IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i12p4602-d188042.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Impact of Technology Habitual Domain on Ambidextrous Innovation: Case Study of a Chinese High-Tech Enterprise

Author

Listed:
  • Xinwei Ye

    (School of Economics and Management, Nanjing University of Science and Technology, Nanjing 210094, China
    Centre for Innovation and Development, Nanjing University of Science and Technology, Nanjing 210094, China)

  • Lei Ma

    (Centre for Innovation and Development, Nanjing University of Science and Technology, Nanjing 210094, China)

  • Junwen Feng

    (School of Economics and Management, Nanjing University of Science and Technology, Nanjing 210094, China)

  • Yang Cheng

    (Centre for Innovation and Development, Nanjing University of Science and Technology, Nanjing 210094, China
    Center for Industrial Production, Aalborg University, 9220 Aalborg, Denmark)

  • Zheng Liu

    (Centre for Innovation and Development, Nanjing University of Science and Technology, Nanjing 210094, China
    Faculty of Business and Society, University of South Wales, Pontypridd CF37 1DL, UK)

Abstract

To obtain a sustainable competitive advantage in the dynamic environment, it is necessary for Chinese high-tech enterprises to focus on their technology habitual domains in formulating ambidextrous innovation strategy. This study integrates technology habitual domain, exploratory innovation and exploitative innovation within a framework and explores the influence mechanism among them. Based on an in-depth case study on KTE, representing a high-tech enterprise in China, we have several findings. Firstly, we depict the evolution mechanism of technology habitual domain; secondly, we find that the high-tech enterprise’s technology habitual domain will cultivate and develop the firms’ dynamic capabilities; and thirdly, the expansion of technology habitual domain will promote exploitative innovation, while the transformation of technology habitual domain will promote exploratory innovation. These findings can be useful guidance for high-tech enterprises in China who are aiming to achieve ambidextrous innovation to better adapt to the turbulent environment, and thus achieving sustainability.

