IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jtecht/v48y2023i6d10.1007_s10961-022-09987-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Automation, organizational ambidexterity and the stability of employee relations: new tensions arising between corporate entrepreneurship, innovation management and stakeholder management

Author

Listed:
  • Martin R. W. Hiebl

    (University of Siegen
    Johannes Kepler University Linz)

  • David I. Pielsticker

    (University of Siegen)

Abstract

While previous entrepreneurship research has only seldom drawn on organizational ambidexterity, the analysis of the important contemporary tensions among entrepreneurship, innovation management and strategic management issues may be facilitated by more closely analysing organizational ambidexterity in entrepreneurial settings. In this paper, we follow this thinking and more closely analyse an often applied form of corporate entrepreneurship: automation. Such automation is transferring work that was formerly conducted by humans to machines and may thus result in new tensions between corporate entrepreneurship, innovation management and the management of organizational stakeholders such as employees. The present paper investigates whether increased automation lowers the stability of firms’ relationships with their employees. In addition, we expect that this relationship is moderated by organizational ambidexterity, as employees may have perceived ambidexterity as a signal that their firm will not overly invest in exploitation only, but maintain a balance between exploitation and exploration. Drawing on stakeholder theory, previous insights into corporate entrepreneurship and a survey of German Mittelstand firms, our findings show that highly ambidextrous firms are indeed more vulnerable to automation, leading to lower employee relational stability. Our findings thus suggest that in highly ambidextrous firms, novel tensions around automation-related corporate entrepreneurship will be detrimental to the stability of the firm’s relations with one of its key stakeholder groups: employees.

