IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ems/euriar/115314.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Strategic Growth and Implementation: Thriving in a Disruptive Landscape

Author

Listed:
  • Mom, T.J.M.

Abstract

To create wealth in a changing and competitive landscape, managers need to identify and develop opportunities for new strategic growth. They also need to have excellent implementation capabilities to reap the benefits of their new growth initiatives. Yet, most managers and companies struggle or even fail to do so. To address this struggle, management practice and research about strategic growth and about implementation need integration. In this inaugural address, I propose three avenues, which may contribute to this. First, for organizations to become really good at developing new strategies for growth and also at implementing them, they need ambidextrous managers, i.e., managers with the capacity to do two very different things equally well, like being entrepreneurial and strategic, conducting exploratory and exploitative learning, and putting in place top-down and bottom-up strategic processes. The second avenue is about creating close connections and systematic interactions between new growth and implementation activities within the organization and among the actors involved. This pertains to managers across different hierarchical levels and to the involvement of operational managers and employees. The third avenue points to scale-ups as an exciting context for practice and research on growth and implementation. Interest in scale-ups may benefit from going beyond typical macro questions of job creation as scaling-up a company rapidly is full of unique managerial and organizational challenges, and scale-ups have the potential to be impactful forces for positive change.

Suggested Citation

  • Mom, T.J.M., 2019. "Strategic Growth and Implementation: Thriving in a Disruptive Landscape," ERIM Inaugural Address Series Research in Management EIA 2019-076-S&E, 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..
  • Handle: RePEc:ems:euriar:115314
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://repub.eur.nl/pub/115314/30966_Oratieboekje_Prof_dr_Tom_Mom_digitaal.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    2. Karakaya, Fahri & Kobu, Bulent, 1994. "New product development process: An investigation of success and failure in high-technology and non-high-technology firms," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 49-66, January.
    3. Magnus Henrekson & Dan Johansson, 2010. "Gazelles as job creators: a survey and interpretation of the evidence," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 227-244, September.
    4. Tom J. M. Mom & Frans A. J. Van Den Bosch & Henk W. Volberda, 2007. "Investigating Managers' Exploration and Exploitation Activities: The Influence of Top‐Down, Bottom‐Up, and Horizontal Knowledge Inflows," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(6), pages 910-931, September.
    5. Raymond Van Wijk & Justin J. P. Jansen & Marjorie A. Lyles, 2008. "Inter‐ and Intra‐Organizational Knowledge Transfer: A Meta‐Analytic Review and Assessment of its Antecedents and Consequences," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(4), pages 830-853, June.
    6. Burgelman, Robert A., 2002. "Strategy as Vector and the Inertia of Co-evolutionary Lock-in," Research Papers 1745, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    7. Teppo Felin & Steve W. J. Kozlowski & Georgia T. Chao, 2012. "The Dynamics of Emergence: Cognition and Cohesion in Work Teams," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(5-6), pages 335-354, July.
    8. Cândido, Carlos J F & Santos, Sérgio P, 2015. "Strategy implementation: What is the failure rate?," Journal of Management & Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 21(2), pages 237-262, March.
    9. Daniel A. Levinthal & James G. March, 1993. "The myopia of learning," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(S2), pages 95-112, December.
    10. Michael A. Hitt & R. Duane Ireland & S. Michael Camp & Donald L. Sexton, 2001. "Strategic entrepreneurship: entrepreneurial strategies for wealth creation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(6‐7), pages 479-491, June.
    11. Tom J. M. Mom & Frans A. J. van den Bosch & Henk W. Volberda, 2009. "Understanding Variation in Managers' Ambidexterity: Investigating Direct and Interaction Effects of Formal Structural and Personal Coordination Mechanisms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 812-828, August.
    12. Robert M. Grant, 1996. "Prospering in Dynamically-Competitive Environments: Organizational Capability as Knowledge Integration," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(4), pages 375-387, August.
    13. Donald F. Kuratko & David B. Audretsch, 2009. "Strategic Entrepreneurship: Exploring Different Perspectives of an Emerging Concept," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 33(1), pages 1-17, January.
    14. Steven W. Floyd & Bill Wooldridge, 1997. "Middle Management’s Strategic Influence and Organizational Performance," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(3), pages 465-485, May.
    15. Mariano L. M. Heyden & Sebastian P. L. Fourné & Bastiaan A. S. Koene & Renate Werkman & Shahzad (Shaz) Ansari, 2017. "Rethinking ‘Top‐Down’ and ‘Bottom‐Up’ Roles of Top and Middle Managers in Organizational Change: Implications for Employee Support," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(7), pages 961-985, November.