Suggested Citation

  • Xinwei Ye & Lei Ma & Junwen Feng & Yang Cheng & Zheng Liu, 2018. "Impact of Technology Habitual Domain on Ambidextrous Innovation: Case Study of a Chinese High-Tech Enterprise," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-21, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:12:p:4602-:d:188042
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/12/4602/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/12/4602/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mary Tripsas & Giovanni Gavetti, 2000. "Capabilities, cognition, and inertia: evidence from digital imaging," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(10‐11), pages 1147-1161, October.
    2. 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.
    3. Chang, Yi-Ying & Hughes, Mathew, 2012. "Drivers of innovation ambidexterity in small- to medium-sized firms," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 1-17.
    4. Alexander Brem, 2017. "Creativity and routine: conceptual considerations on managing organisational ambidexterity in entrepreneurial ventures," International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 21(3), pages 261-273.
    5. Dong, John Qi & Netten, Jork, 2017. "Information technology and external search in the open innovation age: New findings from Germany," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 223-231.
    6. Po-Lung Yu & Yen-Chu Chen, 2010. "Dynamic MCDM, Habitual Domains and Competence Set Analysis for Effective Decision Making in Changeable Spaces," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Matthias Ehrgott & José Rui Figueira & Salvatore Greco (ed.), Trends in Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis, chapter 0, pages 1-35, Springer.
    7. D’Ippolito, Beatrice & Miozzo, Marcela & Consoli, Davide, 2014. "Knowledge systematisation, reconfiguration and the organisation of firms and industry: The case of design," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(8), pages 1334-1352.
    8. Alessandra Colombelli & Jackie Krafft & Francesco Quatraro, 2014. "High-growth firms and technological knowledge: do gazelles follow exploration or exploitation strategies? -super-1," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 23(1), pages 261-291, February.
    9. Paul E. Bierly & Fariborz Damanpour & Michael D. Santoro, 2009. "The Application of External Knowledge: Organizational Conditions for Exploration and Exploitation," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(3), pages 481-509, May.
    10. Krafft Jackie & Quatraro Francesco & Colombelli Alessandra, 2011. "High Growth Firms and Technological Knowledge: Do gazelles follow exploration or exploitation strategies?," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 201114, University of Turin.
    11. Kathleen M. Eisenhardt & Jeffrey A. Martin, 2000. "Dynamic capabilities: what are they?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(10‐11), pages 1105-1121, October.
    12. Po-Lung Yu & Yen-Chu Chen, 2012. "Dynamic multiple criteria decision making in changeable spaces: from habitual domains to innovation dynamics," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 197(1), pages 201-220, August.
    13. David J. Teece, 2012. "Dynamic Capabilities: Routines versus Entrepreneurial Action," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(8), pages 1395-1401, December.
    14. Sidney G. Winter, 2003. "Understanding dynamic capabilities," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(10), pages 991-995, October.
    15. Geoffrey Hodgson & Thorbjørn Knudsen, 2004. "The firm as an interactor: firms as vehicles for habits and routines," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 281-307, July.
    16. Justin J.P. Jansen & Frans A.J. Van den Bosch & Henk W. Volberda, 2005. "Exploratory Innovation, Exploitative Innovation, And Ambidexterity: The Impact Of Environmental And Organizational Antecedents," Schmalenbach Business Review (sbr), LMU Munich School of Management, vol. 57(4), pages 351-363, October.
    17. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    18. Yun, JinHyo Joseph & Won, DongKyu & Jeong, EuiSeob & Park, KyungBae & Yang, JeongHo & Park, JiYoung, 2016. "The relationship between technology, business model, and market in autonomous car and intelligent robot industries," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 142-155.
    19. Markus C. Becker, 2004. "Organizational routines: a review of the literature," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 13(4), pages 643-678, August.
    20. Teece, David J., 2016. "Dynamic capabilities and entrepreneurial management in large organizations: Toward a theory of the (entrepreneurial) firm," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 202-216.
    21. 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.
    22. O'Reilly, Charles A., III & Tushman, Michael L., 2013. "Organizational Ambidexterity: Past, Present and Future," Research Papers 2130, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    23. David J. Teece, 2007. "Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(13), pages 1319-1350, December.
    24. Alessandra Colombelli & Jackie Krafft & Francesco Quatraro, 2014. "High growth firms and technological knowledge: do gazelles follow exploration or exploitation strategies?," Post-Print halshs-01072866, HAL.
    25. Maurizio Zollo & Sidney G. Winter, 2002. "Deliberate Learning and the Evolution of Dynamic Capabilities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(3), pages 339-351, June.
    26. Andrew M. Pettigrew, 1990. "Longitudinal Field Research on Change: Theory and Practice," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 1(3), pages 267-292, August.
    27. Lori Rosenkopf & Atul Nerkar, 2001. "Beyond local search: boundary‐spanning, exploration, and impact in the optical disk industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(4), pages 287-306, April.
    28. Christina Fang & Jeho Lee & Melissa A. Schilling, 2010. "Balancing Exploration and Exploitation Through Structural Design: The Isolation of Subgroups and Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(3), pages 625-642, June.
    29. David J. Teece & Gary Pisano & Amy Shuen, 1997. "Dynamic capabilities and strategic management," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(7), pages 509-533, August.
    30. Chen, Yan, 2017. "Dynamic ambidexterity: How innovators manage exploration and exploitation," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 385-394.
    31. Ardito, Lorenzo & Ferraris, Alberto & Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio & Bresciani, Stefano & Del Giudice, Manlio, 2019. "The role of universities in the knowledge management of smart city projects," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 312-321.
    32. Markus C. Becker, 2004. "Organizational routines : a review of the literature," Post-Print hal-00279010, HAL.
    33. Demetris Vrontis & Alkis Thrassou & Gabriele Santoro & Armando Papa, 2017. "Ambidexterity, external knowledge and performance in knowledge-intensive firms," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 374-388, April.
    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. Peixu He & Yana Pei & Chunpei Lin & Di Ye, 2021. "Ambidextrous Marketing Capabilities, Exploratory and Exploitative Market-Based Innovation, and Innovation Performance: An Empirical Study on China’s Manufacturing Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-21, January.
    2. Chenguang Li & Zhenjun Qiu & Tao Fu, 2021. "The Role of Policy Perceptions and Entrepreneurs’ Preferences in Firms’ Response to Industry 4.0: The Case of Chinese Firms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-19, October.
    3. 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.
    4. Yi Yang & Shuhe Shi & Jingjing Wu, 2022. "Digital Financial Inclusion to Corporation Value: The Mediating Effect of Ambidextrous Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-23, December.

