IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/indcch/v27y2018i1p131-148..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Punctuated equilibrium or ambidexterity: dynamics of incremental and radical organizational change over time

Author

Listed:
  • Juha Uotila

Abstract

Using formal simulation, I examine how environmental turbulence and complexity influence the temporal patterns of incremental and radical organizational change. In stable and simple environments, incremental change is found to be sufficient to keep pace with the task environment. Both turbulence and complexity are found to generate a punctuated equilibrium pattern but with different underlying mechanisms. When both turbulence and complexity are high, the punctuated equilibrium pattern is replaced by a dynamic type of ambidexterity. Implications for managing organizational change are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Juha Uotila, 2018. "Punctuated equilibrium or ambidexterity: dynamics of incremental and radical organizational change over time," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 27(1), pages 131-148.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:indcch:v:27:y:2018:i:1:p:131-148.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/icc/dtx018
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    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. Jan W. Rivkin, 2001. "Reproducing Knowledge: Replication Without Imitation at Moderate Complexity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(3), pages 274-293, June.
    2. Jan W. Rivkin & Nicolaj Siggelkow, 2003. "Balancing Search and Stability: Interdependencies Among Elements of Organizational Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(3), pages 290-311, March.
    3. Giovanni Gavetti & Daniel A. Levinthal & Jan W. Rivkin, 2005. "Strategy making in novel and complex worlds: the power of analogy," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(8), pages 691-712, August.
    4. Marengo, Luigi, et al, 2000. "The Structure of Problem-Solving Knowledge and the Structure of Organizations," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 9(4), pages 757-788, December.
    5. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    6. Christina Fang & Daniel Levinthal, 2009. "Near-Term Liability of Exploitation: Exploration and Exploitation in Multistage Problems," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(3), pages 538-551, June.
    7. Sendil K. Ethiraj & Daniel Levinthal, 2004. "Modularity and Innovation in Complex Systems," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(2), pages 159-173, February.
    8. Nicolaj Siggelkow & Jan W. Rivkin, 2005. "Speed and Search: Designing Organizations for Turbulence and Complexity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(2), pages 101-122, April.
    9. Michael J. Lenox & Scott F. Rockart & Arie Y. Lewin, 2007. "Interdependency, Competition, and Industry Dynamics," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(4), pages 599-615, April.
    10. 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.
    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. Theresa K. Lant & Stephen J. Mezias, 1992. "An Organizational Learning Model of Convergence and Reorientation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(1), pages 47-71, February.
    13. Paul S. Adler & Barbara Goldoftas & David I. Levine, 1999. "Flexibility Versus Efficiency? A Case Study of Model Changeovers in the Toyota Production System," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(1), pages 43-68, February.
    14. Svenja C. Sommer & Christoph H. Loch, 2004. "Selectionism and Learning in Projects with Complexity and Unforeseeable Uncertainty," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(10), pages 1334-1347, October.
    15. Daniel A. Levinthal & James G. March, 1993. "The myopia of learning," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(S2), pages 95-112, December.
    16. Rajiv Sabherwal & Rudy Hirschheim & Tim Goles, 2001. "The Dynamics of Alignment: Insights from a Punctuated Equilibrium Model," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(2), pages 179-197, April.
    17. 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.
    18. 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.
    19. Klepper, Steven, 1997. "Industry Life Cycles," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 6(1), pages 145-181.
    20. 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.
    21. Sucheta Nadkarni & V. K. Narayanan, 2007. "Strategic schemas, strategic flexibility, and firm performance: the moderating role of industry clockspeed," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(3), pages 243-270, March.
    22. Jan W. Rivkin & Nicolaj Siggelkow, 2007. "Patterned Interactions in Complex Systems: Implications for Exploration," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(7), pages 1068-1085, July.
    23. Zhiang (John) Lin & Haibin Yang & Irem Demirkan, 2007. "The Performance Consequences of Ambidexterity in Strategic Alliance Formations: Empirical Investigation and Computational Theorizing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(10), pages 1645-1658, October.
    24. Jan W. Rivkin, 2000. "Imitation of Complex Strategies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(6), pages 824-844, June.
    25. Daniel A. Levinthal, 1997. "Adaptation on Rugged Landscapes," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(7), pages 934-950, July.
    26. Frenken, Koen, 2000. "A complexity approach to innovation networks. The case of the aircraft industry (1909-1997)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 257-272, February.
    27. Michael J. Lenox & Scott F. Rockart & Arie Y. Lewin, 2006. "Interdependency, Competition, and the Distribution of Firm and Industry Profits," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(5), pages 757-772, May.
    28. Thorbjørn Knudsen & Daniel A. Levinthal, 2007. "Two Faces of Search: Alternative Generation and Alternative Evaluation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(1), pages 39-54, February.
    29. Peter Boumgarden & Jackson Nickerson & Todd R. Zenger, 2012. "Sailing into the wind: Exploring the relationships among ambidexterity, vacillation, and organizational performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(6), pages 587-610, June.
    30. 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.
    31. Frank T. Rothaermel & David L. Deeds, 2004. "Exploration and exploitation alliances in biotechnology: a system of new product development," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(3), pages 201-221, March.
    32. Henk W. Volberda, 1996. "Toward the Flexible Form: How to Remain Vital in Hypercompetitive Environments," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(4), pages 359-374, August.
    33. 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.
    34. Juha Uotila & Markku Maula & Thomas Keil & Shaker A. Zahra, 2009. "Exploration, exploitation, and financial performance: analysis of S&P 500 corporations," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(2), pages 221-231, February.
    35. Nicolaj Siggelkow & Daniel A. Levinthal, 2003. "Temporarily Divide to Conquer: Centralized, Decentralized, and Reintegrated Organizational Approaches to Exploration and Adaptation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(6), pages 650-669, December.
    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. den Hamer, Pieter & Frenken, Koen, 2021. "A network-based model of exploration and exploitation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 589-599.
    2. Ismael Cristofer Baierle & Francisco Tardelli da Silva & Ricardo Gonçalves de Faria Correa & Jones Luís Schaefer & Matheus Becker Da Costa & Guilherme Brittes Benitez & Elpidio Oscar Benitez Nara, 2022. "Competitiveness of Food Industry in the Era of Digital Transformation towards Agriculture 4.0," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-22, September.
    3. Yu, Honglan & Fletcher, Margaret & Buck, Trevor, 2022. "Managing digital transformation during re-internationalization: Trajectories and implications for performance," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 28(4).
    4. 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.
    5. Olga Kassotaki, 2022. "Review of Organizational Ambidexterity Research," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(1), pages 21582440221, March.

