In search of the effects of business and political ties on innovation ambidexterity

International Journal of Innovation Management

Volumn 21, Issue 2, 2017, Pages

  Zhang, Jing A ^a   Cui, Xiling ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OTAGO   (New Zealand)

^b HONG KONG SHUE YAN UNIVERSITY   (Hong Kong)

Author keywords

Business ties; innovation ambidexterity; political ties

Indexed keywords

EID: 84982948401     PISSN: 13639196     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1142/S1363919617500190     Document Type: Article

References (90)

1. Acquaah, M (2012). Social networking relationships, firm-specific managerial experience and firm performance in a transition economy: A comparative analysis of family owned and nonfamily firms. Strategic Management Journal, 33(10), 1215-1228.
2. Aiken, LS and SG West (1991). Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
3. Almahendra, R and B Ambos (2015). Exploration and exploitation: A 20-year review of evolution and reconceptualization. International Journal of Innovation Management, 19(1), 1-31.
4. Andriopoulos, C and MW Lewis (2009). Exploitation-exploration tensions and organizational ambidexterity: Managing paradoxes of innovation. Organization Science, 20(4), 696-717.
5. Ang, SH (2008). Competitive intensity and collaboration: Impact on firm growth across technological environments. Strategic Management Journal, 29(10), 1057-1075.
6. Armstrong, JS and TS Overton (1977). Estimating nonresponse bias in mail surveys. Journal of Marketing Research, 14(3), 396-402.
7. Atuahene-Gima, K (2005). Resolving the capability-rigidity paradox in new product innovation. Journal of Marketing, 69(4), 61-83.
8. Bodwell, W and TJ Chermack (2010). Organizational ambidexterity: Integrating deliberate and emergent strategy with scenario planning. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 77(2), 193-202.
9. Boubakri, N, O Guedhami, D Mishra and W Saffar (2012). Political connections and the cost of equity capital. Journal of Corporate Finance, 18(3), 541-559.
10. Boumgarden, P, J Nickerson and TR Zenger (2012). Sailing into the wind: Exploring the relationships among ambidexterity, vacillation, and organizational performance. Strategic Management Journal, 33(6), 587-610.
11. Brion, S, C Mothe and M Sabatier (2010). The impact of organizational context and competences on innovation ambidexterity. International Journal of Innovation Management 14(2) 151-178
12. Cantner, U, A Meder and ALJ ter Wal (2010). Innovator networks and regional knowledge base. Technovation, 30(9), 496-507.
13. Cao, Q, E Gedajlovic and H Zhang (2009). Unpacking organizational ambidexterity: Dimensions, contingencies, and synergistic effects. Organization Science, 20(4), 781-796.
14. Chang, YY and M Hughes (2012). Drivers of innovation ambidexterity in small-to medium-sized firms. European Management Journal, 30(1), 1-17.
15. Chen, M-H, Y-Y Chang and C-Y Lee (2015). Creative entrepreneurs' guanxi networks and success: Information and resource. Journal of Business Research, 68, 900-905.
16. Chen, X and J Wu (2011). Do different guanxi types affect capability building differently? A contingency view. Industrial Marketing Management, 40(4), 581-592.
17. Child, J (1994). Management in China During the Age of Reform. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
18. Chizema, A, X Liu, J Lu and L Gao (2015). Politically connected boards and top executive pay in Chinese listed firms. Strategic Management Journal, 36, 890-906.
19. Chung, HFL, Z Yang and P-H Huang (2015). How does organizational learning matter in strategic business performance? The contingency role of guanxi networking. Journal of Business Research, 68: 1216-1224.
20. Cohen, J. (1978). Partial products are interactions; partial powers are curve components. Psychology Bulletin, 85(4), 858-866.
21. Cruz-Conzález, J, P López-Sáez, JE Navas-López and M Delgado-Verde (2015). Open search strategies and firm performance: The different moderating role of technological environmental dynamism. Technovation, 35, 32-45.
