IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v81y2014icp331-340.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Building exploration and exploitation in the high-tech industry: The role of relationship learning

Author

Listed:
  • Wang, Chao-Hung
  • Hsu, Li-Chang

Abstract

This study advances prior theoretical research by linking relationship learning to exploratory and exploitative innovations. Findings indicate that relationship learning contributes significantly to both exploratory and exploitative innovations. We argue that power asymmetry needs to be taken into account to fully understand the effectiveness of relationship learning. We present a model for analyzing relationship learning, power asymmetry, as well as their impacts on innovative outcome. Specifically, using a sample of 241 high-tech firms, we find that power asymmetry does not significantly moderate the impact of relationship learning on exploratory innovation. However, power asymmetry significantly increases the impact of relationship learning on exploitative innovation. Hence, this study contributes to the debate on the role of relationship learning on generating exploration and exploitation, not only by examining how relationship learning impacts specific innovative outcomes, but also by revealing how the impact of relationship learning is moderated by power asymmetry.

Suggested Citation

  • Wang, Chao-Hung & Hsu, Li-Chang, 2014. "Building exploration and exploitation in the high-tech industry: The role of relationship learning," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 331-340.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:81:y:2014:i:c:p:331-340
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2013.04.008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S004016251300067X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2013.04.008?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mc Namara, Peter & Baden-Fuller, Charles, 2007. "Shareholder returns and the exploration-exploitation dilemma: R&D announcements by biotechnology firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 548-565, May.
    2. Paul Hart & Carol Saunders, 1997. "Power and Trust: Critical Factors in the Adoption and Use of Electronic Data Interchange," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 8(1), pages 23-42, February.
    3. Justin J. P. Jansen & Frans A. J. Van Den Bosch & Henk W. Volberda, 2006. "Exploratory Innovation, Exploitative Innovation, and Performance: Effects of Organizational Antecedents and Environmental Moderators," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(11), pages 1661-1674, November.
    4. Nooteboom, B. & Gilsing, V.A., 2004. "Density And Strength Of Ties In Innovation Networks: A Competence And Governance View," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2004-005-ORG, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    5. Jarvis, Cheryl Burke & MacKenzie, Scott B & Podsakoff, Philip M, 2003. "A Critical Review of Construct Indicators and Measurement Model Misspecification in Marketing and Consumer Research," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 30(2), pages 199-218, September.
    6. Gerald C. Kane & Maryam Alavi, 2007. "Information Technology and Organizational Learning: An Investigation of Exploration and Exploitation Processes," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(5), pages 796-812, October.
    7. Witold J. Henisz & Jeffrey T. Macher, 2004. "Firm- and Country-Level Trade-offs and Contingencies in the Evaluation of Foreign Investment: The Semiconductor Industry, 1994–2002," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(5), pages 537-554, October.
    8. Michael Lubatkin & Zeki Simsek & Yan Ling & John F. Veiga, 2006. "Ambidexterity and Performance in Small-to Medium-Sized Firms : The Pivotal Role of Top Management Team Behavioral Integration," Post-Print hal-02311781, HAL.
    9. Laura B. Cardinal, 2001. "Technological Innovation in the Pharmaceutical Industry: The Use of Organizational Control in Managing Research and Development," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(1), pages 19-36, February.
    10. Chang, Kuo-Hsiung & Gotcher, Donald F., 2007. "Safeguarding investments and creation of transaction value in asymmetric international subcontracting relationships: The role of relationship learning and relational capital," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 42(4), pages 477-488, December.
    11. Gilsing, V. & Nooteboom, B., 2004. "Density and strength of ties in innovation networks: an analysis of multimedia and biotechnology," Working Papers 04.16, Eindhoven Center for Innovation Studies.
    12. Bruno Dyck & Frederick A. Starke & Gary A. Mischke & Michael Mauws, 2005. "Learning to Build a Car: An Empirical Investigation of Organizational Learning," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(2), pages 387-416, March.
    13. Lui, Steven S. & Ngo, Hang-yue & Hon, Alice H.Y., 2006. "Coercive strategy in interfirm cooperation: Mediating roles of interpersonal and interorganizational trust," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 59(4), pages 466-474, April.
