Ambidexterity in projects: An intellectual capital perspective

International Journal of Project Management

Volumn 33, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 177-188

  Turner, Neil ^a   Maylor, Harvey ^b   Swart, Juani ^c  

^a CRANFIELD UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF BATH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Ambidexterity; Exploitation; Exploration; Intellectual capital; Projects

Indexed keywords

MANAGERS; NATURAL RESOURCES EXPLORATION;

AMBIDEXTERITY; EXPLOITATION; INTELLECTUAL CAPITAL; MANAGING PROJECTS; MULTIPLE ELEMENTS; PROJECTS; QUALITATIVE STUDY; TECHNOLOGY PROJECTS;

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT;

HUMAN CAPITAL; PROJECT MANAGEMENT; SOCIAL CAPITAL;

EID: 84912151055     PISSN: 02637863     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2014.05.002     Document Type: Article

References (85)

1. Achrol R.S. Evolution of the marketing organization: new forms for turbulent environments. J. Mark. 1991, 55(4):77-93.
2. Adler P., Benner M., Brunner D., MacDuffie J., Osono E., Staats B., Takeuchi H., Tushman M., Winter S.G. Perspectives on the productivity dilemma. J. Oper. Manag. 2009, 27(2):99-113.
3. Ahn J., Lee D., Lee S. Balancing business performance and knowledge performance of new product development: lessons from ITS industry. Long Range Plan. 2006, 39(5):525-542.
4. Aubry M., Lièvre P. Ambidexterity as a competence of project leaders: a case study from two polar expeditions. Proj. Manag. J. 2010, 41(3):32-44.
5. Association for Project Management., 2012. 'APM Body of Knowledge, 6th Edition'. APM, Princes Risborough, UK.
6. Benner M.J., Tushman M.L. Exploitation, exploration, and process management: the productivity dilemma revisited. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2003, 28(2):238-256.
7. Bennis W.G., O'Toole J. How business schools lost their way. Harv. Bus. Rev. 2005, 83(5):96-104.
8. Bhat J. Technological ambidexterity in the management of national infrastructure programmes. J. Asian Public Policy 2011, 4(3):350-356.
9. Birkinshaw J., Gupta K. Clarifying the distinctive contribution of ambidexterity to the field of organization studies. Acad. Manag. Perspect. 2013, 27(4):287-298.
10. Bontis N. Intellectual capital: an exploratory study that develops measures and models. Manag. Decis. 1998, 36(2):63-76.
11. Brown S.L., Eisenhardt K.M. The art of continuous change: linking complexity theory and time-paced evolution in relentlessly shifting organizations. Adm. Sci. Q. 1997, 42(1):1-34.
12. Burns T., Stalker G. The Management of Innovation 1961, Tavistock, London.
13. Burt R. Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition 1992, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
14. Cao Q., Gedajlovic E., Zhang H. Unpacking organizational ambidexterity: dimensions, contingencies, and synergistic effects. Organ. Sci. 2009, 20(4):781-796.
15. Chandrasekaran A., Linderman K., Schroeder R. Antecedents to ambidexterity competency in high technology organizations. J. Oper. Manag. 2012, 30(1):134-151.
16. Daft R.L., Weick K.E. Toward a model of organizations as interpretation systems. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1984, 9(2):284-295.
17. Davies A., Hobday M. The Business of Projects 2005, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
18. Du W., Pan S.L., Zuo M. How to balance sustainability and profitability in technology organizations: an ambidextrous perspective. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag. 2013, 60(2):366-385.
19. Eisenhardt K.M. Building theories from case study research. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1989, 14(4):532-550.
20. Engwall M. No project is an island: linking projects to history and context. Res. Policy 2003, 32(5):789-808.
21. Eriksson P.E. Exploration and exploitation in project-based organizations: development and diffusion of knowledge at different organizational levels in construction companies. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2013, 31(3):333-341.
22. Farjoun M. Beyond dualism: stability and change as a duality. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2010, 35(2):202-225.
23. Geraldi J., Maylor H., Williams T. Now let's make it really complex (complicated): a systematic review of the complexities of projects. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 2011, 31(9):966-990.
24. Geraldi J.G., Kutsch E., Turner N. Towards a conceptualisation of quality in information technology projects. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2011, 29(5):557-567.
25. Gibson C.B., Birkinshaw J. The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. Acad. Manag. J. 2004, 47(2):209-226.
26. Grabher G. Temporary architectures of learning: knowledge governance in project ecologies. Organ. Stud. 2004, 25(9):1491-1514.