Suggested Citation

  • Martin R. W. Hiebl & David I. Pielsticker, 2023. "Automation, organizational ambidexterity and the stability of employee relations: new tensions arising between corporate entrepreneurship, innovation management and stakeholder management," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(6), pages 1978-2006, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:jtecht:v:48:y:2023:i:6:d:10.1007_s10961-022-09987-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s10961-022-09987-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10961-022-09987-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10961-022-09987-1?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. Martin Woerter, 2012. "Technology proximity between firms and universities and technology transfer," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 37(6), pages 828-866, December.
    2. Pan, Yaotian & Verbeke, Alain & Yuan, Wenlong, 2021. "CEO Transformational Leadership and Corporate Entrepreneurship in China," Management and Organization Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(1), pages 45-76, February.
    3. Abdullah Ramdhani & Prisia Fauzizah & Dini Turipanam Alamanda & Grisna Anggadwita, 2020. "Toward the Creation of Intrapreneur-Friendly Organization," Studies on Entrepreneurship, Structural Change and Industrial Dynamics, in: João Leitão & António Nunes & Dina Pereira & Veland Ramadani (ed.), Intrapreneurship and Sustainable Human Capital, edition 1, pages 85-97, Springer.
    4. Wong, Poh-Kam & Ngin, Phyllisis M., 1997. "Automation and organizational performance: The case of electronics manufacturing firms in Singapore," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 257-268, October.
    5. Susan Bartholomew & Anne D. Smith, 2006. "Improving Survey Response Rates from Chief Executive Officers in Small Firms: The Importance of Social Networks," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 30(1), pages 83-96, January.
    6. André Pahnke & Friederike Welter, 2019. "The German Mittelstand: antithesis to Silicon Valley entrepreneurship?," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 52(2), pages 345-358, February.
    7. Carlos García‐Serrano, 2011. "Does Size Matter? The Influence Of Firm Size On Working Conditions, Job Satisfaction And Quit Intentions," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 58(2), pages 221-247, May.
    8. Failla, Virgilio & Melillo, Francesca & Reichstein, Toke, 2017. "Entrepreneurship and employment stability — Job matching, labour market value, and personal commitment," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 162-177.
    9. Thomas J. Kull & Josip Kotlar & Martin Spring, 2018. "Small and Medium Enterprise Research in Supply Chain Management: The Case for Single†Respondent Research Designs," Journal of Supply Chain Management, Institute for Supply Management, vol. 54(1), pages 23-34, January.
    10. van Veen-Dirks, Paula, 2010. "Different uses of performance measures: The evaluation versus reward of production managers," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 141-164, February.
    11. Enrico Santarelli & Jacopo Staccioli & Marco Vivarelli, 2023. "Automation and related technologies: a mapping of the new knowledge base," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(2), pages 779-813, April.
    12. 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.
    13. Thommie Burström & Timothy L. Wilson, 2015. "Intrapreneurial ambidexterity: a platform project,Swedish approach," Management Research Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 38(11), pages 1172-1190, November.
    14. Roberto Garcia-Castro & Claude Francoeur, 2016. "When more is not better: Complementarities, costs and contingencies in stakeholder management," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(2), pages 406-424, February.
    15. 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.
    16. Armstrong, J. Scott & Overton, Terry S., 1977. "Estimating Nonresponse Bias in Mail Surveys," MPRA Paper 81694, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Berghoff, Hartmut, 2006. "The End of Family Business? The Mittelstand and German Capitalism in Transition, 1949–2000," Business History Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 80(2), pages 263-295, July.
    18. Johannes Luger & Sebastian Raisch & Markus Schimmer, 2018. "Dynamic Balancing of Exploration and Exploitation: The Contingent Benefits of Ambidexterity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(3), pages 449-470, June.
    19. Eni Gambeta & Balaji R. Koka & Robert E. Hoskisson, 2019. "Being too good for your own good: A stakeholder perspective on the differential effect of firm‐employee relationships on innovation search," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(1), pages 108-126, January.
    20. 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.
    21. Bedford, David S. & Bisbe, Josep & Sweeney, Breda, 2019. "Performance measurement systems as generators of cognitive conflict in ambidextrous firms," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 21-37.
    22. 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.
    23. Audretsch, David B & Elston, Julie A, 1997. "Financing the German Mittelstand," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 9(2), pages 97-110, April.
    24. O'Reilly, Charles & Harreld, J. Bruce & Tushman, Michael L., 2009. "Organizational Ambidexterity: IBM and Emerging Business Opportunities," Research Papers 2025, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    25. Brownell, P & Merchant, Ka, 1990. "The Budgetary And Performance Influences Of Product Standardization And Manufacturing Process Automation," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(2), pages 388-397.