    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. Carolina Rojas-Córdova & Amanda J. Williamson & Julio A. Pertuze & Gustavo Calvo, 2023. "Why one strategy does not fit all: a systematic review on exploration–exploitation in different organizational archetypes," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 17(7), pages 2251-2295, October.
    3. Gatti, Corrado & Volpe, Loredana & Vagnani, Gianluca, 2015. "Interdependence among productive activities: Implications for exploration and exploitation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 711-722.
    4. 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.
    5. O'Reilly, Charles A., III & Tushman, Michael L., 2013. "Organizational Ambidexterity: Past, Present and Future," Research Papers 2130, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    6. Peter Moran & Michele Simoni & Gianluca Vagnani, 2011. "Becoming the best: by beating or ignoring the best? Toward an expanded view of the role of managerial selection in complex and turbulent environments," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 15(3), pages 447-481, August.
    7. Friederike Wall, 2016. "Agent-based modeling in managerial science: an illustrative survey and study," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 135-193, January.
    8. 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).
    9. 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.
    10. Oliver Baumann, 2015. "Models of complex adaptive systems in strategy and organization research," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 14(2), pages 169-183, November.
    11. Mo Chen & Aseem Kaul & Brian Wu, 2019. "Adaptation across multiple landscapes: Relatedness, complexity, and the long run effects of coordination in diversified firms," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(11), pages 1791-1821, November.
    12. 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.
    13. Jingoo Kang & Sang‐Joon Kim, 2020. "Performance implications of incremental transition and discontinuous jump between exploration and exploitation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(6), pages 1083-1111, June.
    14. Sai Yayavaram & Sasanka Sekhar Chanda, 2023. "Decision making under high complexity: a computational model for the science of muddling through," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 29(2), pages 300-335, June.
    15. Sahi, Gurjeet Kaur & Gupta, Mahesh C. & Cheng, T.C.E., 2020. "The effects of strategic orientation on operational ambidexterity: A study of indian SMEs in the industry 4.0 era," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 220(C).
    16. 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.
    17. Ioniţă Cătălin Gabriel, 2022. "Exploration vs. Exploitation: How Innovation Strategies Impact Firm Performance and Competitive Advantage," Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence, Sciendo, vol. 16(1), pages 31-46, August.
    18. Oliver Baumann & Nicolaj Siggelkow, 2013. "Dealing with Complexity: Integrated vs. Chunky Search Processes," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(1), pages 116-132, February.
    19. 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.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C63 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Computational Techniques
    • D21 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Firm Behavior: Theory
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes

    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:oup:indcch:v:27:y:2018:i:1:p:131-148.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/icc .

    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.