The ambidextrous manager: what role does culture play?

Abstract

We know from research that the right context can help managers develop an ambidextrous approach. But just as few of us are naturally ambidextrous, many managers fail to balance conformity and change during strategy implementation. We investigate why. Design/methodology/approach Through a qualitative study of managers of an international airline we examine a series of cultural barriers that constrain managers' agile decisionmaking and stop managerial ambidexterity. Findings We identify 6 culturally-ingrained practices that block managerial ambidexterity: Top management's unwavering emphasis on cost-control when survival hinges on fresh investments; Little or no scanning of the environment for new areas of opportunity; Intensive planning oriented toward efficiency issues; Functional structures characterized by extensive division of labor; Centralized control; Formal hierarchical communication channels. Research implications Managers find it difficult to put into practice new initiatives, particularly when the proposed initiatives counter the underlying cultural world of the organization. We suggest that this dark-side of culture can pose tough barriers for ambidextrous action. Practical implications There is an urgent need for organizations to be aware of the possible misalignments between ambidextrous pursuits and the cultural forces that actually drive action. A deep understanding of their organization's cultural universe is a crucial first step for managers aspiring to better engage with ambidexterity and outwit and outperform competitors. Originality Different strategic approaches need not be viewed as irreconcilable. If cultural elements don't block it, managerial ambidexterity can showcase innovative approaches to reconciling trade-offs in strategic decision-making.

The case of sales in the automotive industry during the COVID‐19 pandemic

“…Firms widely agree that the benefits of agile software development outweigh potential drawbacks in most use cases. Among the reported benefits are faster product delivery (Gomes et al, 2020), cost savings (Pearson et al, 2020), improved customer satisfaction (Comella‐Dorda et al, 2017), and improved employee satisfaction (Denning, 2018b; Hodgkinson et al, 2017). As a result, agile ways of working are the status quo in software development today.…”

“…The exploration of agile ways of working in the strategy context remains conceptual and lacks empirical underpinning. Earlier studies provide some examples but do not detail how firms implemented agile in the strategy context (Annosi et al, 2020; Denning, 2017a, 2017b, 2019; Doz & Kosonen, 2010), or focus on niche elements in the context of strategy research, such as cultural barriers that constrain managers' agile decision‐making (Hodgkinson et al, 2017) and evaluation of innovative ideas (Dziallas, 2020). Conceptual studies mainly rephrase the literature on dynamic capabilities.…”

“…This paper refers to the term strategy tool as a vehicle to identify and explore market opportunities (Rengarajan, Moser, & Narayanamurthy, 2021). Prior papers referring to agile approaches as a strategy tool are conceptual (Denning, 2018a; Holbeche, 2019; Ivory & Brooks, 2018; Srinivasan et al, 2020; Thrassou, Vrontis, & Bresciani, 2018), provide some examples but lack the depths a single case study can offer and do not explain how firms implemented agile in the strategy context (Annosi et al, 2020; Denning, 2017a, 2017b, 2019; Doz & Kosonen, 2010), or focus on niche aspects of agility in the strategy context, like cultural barriers that constrain managers' agile decision‐making (Hodgkinson, Ravishankar, & Fischer, 2017) or evaluation of innovative ideas (Dziallas, 2020). The conceptual studies mainly rephrase the well‐established dynamic capabilities literature, heavily influenced by Teece, Pisano, and Shuen (1997).…”

Managers’ Open Innovation and Business Performance in SMEs: A Moderated Mediation Model of Job Crafting and Gender

“…Employee should specialize in, and capitalize on, activities where they tend to excel [40]. Despite this, very little is empirically known about whether the explorative and exploitative activities undertaken by employees as managers impact business performance [4]. Such a link can only be established by addressing how organizational context can highlight the impact of managers' ambidextrous activities on business performance.…”

“…Still, there is a dearth of literature that focuses on the individual ambidextrous competencies among executives or managers that promote OI [3]. However, while addressing the individual competencies, it is important to observe that organizations' cultures play a vital role in ascertaining whether the managers can exploit and explore opportunities that are advantageous to the organization [4]. They claim that managers are the "architects" of "ambidextrous courses of action."…”