    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. Verreynne, Martie-Louise & Hine, Damian & Coote, Len & Parker, Rachel, 2016. "Building a scale for dynamic learning capabilities: The role of resources, learning, competitive intent and routine patterning," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(10), pages 4287-4303.
    2. 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.
    3. Yuan, Chun & Xue, Doudou & He, Xin, 2021. "A balancing strategy for ambidextrous learning, dynamic capabilities, and business model design, the opposite moderating effects of environmental dynamism," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    4. Lysander Weiss & Dominik Kanbach, 2022. "Toward an integrated framework of corporate venturing for organizational ambidexterity as a dynamic capability," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 72(4), pages 1129-1170, December.
    5. Liu, Ting & Li, Xizhuo, 2022. "How Do MNCs Conduct Local Technological Innovation in a Host Country? An Examination From Subsidiaries' Perspective," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 28(3).
    6. Szalavetz Andrea, 2015. "A Dynamic Capabilities Perspective of High-Growth Firms: Organizational Aspects," International Journal of Management and Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, Collegium of World Economy, vol. 48(1), pages 45-62, December.
    7. 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.
    8. Andreas P. Distel & Wolfgang Sofka & Pedro de Faria & Miguel Torres Preto & António Sérgio Ribeiro, 2022. "Dynamic capabilities for hire – How former host-country entrepreneurs as MNC subsidiary managers affect performance," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 53(4), pages 657-688, June.
    9. O'Reilly, Charles A., III & Tushman, Michael, 2007. "Ambidexterity as a Dynamic Capability: Resolving the Innovator's Dilemma," Research Papers 1963, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    10. Björn Michaelis & Shalini Rogbeer & Lars Schweizer & Zafer Özleblebici, 2021. "Clarifying the boundary conditions of value creation within dynamic capabilities framework: a grafting approach," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 15(6), pages 1797-1820, August.
    11. Jutta Wollersheim & Koen H. Heimeriks, 2016. "Dynamic Capabilities and Their Characteristic Qualities: Insights from a Lab Experiment," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(2), pages 233-248, April.
    12. Leo Aldianto & Grisna Anggadwita & Anggraeni Permatasari & Isti Raafaldini Mirzanti & Ian O. Williamson, 2021. "Toward a Business Resilience Framework for Startups," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-19, March.
    13. Neil M Kay, 2018. "We need to talk: opposing narratives and conflicting perspectives in the conversation on routines," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 27(6), pages 943-956.
    14. Hendrik Wilhelm & Indre Maurer & Mark Ebers, 2022. "(When) Are Dynamic Capabilities Routine? A Mixed‐Methods Configurational Analysis," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(6), pages 1531-1562, September.
    15. Wittenstein, Daniel, 2020. "Champions of digital transformation? The dynamic capabilities of hidden champions," ZEW Discussion Papers 20-065, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    16. Justin J. P. Jansen & Michiel P. Tempelaar & Frans A. J. van den Bosch & Henk W. Volberda, 2009. "Structural Differentiation and Ambidexterity: The Mediating Role of Integration Mechanisms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 797-811, August.
    17. Schriber, Svante & Löwstedt, Jan, 2015. "Tangible resources and the development of organizational capabilities," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 54-68.
    18. Schrettle, Stefan & Hinz, Andreas & Scherrer -Rathje, Maike & Friedli, Thomas, 2014. "Turning sustainability into action: Explaining firms' sustainability efforts and their impact on firm performance," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(PA), pages 73-84.
    19. 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.
    20. 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.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:12:p:4602-:d:188042. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.