To achieve sustainable development, focal firms should balance two paradoxical kinds of innovation activities: exploitative and exploratory ones. Published works found that ambidexterity is an effective way to resolve paradoxical tensions, but few in-depth studies have been conducted to explore the innovation paradox of focal firms in the innovation ecosystem from an ambidextrous capability perspective. This paper takes China Spacesat Co., Ltd. as the case to study focal firms' management of innovation paradoxes in the sustainable innovation ecosystem and finds that: (1) Sustainable innovation is an ecosystem in which focal firms' internal functional departments, including the product department, technical center, and Makers' groups, cooperate with external organizations, including component suppliers, scientific research institutes, and government departments, closely and complementarily; (2) In the exploitative and exploratory innovations of complex products, focal firms in the sustainable innovation ecosystem mainly confront three paradoxes: profit drive vs. breakthroughs in the strategic intent of sustainable innovation of the profit-driven model, tight vs. loose coupling of sustainable innovation, and sustainable innovation driven by discipline vs. that by passion; (3) Focal firms in the innovation ecosystem resolve these three innovation paradoxes with structural, contextual, and coordinated ambidextrous capabilities, and build innovation paradox management mechanisms with three steps in sequence, namely by establishing dual sustainable strategic innovation units, strengthening sustainable organizational ties between the internal and external, while co-creating and sharing innovation values, and, finally, promoting the formation and development of their sustainable innovation ecosystem. This paper complements and enriches the innovation ecosystem and ambidextrous capability theory, providing significant practical guidance to the sustainable development of aerospace enterprises.

Establishing a hub-based innovation ecosystem is an effective way for companies to cope with technological transformation and achieve sustainable development. While existing literature has explored how a hub firm develops or manages an innovation ecosystem, little attention has been paid to the strategic challenges in the development and management process. In strategic management, managerial cognitive capability has been proposed as a key factor that influences how firms make strategic changes and adapt to dynamic environments. Hence, from the perspective of managerial cognitive capability, this paper strives to investigate the development of an innovation ecosystem from the perspective of managerial cognitive capability. To do so, we conducted a qualitative case study of Xiaomi’s innovation ecosystem from 2010 to 2019. The research adopts an interpretive approach and finds that (1) the evolution of the innovation ecosystem can be divided into incubation, growth, and regeneration periods, with developing core products, related products, and unrelated products as respective focus; (2) under rapid technological and market changes, it is critical to match the managerial cognitive capability of the hub-firm with its innovation ecosystem; (3) building innovation ecosystems enables the hub-firm to achieve sustainable competitive advantages. The study builds a model for the growth of innovation ecosystems and enriches theoretical research on innovation ecosystems and managerial cognitive capability.

Implementing green Information Technology (IT) is an effective way to realize sustainability. In the process of implementing green IT, IT transformation is essential but tends to fail. However, existing literature can't offer effective guidance for implementing green IT. In this article, we conduct a case study of green IT implementation at Shenyang Aircraft Corporation, an aircraft manufacturer. This study sheds light on the process through which green IT transformation and sustainability are achieved. Consequently, we have expanded the Belief-Action-Outcome (BAO) framework to strategic and operational levels, and summed up the capabilities and mechanisms of each phase, as well as the impact relationships and directions between each phase. At a strategic level, the belief formation phase includes the capability to establish direction and required actions, containing formation of belief in sustainability and cultivation of green culture. The action formation phase needs the capability to reshape strategy and required actions, containing green informatization strategy and the establishment of a green IT group. As for operational level, the belief formation phase needs the capability to integrate and engender trust, the combination of production and research as well as production network implementation constitutes required actions. The action formation phase includes the capability to enact a sustainable plan and required actions have two parts: paperless production and a balanced production plan. This study contributes to present literature from three aspects. First, the study provides a qualitatively empirically grounded framework for the study of green IT. Second, this study contributes to the literature on sustainability from an IT perspective. Finally, our study also made important contributions to the BAO framework.

No abstract

No abstract

This paper aims to take the longitudinal development history of the Lenovo Cross-border complex nested R&D organization as the research object, to explore the development rules of enterprise niche. Strategic positioning is the core issue of enterprise management, and enterprise niche is the core issue of strategic positioning. This study elaborates on the three stages of enterprise R&D organizational ambidexterity promoting enterprise niche evolution, discusses the process model of space development, and reveals the life cycle of enterprise niche. It reveals the deep reason for promoting enterprise niche to develop—the ambidexterity of complex nested organization. The conclusion helps to promote the successful space development of enterprise niches through Cross-border merger and acquisition, and to enhance global sustainable development for the companies from emerging markets such as China.

PurposeIn this study, the authors aim to address the following two research questions: (1) How do technology innovation paradoxes manifest themselves in technological changes? (2) How do incumbent firms manage technology innovation paradoxes through multi-level organizational ambidexterity? To do so, the authors examine technology innovation in cloud computing, which has taken shape and brought about changes to the information technology industry. Specifically, the authors examine how a traditional software company, China Standard Software Co., Ltd. (CS2C), successfully navigated the technological transition to cloud computing from its existing operating systems business by managing innovation paradoxes through multi-level ambidexterity capabilities.Design/methodology/approachThis study examines a single exploratory case and conducts an in-depth analysis of how technology innovation paradoxes manifest themselves in technological changes and how incumbent firms manage technology innovation paradoxes through multi-level organizational ambidexterity. The data collection and analysis occurred simultaneously through three phases. In Phase 1, one of the authors who had worked at CS2C for many years enabled the authors to obtain access to the company. The data analysis during this phase provided the authors with the history and current situation of CS2C, enabling them to understand the external circumstances, such as particular historical period, and internal conditions, such as cultural and technological changes, that would be relevant throughout the course of their study. It also helped the authors identify organizational ambidexterity capability as the guiding theoretical concept for their research. In Phase 2, the authors engaged in site visits and conducted detailed interviews with employees working at CS2C. In Phase 3, most of the data analysis was conducted. When the interview data were not sufficient to support the theoretical analysis, additional data were collected via phone calls and emails, to assure data-theory-model alignment.FindingsThe authors’ findings show that technology innovation paradoxes manifest themselves as contradictory relationships and mutual support relationships between exploitative and exploratory innovation. In addition, the authors identify three integration mechanisms as key to multi-level organizational ambidexterity capabilities in managing technology innovation paradoxes in technological changes.Originality/valueThree important theoretical implications can be drawn from our case analysis. First, this research contributes to the knowledge of innovation paradoxes during technological changes. Second, this research provides a model of multi-level organizational ambidexterity capability in technological changes. Third, this research proposes three integration mechanisms driven by three types of ambidexterity capability at different organizational levels.

No abstract