IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/ibrjnl/v9y2016i3p53-67.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stakeholder-Driven Strategic Renewal

Author

Listed:
  • Megan F. Hess
  • Andrew M. Hess

Abstract

In an ever-changing global marketplace, organizations must adapt and renew to survive. To achieve such strategic renewal, however, organizations must overcome the inertial forces of existing competencies to evolve and develop new ones. Drawing on relational and behavioral theory, we describe how three aspects of stakeholder relationship management-employee alertness, openness to change, and knowledge exchange-both facilitate the exploration activities necessary for strategic renewal and avert the behavioral tendency toward strategic inertia. Our analysis of stakeholder-driven strategic renewal not only extends and elaborates the concept of stakeholder relationship management by making explicit its connections to strategic renewal, but it also highlights the importance of the proper fit between employee roles and dispositions in shaping the effectiveness of the managing for stakeholders approach.

Suggested Citation

  • Megan F. Hess & Andrew M. Hess, 2016. "Stakeholder-Driven Strategic Renewal," International Business Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 9(3), pages 53-67, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:ibn:ibrjnl:v:9:y:2016:i:3:p:53-67
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ibr/article/view/57424/30664
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ibr/article/view/57424
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ikujiro Nonaka & Ryoko Toyama, 2007. "Strategic management as distributed practical wisdom (phronesis)," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 16(3), pages 371-394, June.
    2. Bruce Kogut & Udo Zander, 1992. "Knowledge of the Firm, Combinative Capabilities, and the Replication of Technology," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(3), pages 383-397, August.
    3. Mary M. Crossan & Iris Berdrow, 2003. "Organizational learning and strategic renewal," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(11), pages 1087-1105, November.
    4. Wendy K. Smith & Michael L. Tushman, 2005. "Managing Strategic Contradictions: A Top Management Model for Managing Innovation Streams," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(5), pages 522-536, October.
    5. Jeffrey S. Harrison & Douglas A. Bosse & Robert A. Phillips, 2010. "Managing for stakeholders, stakeholder utility functions, and competitive advantage," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(1), pages 58-74, January.
    6. Harting, Troy R. & Harmeling, Susan S. & Venkataraman, S., 2006. "Innovative Stakeholder Relations: When “Ethics Pays†(and When it Doesn’t)," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(1), pages 43-68, January.
    7. Rebecca Henderson & Iain Cockburn, 1994. "Measuring Competence? Exploring Firm Effects in Pharmaceutical Research," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(S1), pages 63-84, December.
    8. Gianni Lorenzoni & Andrea Lipparini, 1999. "The leveraging of interfirm relationships as a distinctive organizational capability: a longitudinal study," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(4), pages 317-338, April.
    9. Ikujiro Nonaka, 1994. "A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(1), pages 14-37, February.
    10. Harrison, Jeffrey S. & Bosse, Douglas A., 2013. "How much is too much? The limits to generous treatment of stakeholders," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 56(3), pages 313-322.
    11. 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.
    12. Beverly Virany & Michael L. Tushman & Elaine Romanelli, 1992. "Executive Succession and Organization Outcomes in Turbulent Environments: An Organization Learning Approach," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(1), pages 72-91, February.
    13. 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.
    14. Daniel A. Levinthal & James G. March, 1993. "The myopia of learning," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(S2), pages 95-112, December.
    15. James P. Walsh, 1995. "Managerial and Organizational Cognition: Notes from a Trip Down Memory Lane," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(3), pages 280-321, June.
    16. Michael Lubatkin & Zeki Simsek & Steven W. Floyd, 2003. "Inter-firm networks and entreprenuerial behavior : A structural embeddedness perspective," Post-Print hal-02311651, HAL.
    17. Carmelo Cennamo & Pascual Berrone & Luis Gomez-Mejia, 2009. "Does Stakeholder Management have a Dark Side?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 89(4), pages 491-507, November.
    18. Donna Marie DeCarolis & David L. Deeds, 1999. "The impact of stocks and flows of organizational knowledge on firm performance: an empirical investigation of the biotechnology industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(10), pages 953-968, October.