    26. Sebastian D. Becker & Matthias D. Mahlendorf & Utz Schäffer & Mario Thaten, 2016. "Budgeting in Times of Economic Crisis," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(4), pages 1489-1517, December.
    27. Andre Jungmittag, 2021. "Robotisation of the manufacturing industries in the EU: Convergence or divergence?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(5), pages 1269-1290, October.
    28. J. P. Coen Rigtering & M. Ayelen Behrens, 2021. "The Effect of Corporate — Start-Up Collaborations on Corporate Entrepreneurship," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 15(8), pages 2427-2454, November.
    29. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    30. Aysit Tansel & Şaziye Gazîoğlu, 2014. "Management-employee relations, firm size and job satisfaction," International Journal of Manpower, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 35(8), pages 1260-1275, October.
    31. Thierry Lallemand & Robert Plasman & François Rycx, 2005. "Why do large firms pay higher wages? Evidence from matched worker‐firm data," International Journal of Manpower, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 26(7/8), pages 705-723, October.
    32. Jaepil Choi & Heli Wang, 2009. "Stakeholder relations and the persistence of corporate financial performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(8), pages 895-907, August.
    33. Wei Keat Benny Ng & Robin Junker & Rianne Appel-Meulenbroek & Myriam Cloodt & Theo Arentze, 2020. "Perceived benefits of science park attributes among park tenants in the Netherlands," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(4), pages 1196-1227, August.
    34. Benedikt Schnellbächer & Sven Heidenreich, 2020. "The role of individual ambidexterity for organizational performance: examining effects of ambidextrous knowledge seeking and offering," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(5), pages 1535-1561, October.
    35. Aleksandra Kacperczyk, 2009. "With greater power comes greater responsibility? takeover protection and corporate attention to stakeholders," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(3), pages 261-285, March.
    36. David H. Autor, 2015. "Why Are There Still So Many Jobs? The History and Future of Workplace Automation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 29(3), pages 3-30, Summer.
    37. O'Reilly, Charles A., III & Tushman, Michael L., 2013. "Organizational Ambidexterity: Past, Present and Future," Research Papers 2130, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    38. Eddleston, Kimberly A. & Kellermanns, Franz W., 2007. "Destructive and productive family relationships: A stewardship theory perspective," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 545-565, July.
    39. João Leitão & António Nunes & Dina Pereira & Veland Ramadani, 2020. "Insights into a New Research Agenda for the Behavioural Theory of the Firm," Studies on Entrepreneurship, Structural Change and Industrial Dynamics, in: João Leitão & António Nunes & Dina Pereira & Veland Ramadani (ed.), Intrapreneurship and Sustainable Human Capital, edition 1, pages 1-8, Springer.
    40. Arntz, Melanie & Gregory, Terry & Zierahn, Ulrich, 2017. "Revisiting the risk of automation," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 157-160.
    41. Johan Wiklund & DEAN Shepherd, 2003. "Knowledge‐based resources, entrepreneurial orientation, and the performance of small and medium‐sized businesses," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(13), pages 1307-1314, December.
    42. Wright, Scott A. & Schultz, Ainslie E., 2018. "The rising tide of artificial intelligence and business automation: Developing an ethical framework," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 61(6), pages 823-832.
    43. Berghoff, Hartmut, 2006. "The End of Family Business? The Mittelstand and German Capitalism in Transition, 1949–2000," Business History Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 80(2), pages 263-295, July.
    44. Constantine Andriopoulos & Marianne W. Lewis, 2009. "Exploitation-Exploration Tensions and Organizational Ambidexterity: Managing Paradoxes of Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 696-717, August.
    45. Zahra, Shaker A., 1991. "Predictors and financial outcomes of corporate entrepreneurship: An exploratory study," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 6(4), pages 259-285, July.
    46. Wolfgang H. Güttel & Stefan W.Konlechner, 2009. "Continuously Hanging by a Thread: Managing Contextually Ambidextrous Organizations," Schmalenbach Business Review (sbr), LMU Munich School of Management, vol. 61(2), pages 149-171, April.
    47. Gun Jea Yu & Joonkyum Lee, 2017. "When should a firm collaborate with research organizations for innovation performance? The moderating role of innovation orientation, size, and age," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(6), pages 1451-1465, December.
    48. Josef Åström & Wiebke Reim & Vinit Parida, 2022. "Value creation and value capture for AI business model innovation: a three-phase process framework," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 16(7), pages 2111-2133, October.
    49. Yang, Jie & Wang, Jinjun & Wong, Christina W.Y. & Lai, Kee-Hung, 2008. "Relational stability and alliance performance in supply chain," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 600-608, August.
    50. Tindara Abbate & Fabrizio Cesaroni & Angelo Presenza, 2021. "Knowledge transfer from universities to low- and medium-technology industries: evidence from Italian winemakers," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(4), pages 989-1016, August.