27. Graetz F., Smith A. Organizing forms in change management: the role of structures, processes and boundaries in a longitudinal case analysis. J. Chang. Manag. 2005, 5(3):311-328.
28. Granovetter M. The strength of weak ties. Am. J. Sociol. 1973, 78:1360-1380.
29. Grant R.M. Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strateg. Manag. J. 1996, 17:109-122.
30. Grover V., Purvis R.L., Segars A.H. Exploring ambidextrous innovation tendencies in the adoption of telecommunications technologies. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag. 2007, 54(2):268-285.
31. Gupta A.K., Smith K.G., Shalley C.E. The interplay between exploration and exploitation. Acad. Manag. J. 2006, 49(4):693-706.
32. Hansen M.T., von Oetinger B. Introducing T-shaped managers. Harv. Bus. Rev. 2001, 79(3):106-116.
33. He Z., Wong P. Exploration vs. exploitation: an empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis. Organ. Sci. 2004, 15(4):481-494.
34. Hedberg B. How organisations learn and unlearn. Handbook of Organisational Design 1981, 3. Cambridge University Press, London. P.C. Nystrom, W.H. Starbuck (Eds.).
35. Hsu L., Wang C. Clarifying the effect of intellectual capital on performance: the mediating role of dynamic capability. Br. J. Manag. 2012, 23(2):179-205.
36. Im G., Rai A. Knowledge sharing ambidexterity in long-term inter-organizational relationship. Manag. Sci. 2008, 54(7):1281-1296.
37. Jansen J.J.P., Van D.B., Volberda H.W. Exploratory innovation, exploitative innovation, and performance: effects of organizational antecedents and environmental moderator. Manag. Sci. 2006, 52(11):1661-1674.
38. Junni P., Sarala R.M., Taras V., Tarba S.Y. Organizational ambidexterity and performance: a meta-analysis. Acad. Manag. Perspect. 2013, 27(4):299-312.
39. Kale D. The distinctive patterns of dynamic learning and inter-firm differences in the Indian pharmaceutical industry. Br. J. Manag. 2010, 21(1):223-238.
40. Kang S., Snell S.A. Intellectual capital architectures and ambidextrous learning: a framework for human resource management. J. Manag. Stud. 2009, 46(1):65-92.
41. Kang S., Morris S.S., Snell S.A. Relational archetypes, organizational learning, and value creation: extending the human resource architecture. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2007, 32(1):236-256.
42. Ketkar S., Sett P.K. HR flexibility and firm performance: analysis of a multi-level causal model. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2009, 20(5):1009-1038.
43. King N. Using templates in the thematic analysis of text. Essential Guide to Qualitative Methods in Organizational Research 2004, 256-270. Sage, London. C. Cassell, G. Symon (Eds.).
44. Kristal M.M., Huang X., Roth A.V. The effect of an ambidextrous supply chain strategy on combinative competitive capabilities and business performance. J. Oper. Manag. 2010, 28(5):415-429.
45. Leybourne S.A., Sainter P. Advancing project management: authenticating the shift from process to 'nuanced' project-based management in the ambidextrous organization. Proj. Manag. J. 2012, 43(6):5-15.
46. Li C., Lin C., Chu C. The nature of market orientation and the ambidexterity of innovations. Manag. Decis. 2008, 46(7):1002-1026.
47. Lin H., McDonough E.F. Investigating the role of leadership and organizational culture in fostering innovation ambidexterity. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag. 2011, 58(3):497-509.
48. Lin Z., Yang H., Demirkan I. The performance consequences of ambidexterity in strategic alliance formations: empirical investigation and computational theorizing. Manag. Sci. 2007, 53(10):1645-1658.
49. Liu L., Leitner D. Simultaneous pursuit of innovation and efficiency in complex engineering projects: a study of the antecedents and impacts of ambidexterity in project teams. Proj. Manag. J. 2012, 43(6):97-110.
50. Liu L., Wang X., Sheng Z. Achieving ambidexterity in large, complex engineering projects: a case study of the Sutong Bridge project. Proc. 16th International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management 2012, 1931-1936.
51. Lubatkin M.H., Simsek Z., Ling Y., Veiga J.F. Ambidexterity and performance in small- to medium-sized firms: the pivotal role of top management team behavioral integration. J. Manag. 2006, 32(5):646-672.
52. Lundin R.A., Söderholm A. A theory of the temporary organization. Scand. J. Manag. 1995, 11(4):437-455.
53. March J.G. Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organ. Sci. 1991, 2(1):71-87.
54. Marlow S., Taylor S., Thompson A. Informality and formality in medium-sized companies: contestation and synchronization. Br. J. Manag. 2010, 21(4):954-966.
55. Maylor H., Brady T., Cooke-Davies T., Hodgson D. From projectification to programmification. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2006, 24(8):663-674.