22. Cuevas-Rodriguez, G, C Cabello-Medina and A Carmona-Lavado (2014). Internal and external social capital for radical product innovation: Do they always work well together? British Journal of Management, 25(2), 266-284.
23. Dalal, DK and MJ Zickar (2012). Some common myths about centering predictor variables in moderated multiple regression and polynomial regression. Organizational Research Methods, 15(3), 339-362.
24. Dillman, DA (1978). Mail and Telephone Surveys: The Total Design Method. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
25. Fomell, C and DF Larcker (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 39-50.
26. Galunic, DC and S Rodan (1998). Resource recombinations in the firm: Knowledge structures and the potential for Schumpeterian innovation. Strategic Management Journal, 19(12), 1193-1201.
27. Gerbing, DW and JC Anderson (1988). An updated paradigm for scale development incorporating unidimensionality and its assessment. Journal of Marketing Research, 25(2), 186-192.
28. Gibson, CB and J Birkinshaw (2004). The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. Academy of Management, 47(2), 209-226.
29. Granovetter, M (1985). Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 481-510.
30. Guan, J and N Liu (2016). Exploitative and exploratory innovations in knowledge network and collaboration network: A patent analysis in the technological field of nanoenergy. Research Policy, 45, 97-112.
31. Gupta, AK, KG Smith and CE Shalley (2006). The interplay between exploration and exploitation. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4), 693-706.
32. He, Z-L, and P-K Wong (2004). Exploration vs. exploitation: An empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis. Organization Science, 15(4), 481-494.
33. Heavey, C, Z Simsek and BC Fox (2015). Managerial social networks and ambidexterity of SMEs: The moderating role of a proactive commitment to innovation. Human Resource Management, 54(1), S201-S221.
34. Hernández-Espallardo, M, M Sánchez-Pérez and C Segovia-López (2011). Exploitationand exploration-based innovations: The role of knowledge in inter-firm relationships with distributors. Technovation, 31(5-6), 203-215.
35. Hillman, AJ and MA Hitt (1999). Corporate political strategy formulation: A model of approach, participation, and strategy decisions. Academy of Management Review, 24(4), 825-842.
36. Hillman, AJ, A Zardkoohi and L Bierman (1999). Corporate political strategies and firm performance: Indications of firm-specific benefits from personal service in the U.S Government. Strategic Management Journal, 20(1) 67-81.
37. Hughes, M, SL Martin, RE Morgan and MJ Robson (2010). Realizing product-market advantage in high-technology international new ventures: The mediating role of ambidextrous innovation. Journal of International Marketing, 18(4), 1-21.
38. Jansen, JJP, Z Simsek and Q Cao (2012). Ambidexterity and performance in multiunit contexts: Cross-level moderating effects of structural and resource attributes. Strategic Management Journal, 33(11), 1286-1303.
39. Jansen, JJP, MP Tempelaar and FA Van den Bosch (2009). Structural differentiation and ambidexterity: The mediating role of integration mechanisms. Organization Science, 20(4), 797-811.
40. Kim, Y and SS Liu (2015). The impact of external network and business group on innovation: Do the types of innovation matter? Journal of Business Research, 68, 1964-1973.
41. Knoke, D (1999). Organizational networks and corporate social capital. In Corporate Social Capital and Liability, SM Gabbay (ed.), pp. 17-42. Boston: Kluwer Academic Press.
42. Kortmann, S (2015). The mediating role of strategic orientations on the relationship between ambidexterity-oriented decisions and innovative ambidexterity. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 32(5), 666-684.
43. Kotabe, M, CX Jiang and JY Murray (2011). Managerial ties, knowledge acquisition, realized absorptive capacity and new product market performance of emerging multinational companies: A case of China. Journal of World Business, 46(2), 166-176.
44. Lee, C, K Lee and JM Pennings (2001). Internal capabilities, external networks, and performance: A study on technology-based ventures. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6-7), 615-640.
