Cambridge University Press.
16. Covin, J. G., Prescott, J. E., & Slevin, D. P. 1990. The effects of technological sophistication on strategic profiles, structure and firm performance. Journal of Management Studies, 27: 485-510.
17. Dess, G. G., & Robinson, R. B. 1984. Measuring organization performance in the absence of objective measures: The case of the privately-held firm and the conglomerate business unit. Strategic Management Journal, 5: 265-273.
18. Dutton, J. E., & Jackson, S. E. 1987. Categorizing strategic issues: Links to organizational action. Academy of Management Review, 12: 76-90.
19. Edwards, J. R. 1993. Problems with the use of profile similarity indices in the study of congruence in organizational research. Personnel Psychology, 46: 641-665.
20. Edwards, J. R. 1994. The study of congruence in organizational behavior research: Critique and a proposed alternative. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 58: 51-100.
21. Edwards, J. R., & Parry, M. E. 1993. On the use of polynomial regression equations as an alternative to differences scores in organizational research. Academy of Management Journal, 36: 1577-1613.
22. Eisenhardt, K. 1989. Agency theory: An assessment and review. Academy of Management Review, 14: 57-74.
23. Eisenhardt, K. M., & Martin, J. A. 2000. Dynamic capabilities: What are they ? Strategic Management Journal, 21: 1105-1121.
24. Eisenhardt, K. M., & Schoonhoven, C. B. 1990. Organizational growth: Linking founding team, strategy, environment, and growth among U.S. semiconductor ventures, 1978-1988. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35: 504-529.
25. Floyd, S., & Lane, P. 2000. Strategizing throughout the organization: Managing role conflict in strategic renewal. Academy of Management Review, 25: 154-177.
26. Geletkanycz, M. A. 1998. The salience of "culture's consequences": The effect of cultural values on top executive commitment to the status quo. Strategic Management Journal, 18: 615-634.
27. George, J. M., & Bettenhausen, K. 1990. Understanding prosaic behavior, sales performance, and turnover: A group-level analysis in a service context. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75: 698-709.
28. Ghemawat, P., & Costa, J. 1993. The organizational tension between static and dynamic efficiency. Strategic Management Journal, 14: 59-73.
29. Gibson, C., & Birkinshaw, J. 2004. The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. Academy of Management Journal, 47: 209-226.
30. Granovetter, M. 1985. Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91: 481-510.
31. Gupta, A. K., & Govindarajan, V. 1986. Resource sharing among SBUs: Strategic antecedents and administrative implications. Academy of Management Journal, 29: 695-714.
32. Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. 1995. Multivariate data analysis with readings. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
33. Hambrick, D. C. 1994. Top management groups: A conceptual integration and reconsideration of the team label. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior, 16: 171-214. Greenwich, CT: JAI.
34. Hambrick, D. C. 1995. Fragmentation and the other problems CEOs have with their top management teams. California Management Review, 37: 110-128.
35. Hambrick, D. C. 1998. Corporate coherence and the top management team. In D. C. Hambrick, D. A. Nadler, & M. L. Tushman (Eds.), Navigating change: How CEOs, top teams, and boards steer transformation: 123-140. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
36. Hambrick, D. C., & Finkelstein, S. 1987. Managerial discretion: A bridge between two polar views on organizations. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior, 9: 369-406. Greenwich, CT: JAI.
37. Hambrick, D. C., Li, J., Xin, K., & Tsui, A. S. 2001. Compositional gaps and downward spirals in international joint venture management. Strategic Management Journal, 22: 1033-1053.
38. Hambrick, D. C., & Mason, P. A. 1984. Upper echelon: The organization as a reflection of its top managers. Academy of Management Review, 9: 193-206.
39. Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. 1989. Organizational ecology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
40. Harry, M. J., & Schroeder, R. 2000. Six sigma: The breakthrough management strategy revolutionizing the world's top corporations. New York: Currency.
41. Hartigan, J. A., & Wong, M. A. 1979. A K-means clustering algorithm. Applied Statistics, 28: 100-108.
42. He, Z., & Wong, P.-K. 2004. Exploration and exploitation: An empirical test of the ambidextrous hypothesis. Organization Science, 15: 481-496.
43. Henderson, R. M., & Clark, K. B. 1990. Architectural innovation: The reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35: 9-30.
44. Hoyle, R. H., & Panter, A. T. 1995. Writing about structural equation models. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues and applications: 158-176. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
45. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. 1999. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6: 1-55.
46. wg: An assessment of within-group inter-rater agreement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78: 306-339.
47. Janis, I. 1972. Victims of groupthink. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
48. Jöreskog, K. G. 1993. Testing structural equation models. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models: 294-316. New York: Wiley.
49. Kline, R. B. 1998. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: Guildford.
50. Knight, D., Pearce, C. L., Smith, K. G., Olian, J. D., Sims H. P., Smith, K. A., et al. 1999. Top management team diversity, group process, and strategic consensus. Strategic Management Journal, 20: 445-458.