    16. Michelle Rogan & Marie Louise Mors, 2014. "A Network Perspective on Individual-Level Ambidexterity in Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(6), pages 1860-1877, December.
    17. J. Robert Baum & Barbara J. Bird, 2010. "The Successful Intelligence of High-Growth Entrepreneurs: Links to New Venture Growth," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(2), pages 397-412, April.
    18. Qing Cao & Eric Gedajlovic & Hongping Zhang, 2009. "Unpacking Organizational Ambidexterity: Dimensions, Contingencies, and Synergistic Effects," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 781-796, August.
    19. Clayton M. Christensen & Rory McDonald & Elizabeth J. Altman & Jonathan E. Palmer, 2018. "Disruptive Innovation: An Intellectual History and Directions for Future Research," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(7), pages 1043-1078, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Olga Kassotaki, 2022. "Review of Organizational Ambidexterity Research," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(1), pages 21582440221, March.
    2. Sunkee Lee, 2019. "Learning-by-Moving: Can Reconfiguring Spatial Proximity Between Organizational Members Promote Individual-level Exploration?," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(3), pages 467-488, May.
    3. 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.
    4. Marios Kokkodis, 2023. "Adjusting Skillset Cohesion in Online Labor Markets: Reputation Gains and Opportunity Losses," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(3), pages 1245-1258, September.
    5. Lori Rosenkopf & Patia McGrath, 2011. "Advancing the Conceptualization and Operationalization of Novelty in Organizational Research," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1297-1311, October.
    6. Marina Estrada-Cruz & Noelia Rodriguez-Hernández & Antonio J. Verdú-Jover & Jose Maria Gómez-Gras, 2022. "The effect of competitive intensity on the relationship between strategic entrepreneurship and organizational results," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 1-24, March.
    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. François Constant & Richard Calvi & Thomas Johnsen, 2020. "Managing tensions between exploitative and exploratory innovation through purchasing function ambidexterity Managing tensions between exploitative and exploratory innovation through purchasing functio," Post-Print hal-02891790, HAL.
    9. Hughes, Paul & Hughes, Matthew & Stokes, Peter & Lee, Hanna & Rodgers, Peter & Degbey, William Y., 2020. "Micro-foundations of organizational ambidexterity in the context of cross-border mergers and acquisitions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    10. Youngtak M. Kim & John R. Busenbark & Seung-Hwan Jeong & Son K. Lam, 2022. "The performance impact of marketing dualities: a response surface approach to resolving empirical challenges," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 50(5), pages 915-940, September.
    11. Fourné, Sebastian P.L. & Rosenbusch, Nina & Heyden, Mariano L.M. & Jansen, Justin J.P., 2019. "Structural and contextual approaches to ambidexterity: A meta-analysis of organizational and environmental contingencies," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 564-576.
    12. Marina Estrada-Cruz & Noelia Rodriguez-Hernández & Antonio J. Verdú-Jover & Jose Maria Gómez-Gras, 0. "The effect of competitive intensity on the relationship between strategic entrepreneurship and organizational results," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-24.
    13. 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.
    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. Marios Kokkodis & Sam Ransbotham, 2023. "Learning to Successfully Hire in Online Labor Markets," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(3), pages 1597-1614, March.
    16. Veider, Viktoria & Matzler, Kurt, 2016. "The ability and willingness of family-controlled firms to arrive at organizational ambidexterity," Journal of Family Business Strategy, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 105-116.
    17. Sunkee Lee & Philipp Meyer-Doyle, 2017. "How Performance Incentives Shape Individual Exploration and Exploitation: Evidence from Microdata," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(1), pages 19-38, February.
    18. 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.
    19. 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.
    20. Son K. Lam & Thomas E. DeCarlo & Ashish Sharma, 2019. "Salesperson ambidexterity in customer engagement: do customer base characteristics matter?," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 659-680, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Strategic growth; Implementation; Execution; Strategic management; Entrepreneurship; Ambidexterity; Scale-up; High growth firm; Competitive advantage; Disruption;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • M13 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - New Firms; Startups
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ems:euriar:115314. 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: RePub (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/erimanl.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.