No abstract

This study conceptualized exploratory and exploitative learning as distinct team-level activities, constructed measures of them, and examined their relationships with psychological safety, task conflict, and team performance. Structural equation analysis in a sample of 142 innovation project teams indicated that psychological safety was linearly and nonlinearly related to team exploitative and exploratory learning, respectively; whereas task conflict positively moderated the relationship between psychological safety and exploitative learning. Furthermore, exploratory and exploitative learning were additively related to team performance, as rated by team managers, and mediated its relationship with psychological safety. The findings contribute to understanding how and under what conditions organizational teams engage in exploratory and exploitative learning to maximize their performance

In addressing the notion of team ambidexterity, we propose that sociopsychological factors (i.e., team cohesion and team efficacy) may help team members to resolve paradoxical challenges and to combine exploratory and exploitative learning efforts. In addition, we theorize that senior executives may play an important role in facilitating the emergence of ambidexterity at lower hierarchical levels. In doing so, we develop a multilevel contingency framework and propose that the effectiveness of teams to achieve ambidexterity is contingent upon supportive leadership behaviours at the organizational-level. Using multilevel, multisource, and temporally separated data on 87 teams within 37 high-tech and pharmaceutical firms, we not only reveal how team cohesion and efficacy may matter for the emergence of team ambidexterity but also show that the effectiveness of supportive leadership behaviours from senior executives varies across cohesive and efficacious teams.

International audienceThis study develops a cross-level model examining the effects of intellectual capital facets (i.e., human, social, and organizational capital) on unit ambidexterity. Further, it proposes that organizational-level high-performance human resource (HPHR) practices significantly shape these effects as well as the unit ambidexterity–unit performance relationship. Hierarchical linear modeling on multisource and lagged data from a sample of 148 business units from 58 US Fortune 500 firms shows that unit human and social capital positively contributes to unit ambidexterity, unit organizational capital has a negative relationship with unit ambidexterity, and organizational HPHR practices amplify the former and mitigate the latter of these unit-level effects. The findings also reveal that the relationship between ambidexterity and unit performance becomes stronger in organizational contexts of heightened HPHR practices. This multilevel approach increases understanding of how units achieve ambidexterity and attain related performance gains

Reprinted by permission of SAGE Publications. Use policyThe full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that:• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.Please consult the full DRO policy for further details.