Continuous innovation: towards a paradoxical, ambidextrous combination of exploration and exploitation

Martini, Antonella; Laugen, Bjørge Timenes; Gastaldi, Luca; Corso, Mariano

doi:10.1504/ijtm.2013.050246

Cited by 74 publications

(69 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Strategies like managing networks of practice (Agterberg et al, 2010) and management of information and communication technologies (ICTs) are also important. However, most studies have been conducted in organisations in developed countries, and there are few insights from developing countries on the roles for managing structural challenges, particularly in complex social structures like netchains (Martini et al, 2013;Mueller et al, 2013;Turner et al, 2013). 3.…”

Section: Journal On Chain and Network Science 15 (2015)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, it is less clear who plays which roles to span and mobilise multi-dimensional contextual boundaries (Gupta et al, 2006;Nosella et al, 2012). Similarly the role that information and communication technologies can play (Martini et al, 2013) to foster ambidexterity in netchains is a gap in the literature.…”

Section: Journal On Chain and Network Science 15 (2015)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Stakeholder roles for fostering ambidexterity in Sub-Saharan African agricultural netchains for the emergence of multi-stakeholder cooperatives

Perdomo

Farrow²,

Trienekens

et al. 2016

Journ. Chain and Network Sc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Sub-Saharan African smallholder agricultural sector faces multiple and usually complex challenges, which can potentially be overcome by collective action. Smallholder farmers and other value chain stakeholders can tackle temporal, structural and contextual challenges by joining multi-level innovation networks to benefit collectively from shared information, knowledge, improved capacities and economies of scale in a process of innovation. Ambidexterity is a capability of innovation networks to balance exploration and exploitation dynamics in an innovation process, and is applicable at multiple levels: individuals, leaders, champions, teams and clusters. In the paradigm of open innovation, these levels become intertwined in hybrid social structures of innovation netchains. The objective of this paper is to describe the roles and identify the stakeholders that play those roles in an innovation process. We present case studies on farmer groups who participate in collective action and we compare multi-stakeholder platforms with other configurations of actors that tackle challenges in potato netchains in three Sub-Saharan African countries. We track and analyse innovation trajectories for six cases adapting netchain analysis techniques linking roles with the challenges faced at particular stages of each innovation trajectory. We find three management designs for fostering exploration and exploitation: (1) exploratory or exploitative management designs for small innovation networks; (2) exploitative management designs for larger networks; and (3) ambidextrous management designs for multi-stakeholder networks. Traditional roles played by managers are identified to manage exploration and exploitation in an ambidextrous way, but also evidence of roles of civil society actors facilitating collective action for the emergence of multi-stakeholder cooperatives. Since ambidexterity is about dynamism, we identified three types of mobility to be fostered when tackling challenges in an innovation process: (1) mobility-dynamism of the innovation process over time; (2) structural-knowledge mobility in innovation networks; and (3) boundary mobility.

show abstract

Section: Journal On Chain and Network Science 15 (2015)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Journal On Chain and Network Science 15 (2015)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Stakeholder roles for fostering ambidexterity in Sub-Saharan African agricultural netchains for the emergence of multi-stakeholder cooperatives

Perdomo

Farrow²,

Trienekens

et al. 2016

Journ. Chain and Network Sc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Second, although ambidexterity is the most useful way of managing paradoxes [9], few works study the implications of ambidextrous capability in resolving innovation paradoxes. Managing innovation paradoxes from an ambidextrous capability perspective can achieve a balance between two paradoxical tasks, such as exploitative and exploratory innovations [33]. Therefore, ambidextrous capability is taken as a theoretical lens to address these two gaps, and this theoretical lens is reviewed below.…”

Section: Innovation Paradox In Sustainabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Managing Innovation Paradox in the Sustainable Innovation Ecosystem: A Case Study of Ambidextrous Capability in a Focal Firm

Zeng

Ouyang

2017

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

“…Firms within dynamic environments characterized by technological developments have to continuously innovate in order to remain competitive (Martini, Laugen, Gastaldi & Corso, 2013). However, how do individuals working within firms and industries with primitive technologies deal with innovation has remained an unexplored area (Hirsch-Kreinsen, 2008a;2008b;Hirsch-Kreinsen & Jacobson, 2008;Kirner, Kinker, & Jaeger, 2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Individual’s Influence on Low-Technology Innovation: A Critical Realism Based Case Study on North-West Pakistan’s Marble Sector

Nouman¹,

Taj²,

Gul³

2017

BER

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Continuous innovation: towards a paradoxical, ambidextrous combination of exploration and exploitation

Cited by 74 publications

References 8 publications

Stakeholder roles for fostering ambidexterity in Sub-Saharan African agricultural netchains for the emergence of multi-stakeholder cooperatives

Stakeholder roles for fostering ambidexterity in Sub-Saharan African agricultural netchains for the emergence of multi-stakeholder cooperatives

Managing Innovation Paradox in the Sustainable Innovation Ecosystem: A Case Study of Ambidextrous Capability in a Focal Firm

The Individual’s Influence on Low-Technology Innovation: A Critical Realism Based Case Study on North-West Pakistan’s Marble Sector

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About