    14. Sebastian Raisch & Julian Birkinshaw & Gilbert Probst & Michael L. Tushman, 2009. "Organizational Ambidexterity: Balancing Exploitation and Exploration for Sustained Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 685-695, August.
    15. Bo Bernhard Nielsen & Sabina Nielsen, 2009. "Learning and Innovation in International Strategic Alliances: An Empirical Test of the Role of Trust and Tacitness," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(6), pages 1031-1056, September.
    16. Thornhill, Stewart, 2006. "Knowledge, innovation and firm performance in high- and low-technology regimes," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 21(5), pages 687-703, September.
    17. Zi-Lin He & Poh-Kam Wong, 2004. "Exploration vs. Exploitation: An Empirical Test of the Ambidexterity Hypothesis," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 481-494, August.
    18. Kira Kristal Reed & Michael Lubatkin & Narasimhan Srinivasan, 2006. "Proposing and Testing an Intellectual Capital‐Based View of the Firm," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(4), pages 867-893, June.
    19. Hsu, Chin-Chun & Pereira, Arun, 2008. "Internationalization and performance: The moderating effects of organizational learning," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 188-205, April.
    20. Prashant Kale & Harbir Singh, 2007. "Building firm capabilities through learning: the role of the alliance learning process in alliance capability and firm‐level alliance success," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(10), pages 981-1000, October.
    21. Wincent, Joakim & Anokhin, Sergey & Örtqvist, Daniel, 2010. "Does network board capital matter? A study of innovative performance in strategic SME networks," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 63(3), pages 265-275, March.
    22. Luiz F. Mesquita & Jaideep Anand & Thomas H. Brush, 2008. "Comparing the resource‐based and relational views: knowledge transfer and spillover in vertical alliances," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(9), pages 913-941, September.
    23. Liu, Chia-Ling (Eunice) & Ghauri, Pervez N. & Sinkovics, Rudolf R., 2010. "Understanding the impact of relational capital and organizational learning on alliance outcomes," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 237-249, July.
    24. Berthon, Pierre & Pitt, Leyland F. & Ewing, Michael T. & Bakkeland, Gunnar, 2003. "Norms and power in marketing relationships: Alternative theories and empirical evidence," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 56(9), pages 699-709, September.
    25. Rhona Johnsen & David Ford, 2008. "Exploring the concept of asymmetry: A typology for analysing customer-supplier relationships," Post-Print hal-00952813, HAL.
    26. Yamakawa, Yasuhiro & Yang, Haibin & Lin, Zhiang (John), 2011. "Exploration versus exploitation in alliance portfolio: Performance implications of organizational, strategic, and environmental fit," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 287-296, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Guan, Jiancheng & Liu, Na, 2016. "Exploitative and exploratory innovations in knowledge network and collaboration network: A patent analysis in the technological field of nano-energy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 97-112.
    2. Onufrey, Ksenia & Bergek, Anna, 2020. "Second wind for exploitation: Pursuing high degrees of product and process innovativeness in mature industries," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    3. Li-Wei Wu & Chen-Yu Lin, 2018. "Innovation Benefited by Relationship Learning," International Journal of Business and Economics, School of Management Development, Feng Chia University, Taichung, Taiwan, vol. 17(1), pages 55-72, June.
    4. Valaei, Naser & Rezaei, Sajad & Ismail, Wan Khairuzzaman Wan, 2017. "Examining learning strategies, creativity, and innovation at SMEs using fuzzy set Qualitative Comparative Analysis and PLS path modeling," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 224-233.
    5. Hanyu Zhu & Kailing Zhang & Gang Li & Lin Chen & Xijie Zhao, 2022. "Relationship Management Capability and Service Innovation Performance: The Joint-Effect of Relationship Learning and Competitive Intensity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-22, September.
    6. Stephanie Lange & Marcus Wagner, 2021. "The influence of exploratory versus exploitative acquisitions on innovation output in the biotechnology industry," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 56(2), pages 659-680, February.