    19. Clement, Ronald W., 2005. "The lessons from stakeholder theory for U.S. business leaders," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 255-264.
    20. Prashant Kale & Harbir Singh & Howard Perlmutter, 2000. "Learning and protection of proprietary assets in strategic alliances: building relational capital," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(3), pages 217-237, 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. Anna Kramarenko & Anton Kvitka, 2023. "Development of a social-oriented inclusive business model for strategic enterprise renewal," Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies, PC TECHNOLOGY CENTER, vol. 6(13 (126)), pages 6-14, December.
    2. Klaus Möller & Flavia Schmid & Theresa Maria Seehofer & Philipp Wenig, 2022. "How the Design of an Organizational Context Helps to Attain Contextual Ambidexterity," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 74(4), pages 603-629, 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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. Frank T. Rothaermel & Maria Tereza Alexandre, 2009. "Ambidexterity in Technology Sourcing: The Moderating Role of Absorptive Capacity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 759-780, August.
    4. 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.
    5. Koen H. Heimeriks & Geert Duysters, 2007. "Alliance Capability as a Mediator Between Experience and Alliance Performance: An Empirical Investigation into the Alliance Capability Development Process," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(1), pages 25-49, January.
    6. Guo, Jingjing & Guo, Bin & Zhou, Jianghua & Wu, Xiaobo, 2020. "How does the ambidexterity of technological learning routine affect firm innovation performance within industrial clusters? The moderating effects of knowledge attributes," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    7. 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.
    8. Heimeriks, K. & Duysters, G.M., 2004. "A study into the alliance capability development process," Working Papers 04.21, Eindhoven Center for Innovation Studies.
    9. Wu Zhan & Roger (Rongxin) Chen, 2013. "Dynamic capability and IJV performance: The effect of exploitation and exploration capabilities," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 601-632, June.
    10. Ming Piao & Edward J. Zajac, 2016. "How exploitation impedes and impels exploration: Theory and evidence," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(7), pages 1431-1447, July.
    11. Forés, Beatriz & Camisón, César, 2016. "Does incremental and radical innovation performance depend on different types of knowledge accumulation capabilities and organizational size?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 831-848.
    12. 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.
    13. Dovev Lavie & Israel Drori, 2012. "Collaborating for Knowledge Creation and Application: The Case of Nanotechnology Research Programs," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(3), pages 704-724, June.
    14. Duysters, G.M. & Heimeriks, K.H., 2002. "The influence of alliance capabilities on alliance performance: an empirical investigation," Working Papers 02.08, Eindhoven Center for Innovation Studies.
    15. Lin, H.E., 2010. "Effects of strategy, context and antecedents and capabilities on the outcomes of ambidexterity : A multiple country case study of the US, China and Taiwan," Other publications TiSEM c0eab7d6-d6c7-4b55-9822-1, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    16. Montserrat Boronat-Navarro & Alexandra García-Joerger, 2019. "Ambidexterity, Alliances and Environmental Management System Adoption in Spanish Hotels," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-16, October.
    17. Yang, Yi & Narayanan, V.K. & Zahra, Shaker, 2009. "Developing the selection and valuation capabilities through learning: The case of corporate venture capital," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 261-273, May.
    18. Peeters, T.J.G., 2013. "External knowledge search and use in new product development," Other publications TiSEM 300ebb34-b090-4210-b95e-f, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    19. Ye Jin Lee & Kwangsoo Shin & Eungdo Kim, 2019. "The Influence of a Firm’s Capability and Dyadic Relationship of the Knowledge Base on Ambidextrous Innovation in Biopharmaceutical M&As," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-17, September.
    20. Pettus, Michael L. & Kor, Yasemin Y. & Mahoney, Joseph T., 2007. "A Theory of Change in Turbulent Environments: The Sequencing of Dynamic Capabilities Following Industry Deregulation," Working Papers 07-0100, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    stakeholder relationship management; strategic renewal; stakeholder theory; behavioral theory;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ibn:ibrjnl:v:9:y:2016:i:3:p:53-67. 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: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    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.