45. Leenders, MAAM and B Wierenga (2008). The effect of the marketing-R&D interface on new product performance: The critical role of resources and scope. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 25(1), 56-68.
46. Li, H and Y Zhang (2007). The role of managers' political networking and functional experience in new venture performance: Evidence from China's transition economy. Strategic Management Journal, 28(8), 791-804.
47. Lindell, MK and DJ Whitney (2001). Accounting for common method variance in crosssectional research design. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(1), 114-121.
48. Lisboa, A, D Skarmeas and C Lages (2011). Entrepreneurial orientation, exploitative and explorative capabilities, and performance outcomes in export markets: A resourcebased approach. Industrial Marketing Management, 40(8), 1274-1284.
49. Lubatkin, MH, Z Simsek, Y Ling and JF Veiga (2006). Ambidexterity and performance in small-to medium-sized firms: The pivotal role of top management team behavioral integration. Journal of Management, 32(5), 646-672.
50. Mahmood, IP, H Zhu and EJ Zajac (2011). Where can capabilities come from? Network ties and capability acquisition in business groups. Strategic Management Journal, 32 (8), 820-848.
51. Maholtra, NK, SS Kim and A Patil (2006). Common method variance in IS research: A comparison of alternative approaches and a reanalysis of past research. Management Science, 52(12), 1865-1883.
52. March, JG (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 83-104.
53. Menguc, B and S Auh (2008). The asymmetric moderating role of market orientation on the ambidexterity-firm performance relationship for prospectors and defenders. Industrial Marketing Management, 37(4), 455-470.
54. Merrilees, B, S Rundle-Thiele and A Lye (2011). Marketing capabilities: Antecedents and implications for B2B SME performance. Industrial Marketing Management, 40(3), 368-375.
55. Michelfelder, I and J Kratzer (2013). Why and how combining strong and weak ties within a single interorganizational R&D collaboration outperforms other collaboration structures. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 30(6), 1159-1177.
56. Mihalache, OR, JJP Jansen, FA Van Den Bosch and HW Volberda (2014). Top management team shared leadership and organizational ambidexterity: A moderated mediation framework. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 8, 128-148.
57. Nahapiet, J and S Ghoshal (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 242-266.
58. O'Brien, RM (2007). A caution regarding rules of thumb for variance inflation factors. Quality and Quantity, 41(5), 673-690.
59. Ozer, M. and W Zhang (2015). The effects of geographic and network ties on exploitative and exploratory product innovation. Strategic Management Journal, 36, 1105-1114.
60. Peng, MW and YD Luo (2000). Managerial ties and firm performance in a transition economy: The nature of a micro-macro link. Academy of Management Journal, 43(3), 486-501.
61. Penrose, ET (1959). The Theory of the Growth of the Firm. New York: John Wiley.
62. Powell, WW, KW Koput and I Smith-Doerr (1996). Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(1), 116-145.
63. Quintana-García, C and CA Benavides-Velasco (2008). Innovative competence, exploration and exploitation: The influence of technological diversification. Research Policy, 37(3), 492-507.
64. Salavisa, I, C Sousa and M Fontes (2012). Topologies of innovation networks in knowledge-intensive sectors: Sectoral differences in the access to knowledge and complementary assets through formal and informal ties. Technovation, 32(6), 380-399.
65. Schumpeter, JA (1934). The Theory of Economic Development: An Inquiry into Profits, Capital, Credit, Interest and the Business Cycle. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
66. Sheng, SB, KZ Zhou and JJ Li (2011). The effects of business and political ties on firm performance: Evidence from China. Journal of Marketing, 75(1), 1-15.
67. Shu, C, AL Page, S Gao and X Jiang (2012). Managerial ties and firm innovation: Is knowledge creation a missing link? Journal of Product Innovation Management, 29(1), 125-143.