51. Levinthal, D. A., & March, J. G. 1993. The myopia of learning. Strategic Management Journal, 14: 95-112.
52. Li, H., & Zhang, Y. 2002. Founding team comprehension and behavioral integration: Evidence from new technology ventures in China. In D. Nagao (Ed.), Academy of Management Best Paper Proceedings: 1-6. New York: Briarcliff Manor.
53. March, J. G. 1991. Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2: 71-87.
54. Medsker, G. J., Williams, L. J., & Holahan, P. J. 1994. A review of current practices for evaluating causal models in organizational behavior and human resources management research. Journal of Management, 20: 439-464.
55. Nohria, N., & Gulati, R. 1996. Is slack good or bad for innovation? Academy of Management Journal, 39: 1245-1264.
56. Nonaka, L. 1994. A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization Science, 5: 714-737.
57. O'Reilly, C. A., III., Snyder, R. C., & Boothe, J. N. 1993. Executive team demography and organizational change. In G. P. Huber & W. H. Glick (Eds.), Organizational change and redesign: Ideas and insights for improving performance: 147-175. New York: Oxford University Press.
58. O'Reilly, C. A., III., & Tushman, M. L. 2004. The ambidextrous organization. Harvard Business Review, 82(4): 74-81.
59. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J., & Podsakoff, N. P. 2003. Common method bias in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88: 879-903.
60. Porter, M. E. 1985. Competitive advantage. New York: Free Press.
61. Robinson, R. B., & Pearce, J. A. 1988. Planned patterns of strategic behavior and their relationship to business-unit performance. Strategic Management Journal, 9: 43-60.
62. Romanelli, E. 1987. New venture strategies in the minicomputer industry. California Management Review, 30: 160-175.
63. Shaw, M. E. 1981. Group dynamics: The psychology of small group behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill.
64. Shook, C. L., Ketchen, D. J., Hult, G. T. M., & Kacmar, K. M. 2004. An assessment of the use of structural equation modeling in strategic management research. Strategic Management Journal, 25: 397-404.
65. Siegel, P. A., & Hambrick, D. 1996. Business strategy and the social psychology of top management teams. In J. A. C. Baum & J. E. Dutton (Eds.), Advances in strategic management, 13: 91-119. Greenwich, CT: JAI.
66. Simons, T., Pelled, L. H., & Smith, K. A. 1999. Making use of difference: Diversity, debate, and decision comprehensiveness in top management teams. Academy of Management Journal, 42: 662-675.
67. Simsek, Z., Veiga, J. F., Lubatkin, M., & Dino, R. 2005. Modeling the multilevel determinants of top management team behavioral integration, Academy of Management Journal, 48: 69-84.
68. Small Business Association. 2003. Administrative economic plan (Release 03-02). Washington, DC: Author.
69. Smith, K. G., Collins, C. J., & Clark, K. D. 2005. Existing knowledge, knowledge creation capability and the rate of new product introduction in high technology firms. Academy of Management Journal, 48: 346-357.
70. Smith, K. G., Smith, K. A., Olian, J. D., Sims, H. P., O'Bannon, D. P., & Scully, J. A. 1994. Top management team demography and process: The role of social integration and communication. Administrative Sciences Quarterly, 39: 412-438.
71. Smith, W., & Tushman, M. 2005. Managing strategic contradictions: A top management model for managing innovation streams. Organization Science, 16: 522-536.
72. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. 1996. Using multivariate statistics. New York: HarperCollins.
73. Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. 1997. Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18: 509-533.
74. Tushman, M. L., & Nadler, D. A. 1978. Information processing as an integrating concept in organizational design. Academy of Management Review, 3: 613-624.
75. Tushman, M. L., & O'Reilly, C. A., III. 1996. Ambidextrous organizations: Managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. California Management Review, 38: 8-30.
76. Tushman, M. L., & O'Reilly, C. A., III. 1997. Winning through innovation. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
77. Tushman, M., & Romanelli, E. 1985. Organizational evolution: A metamorphosis model of convergence and reorientation. In L. L. Cummings & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior, 7: 171 - 222. Greenwich, CT: JAI.
78. Uzzi, B. 1997. Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42: 35-67.
79. Waldman, D. A., Ramirez, G. G., House, R. J., & Puranam, P. 2001. Does leadership matter? CEO leadership attributes and profitability under conditions of perceived environmental uncertainty. Academy of Management Journal, 44: 134-143.
80. Weick, K. E. 1982. Management of organizational change among loosely coupled elements. In P. S. Goodman (Ed.), Change in organizations: 375-408. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
81. Weick, K. E. 1995. Sensemaking in organizations. London: Sage.
82. Winer, B. J. 1971. Statistical principles in experimental design. New York: McGraw-Hill.
83. Wooldridge, B., & Floyd, S. W. 1989. Strategic process effects on consensus. Strategic Management Journal, 10: 295-302.
84. Zahra, S. A., Ireland, R. D., & Hitt, M. A. 2000. International expansion by new venture firms: International diversity, mode of entry, technological learning, and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 43: 925-950.