    51. Frank Montabon & Patricia J. Daugherty & Haozhe Chen, 2018. "Setting Standards for Single Respondent Survey Design," Journal of Supply Chain Management, Institute for Supply Management, vol. 54(1), pages 35-41, January.
    52. Timo Mitze & Teemu Makkonen, 2020. "When interaction matters: the contingent effects of spatial knowledge spillovers and internal R&I on firm productivity," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(4), pages 1088-1120, August.
    53. James Bessen, 2019. "Automation and jobs: when technology boosts employment," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 34(100), pages 589-626.
    54. Pahnke, André & Welter, Friederike, 2019. "The German Mittelstand: Antithesis to the Silicon Valley entrepreneurship model?," Working Papers 01/19, Institut für Mittelstandsforschung (IfM) Bonn.
    55. Zeki Simsek, 2009. "Organizational Ambidexterity: Towards a Multilevel Understanding," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(4), pages 597-624, June.
    56. R. Duane Ireland & Jeffrey G. Covin & Donald F. Kuratko, 2009. "Conceptualizing Corporate Entrepreneurship Strategy," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 33(1), pages 19-46, January.
    57. 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.
    58. Amy J. Hillman & Gerald D. Keim, 2001. "Shareholder value, stakeholder management, and social issues: what's the bottom line?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(2), pages 125-139, February.
    59. Aggela Dimitropoulou & Ioannis Giotopoulos & Aimilia Protogerou & Aggelos Tsakanikas, 2023. "Does the innovativeness of creative firms help their business clients to innovate?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 1-32, February.
    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. David B. Audretsch & Maribel Guerrero, 2023. "Is ambidexterity the missing link between entrepreneurship, management, and innovation?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(6), pages 1891-1918, 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. David B. Audretsch & Maribel Guerrero, 2023. "Is ambidexterity the missing link between entrepreneurship, management, and innovation?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(6), pages 1891-1918, December.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Christine Weigel & Klaus Derfuss & Martin R. W. Hiebl, 2023. "Financial managers and organizational ambidexterity in the German Mittelstand: the moderating role of strategy involvement," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 569-605, February.
    5. Olga Kassotaki, 2022. "Review of Organizational Ambidexterity Research," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(1), pages 21582440221, March.
    6. 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.
    7. Bürgel, Tobias R. & Hiebl, Martin R.W. & Pielsticker, David I., 2023. "Digitalization and entrepreneurial firms' resilience to pandemic crises: Evidence from COVID-19 and the German Mittelstand," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 186(PA).
    8. Katou, Anastasia A. & Budhwar, Pawan S. & Patel, Charmi, 2021. "A trilogy of organizational ambidexterity: Leader’s social intelligence, employee work engagement and environmental changes," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 688-700.
    9. 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.
    10. 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).
    11. Jan Ossenbrink & Joern Hoppmann & Volker H. Hoffmann, 2019. "Hybrid Ambidexterity: How the Environment Shapes Incumbents’ Use of Structural and Contextual Approaches," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(6), pages 1319-1348, November.
    12. Jan Ossenbrink & Joern Hoppmann, 2019. "Polytope Conditioning and Linear Convergence of the Frank–Wolfe Algorithm," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 44(1), pages 1319-1348, February.
    13. 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.
    14. Solís-Molina, Miguel & Hernández-Espallardo, Miguel & Rodríguez-Orejuela, Augusto, 2018. "Performance implications of organizational ambidexterity versus specialization in exploitation or exploration: The role of absorptive capacity," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 181-194.
    15. 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).
    16. Lennerts, Silke & Schulze, Anja & Tomczak, Torsten, 2020. "The asymmetric effects of exploitation and exploration on radical and incremental innovation performance: An uneven affair," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 121-134.
    17. Hu, Min & Dou, Junsheng & You, Xialei, 2023. "Is organizational ambidexterity always beneficial to family-managed SMEs? Evidence from China," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    18. Hui Gao & Suming Wu, 2023. "The Influence of Ambidextrous Knowledge Search on Technological Innovation: The Mediating Role of Knowledge Base," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(4), pages 21582440231, December.
    19. Gastaldi, Luca & Lessanibahri, Sina & Tedaldi, Gianluca & Miragliotta, Giovanni, 2022. "Companies’ adoption of Smart Technologies to achieve structural ambidexterity: an analysis with SEM," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    20. José Andrade & Mário Franco & Luis Mendes, 2023. "Facilitating and Inhibiting Effects of Organisational Ambidexterity in SME: an Analysis Centred on SME Characteristics," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 14(1), pages 35-64, March.

    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:kap:jtecht:v:48:y:2023:i:6:d:10.1007_s10961-022-09987-1. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.