68. Simsek, Z, C Heavey, JF Veiga and D Souder (2009). A typology for aligning organizational ambidexterity's conceptualizations, antecedents, and outcomes. Journal of Management Studies, 46(5), 864-894.
69. Sirmon, DG, MA Hitt and RD Ireland (2007). Managing firm resources in dynamic environments to create value: Looking inside the black box. Academy of Management Review, 32(1), 273-292.
70. Smith-Doerr, L and WW Powell (2005). Networks and economic life. In The Handbook of Economic Sociology, N Smelser and R Swedberg (eds.), pp. 379-402. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
71. Stadler, C, T Rajwani and F Karaba (2014). Solutions to the exploration/exploitation dilemma: Networks as a new level of analysis. International Journal of Management Reviews, 16(2), 172-193.
72. Stettner, U and D Lavie (2014). Ambidexterity under scrutiny: Exploration and exploitation via internal organization, alliances and acquisitions. Strategic Management Journal, 35(13), 1903-1929.
73. Su, YS, EWK Tsang and MW Peng (2009). How do internal capabilities and external partnerships affect innovativeness? Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 26, 309-331.
74. Suchman, MC (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571-610.
75. Teece, DJ, G Pisano and A Shuen (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509-533.
76. Turner, N, J Swart and H Maylor (2013). Mechanisms for managing ambidexterity: A review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 15, 317-332.
77. Tushman, ML and CA O'Reilly III (1996). Ambidextrous organizations: Managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. California Management Review, 38(4), 8-30.
78. Voudouris, I, S Lioukas, M Iatrelli and Y Caloghirou (2012). Effectiveness of technology investment: Impact of internal technological capability, networking and investment's strategic performance. Technovation, 32(6), 400-414.
79. Wang, C-H and L-C Hsu (2014). Building exploration and exploitation in the high-tech industry: The role of relationship learning. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 81, 331-340.
80. Wang, CL and M Rafiq (2014). Ambidextrous organizational culture, contextual ambidexterity and new product innovation: A comparative study of UK and Chinese hightech firms. British Journal of Management, 25(1), 58-76.
81. Wiklund, J and D Shepherd (2005). Entrepreneurial orientation and small business performance: A configurational approach. Journal of Business Venturing, 20(1), 71-91.
82. Wu, J (2011). Asymmetric roles of business ties and political ties in product innovation. Journal of Business Research, 64(11), 1151-1156.
83. Yalcinkaya, G, RJ Calantone and DA Griffith (2007). An examination of exploration and exploitation capabilities: Implications for product innovation and market performance. Journal of International Marketing15(4) 63-93
84. Yang, Z, X Zhou and P Zhang (2015). Discipline versus passion: Collectivism, centralization, and ambidextrous innovation. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 32(3), 745-769.
85. Zhang, Y and H Li (2010). Innovation search of new ventures in a technology cluster: The role of ties with service intermediaries. Strategic Management Journal, 31, 88-109.
86. Zhang, X, X Ma, Y Wang, X Li and D Huo (2016). What drives the internationalization of Chinese SMEs? The joint effects of international entrepreneurship characteristics, network ties, and firm ownership. International Business Review, 25(2), 522-534.
87. Zhang, J, J Tan and PK Wong (2015). When does investment in political ties improve firm performance? The contingent effect of innovation activities. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 32, 363-387.
88. Zheng, W, K Singh and W Mitchell (2015). Buffering and enabling: The impact of interlocking political ties on firm survival and sales growth. Strategic Management Journal, 36, 1615-1636.
89. Zhou, W (2013). Political connections and entrepreneurial investment: Evidence from China's transition economy. Journal of Business Venturing, 28(2), 299-315.
90. Zhou, KZ and F Wu (2010). Technological capability, strategic flexibility, and product innovation. Strategic Management Journal, 31(5), 547-561.