56. Maylor H., Turner N., Murray-Webster R. How hard can it be? Actively managing complexity in technology projects. Res. Technol. Manag. 2013, 56(4):45-51.
57. McCarthy I.P., Gordon B.R. Achieving contextual ambidexterity in R&D organizations: a management control system approach. R&D Manag. 2011, 41(3):240-258.
58. McDermott C.M., Prajogo D.I. Service innovation and performance in SMEs. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 2012, 32(2):216-237.
59. Mom T.J.M., Van den Bosch F., Volberda H.W. Investigating managers' exploration and exploitation activities: the influence of top-down, bottom-up, and horizontal knowledge inflows. J. Manag. Stud. 2007, 44(6):910-931.
60. Mom T.J.M., Van den Bosch F., Volberda H.W. Understanding variation in managers' ambidexterity: investigating direct and interaction effects of formal structural and personal coordination mechanisms. Organ. Sci. 2009, 20(4):812-828.
61. Morgan R.E., Berthon P. Market orientation, generative learning, innovation strategy and business performance inter-relationships in bioscience firms. J. Manag. Stud. 2008, 45(8):1329-1353.
62. Nahapiet J., Ghoshal S. Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1998, 23(2):242-266.
63. Napier N.P., Mathiassen L., Robey D. Building contextual ambidexterity in a software company to improve firm-level coordination. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 2011, 20(6):674-690.
64. Reilly C.A., Tushman M.L. Organizational ambidexterity: past, present, and future. Acad. Manag. Perspect. 2013, 27(4):324-338.
65. O'Reilly C.A., Tushman M.L. The ambidextrous organization. Harv. Bus. Rev. 2004, 82(4):74-81.
66. O'Reilly C.A., Tushman M.L. Organizational ambidexterity in action: how managers explore and exploit. Calif. Manag. Rev. 2011, 53(4):5-22.
67. Patel P.C., Terjesen S., Li D. Enhancing effects of manufacturing flexibility through operational absorptive capacity and operational ambidexterity. J. Oper. Manag. 2012, 30(3):201-220.
68. Pavlou P.A., El Sawy O.A. The "third hand": IT-enabled competitive advantage in turbulence through improvisational capabilities. Inf. Syst. Res. 2010, 21(3):443-471.
69. Raisch S., Birkinshaw J., Probst G., Tushman M.L. Organizational ambidexterity: balancing exploitation and exploration for sustained performance. Organ. Sci. 2009, 20(4):685-695.
70. Reagans R., McEvily B. Network structure and knowledge transfer: the effects of cohesion and range. Adm. Sci. Q. 2003, 48(2):240-267.
71. Reed K.K., Lubatkin M., Srinivasan N. Proposing and testing an intellectual capital-based view of the firm. J. Manag. Stud. 2006, 43(4):867-893.
72. Riccaboni M., Moliterni R. Managing technological transitions through R&D alliances. R&D Manag. 2009, 39(2):124-135.
73. Sarkees M., Hulland J. Innovation and efficiency: it is possible to have it all. Bus. Horiz. 2009, 52(1):45-55.
74. Simsek Z. Organizational ambidexterity: towards a multilevel understanding. J. Manag. Stud. 2009, 46(4):597-624.
75. Simsek Z., Heavey C., Veiga J.F., Souder D. A typology for aligning organizational ambidexterity's conceptualizations, antecedents, and outcomes. J. Manag. Stud. 2009, 46(5):864-894.
76. Subramaniam M., Youndt M.A. The influence of intellectual capital on the types of innovative capabilities. Acad. Manag. J. 2005, 48(3):450-463.
77. Swart J. Intellectual capital: disentangling an enigmatic concept. J. Intellect. Cap. 2006, 7(2):136-159.
78. Tarafdar M., Gordon S.R. Understanding the influence of information systems competencies on process innovation: a resource-based view. J. Strateg. Inf. Syst. 2007, 16(4):353-392.
79. The Standish Group Chaos Summary Report 2009: The 10 Laws of CHAOS 2009, The Standish Group International, Boston, MA, (http://www.slideshare.net/AccelerateManagement/chaos-summary-2009-the-standish-group).
80. Tiwana A. Do bridging ties complement strong ties? An empirical examination of alliance ambidexterity. Strateg. Manag. J. 2008, 29(3):251-272.
81. Turner N., Swart J., Maylor H. Mechanisms for managing ambidexterity: a review and research agenda. Int. J. Manag. Rev. 2013, 15(3):317-332.
82. Tushman M.L., O'Reilly C.A. Ambidextrous organizations: managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. Calif. Manag. Rev. 1996, 38(4):8-30.
83. Winter M., Andersen E.S., Elvin R., Levene R. Focusing on business projects as an area for future research: an exploratory discussion of four different perspectives. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2006, 24(8):699-709.
84. Yin R. Case Study Research, Design and Methods 2009, Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage. 4th Edition.
85. Youndt M.A., Subramaniam M., Snell S.A. Intellectual capital profiles: an examination of investments and returns. J. Manag. Stud. 2004, 41(2):335-361.