    7. Jensen, Are & Clausen, Tommy H., 2017. "Origins and emergence of exploration and exploitation capabilities in new technology-based firms," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 163-175.
    8. Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio, 2019. "Trading knowledge for status: Conceptualizing R&D alliance formation to achieve ambidexterity," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 36-42.
    9. Ali, Murad, 2021. "Imitation or innovation: To what extent do exploitative learning and exploratory learning foster imitation strategy and innovation strategy for sustained competitive advantage?✰," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    10. Yasser Alizadeh & Antonie J. Jetter, 2019. "Pathways for Balancing Exploration and Exploitation in Innovations: A Review and Expansion of Ambidexterity Theory," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(05), pages 1-33, August.
    11. Chen, Hongshu & Jin, Qianqian & Wang, Ximeng & Xiong, Fei, 2022. "Profiling academic-industrial collaborations in bibliometric-enhanced topic networks: A case study on digitalization research," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    12. Hongshu Chen & Xinna Song & Qianqian Jin & Ximeng Wang, 2022. "Network dynamics in university-industry collaboration: a collaboration-knowledge dual-layer network perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(11), pages 6637-6660, November.
    13. Jiuling Xiao & Yuting Bao & Jiankang Wang, 2023. "Which neighbor is more conducive to innovation? The moderating effect of partners’ innovation," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 33-67, February.
    14. Wu, Ing-Long & Chiu, Mai-Lun, 2018. "Examining supply chain collaboration with determinants and performance impact: Social capital, justice, and technology use perspectives," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 5-19.
    15. Jingbei Wang & Naiding Yang, 2019. "Dynamics of collaboration network community and exploratory innovation: the moderation of knowledge networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(2), pages 1067-1084, November.
    16. Xiaoli Li & Kun Li & Hao Zhou, 2022. "Impact of Inventor’s Cooperation Network on Ambidextrous Innovation in Chinese AI Enterprises," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-21, August.
    17. Seo, Ribin & Park, Ji-Hoon, 2022. "When is interorganizational learning beneficial for inbound open innovation of ventures? A contingent role of entrepreneurial orientation," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    18. Jorge Ferreira & Sofia Cardim & Arnaldo Coelho, 2021. "Dynamic Capabilities and Mediating Effects of Innovation on the Competitive Advantage and Firm’s Performance: the Moderating Role of Organizational Learning Capability," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 12(2), pages 620-644, June.
    19. Colin Gallagher & Dean Lusher & Johan Koskinen & Bopha Roden & Peng Wang & Aaron Gosling & Anastasios Polyzos & Martina Stenzel & Sarah Hegarty & Thomas Spurling & Gregory Simpson, 2023. "Network patterns of university-industry collaboration: A case study of the chemical sciences in Australia," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(8), pages 4559-4588, August.
    20. Heuschneider, Sara & Herstatt, Cornelius, 2016. "External search for exploration of future discontinuities and trends: Implications from the literature using co-citation and content analysis," Working Papers 92, Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), Institute for Technology and Innovation Management.
    21. Xie, Xuemei & Wang, Hongwei & García, Javier Sendra, 2021. "How does customer involvement in service innovation motivate service innovation performance? The roles of relationship learning and knowledge absorptive capacity," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 630-643.
    22. Jing A. Zhang & Xiling Cui, 2017. "In Search Of The Effects Of Business And Political Ties On Innovation Ambidexterity," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(02), pages 1-27, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ferreira, Jorge & Coelho, Arnaldo & Moutinho, Luiz, 2020. "Dynamic capabilities, creativity and innovation capability and their impact on competitive advantage and firm performance: The moderating role of entrepreneurial orientation," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 92.
    2. Karl Aschenbrücker & Tobias Kretschmer, 2022. "Performance-based incentives and innovative activity in small firms: evidence from German manufacturing," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 11(2), pages 47-64, June.
    3. Yasser Alizadeh & Antonie J. Jetter, 2019. "Pathways for Balancing Exploration and Exploitation in Innovations: A Review and Expansion of Ambidexterity Theory," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(05), pages 1-33, August.
    4. Kammerlander, Nadine & Burger, Dominik & Fust, Alexander & Fueglistaller, Urs, 2015. "Exploration and exploitation in established small and medium-sized enterprises: The effect of CEOs' regulatory focus," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 582-602.
    5. Bonesso, Sara & Gerli, Fabrizio & Scapolan, Annachiara, 2014. "The individual side of ambidexterity: Do individuals’ perceptions match actual behaviors in reconciling the exploration and exploitation trade-off?," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 392-405.
    6. Chang, Kuo-Hsiung & Gotcher, Donald F., 2020. "How and when does co-production facilitate eco-innovation in international buyer-supplier relationships? The role of environmental innovation ambidexterity and institutional pressures," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 29(5).
    7. Partanen, Jukka & Kohtamäki, Marko & Patel, Pankaj C. & Parida, Vinit, 2020. "Supply chain ambidexterity and manufacturing SME performance: The moderating roles of network capability and strategic information flow," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 221(C).
    8. Manuel Guisado-González & Jennifer González-Blanco & José Luis Coca-Pérez, 2019. "Exploration, exploitation, and firm age in alliance portfolios," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 9(4), pages 387-406, December.
    9. Danny Soetanto & Sarah L. Jack, 2018. "Slack resources, exploratory and exploitative innovation and the performance of small technology-based firms at incubators," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(5), pages 1213-1231, October.
    10. Choo Yeon Kim & Myung Sub Lim & Jae Wook Yoo, 2019. "Ambidexterity in External Knowledge Search Strategies and Innovation Performance: Mediating Role of Balanced Innovation and Moderating Role of Absorptive Capacity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-23, September.
    11. Michael Yao-Ping Peng & Zhaohua Zhang & Hsin-Yi Yen & Shu-Mi Yang, 2019. "Dynamic Capabilities and Firm Performance in the High-Tech Industry: Quadratic and Moderating Effects under Differing Ambidexterity Levels," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-15, September.
    12. Úbeda-García, Mercedes & Claver-Cortés, Enrique & Marco-Lajara, Bartolomé & Zaragoza-Sáez, Patrocinio, 2020. "Toward a dynamic construction of organizational ambidexterity: Exploring the synergies between structural differentiation, organizational context, and interorganizational relations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 363-372.
    13. Andreea N. Kiss & Dirk Libaers & Pamela S. Barr & Tang Wang & Miles A. Zachary, 2020. "CEO cognitive flexibility, information search, and organizational ambidexterity," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(12), pages 2200-2233, December.
    14. José Andrade & Mário Franco & Luis Mendes, 2021. "Technological capacity and organisational ambidexterity: the moderating role of environmental dynamism on Portuguese technological SMEs," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 15(7), pages 2111-2136, October.
    15. Michael Yao-Ping Peng & Ku-Ho Lin & Dennis Liute Peng & Peihua Chen, 2019. "Linking Organizational Ambidexterity and Performance: The Drivers of Sustainability in High-Tech Firms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-17, July.
    16. Angeloantonio Russo & Rosamartina Schena, 2021. "Ambidexterity in the context of SME alliances: Does sustainability have a role?," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(2), pages 606-615, March.
    17. Christine Chou & Steven O. Kimbrough, 2016. "An agent-based model of organizational ambidexterity decisions and strategies in new product development," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 4-46, March.
    18. Swarup Kumar Dutta, 2013. "Ambidexterity as a Mediating Variable in the Relationship between Dynamism in the Environment, Organizational Context and Strategic Renewal," Jindal Journal of Business Research, , vol. 2(1), pages 27-41, June.
    19. Liu, Chia-Ling (Eunice) & Zhang, Yingying, 2014. "Learning process and capability formation in cross-border buyer–supplier relationships: A qualitative case study of Taiwanese technological firms," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 23(4), pages 718-730.
    20. Sara Bonesso & Fabrizio Gerli & Annachiara Scapolan, 2012. "Exploration and exploitation: Do actual behaviors match individuals' perceptions?," Working Papers 7, Department of Management, Università Ca' Foscari Venezia.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:81:y:2014:i:c:p:331-340. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00401625 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.