IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Achieving ambidexterity in large, complex engineering projects: a case study of the Sutong Bridge project

Listed author(s):
  • Li Liu
  • Xuerong Wang
  • Zhaohan Sheng
Registered author(s):

    Complex engineering projects typically face unique challenges that demand both exploring innovative solutions and exploiting existing capabilities. However, it is difficult to manage both exploitation and exploration in the same organizational unit owing to the different organizational support required for each. The solutions to managing the tension involve separating the two approaches into separate organizational units—structural separation, or separating by time—temporal separation, or by creating an organizational context that empowers employees to pursue both. Structural separation may not work because of the predominant need for integration at project level due to the fragmented nature of the construction industry and the co-location of project team. Instead, temporal separation could be an effective mechanism of separation. Creating the appropriate project context could facilitate project ambidexterity. Extant studies on ambidexterity focus on the organizational level which may not apply at project level. This study examines the effects of the above three antecedents to project ambidexterity. The key findings are that ambidexterity can be achieved during the limited lifespan of a complex engineering project through: (1) partitioning the two approaches in different project phases and then integrating the two; (2) implementing policies and financial support aiming at facilitating contextual ambidexterity both at and above project level.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Taylor & Francis Journals in its journal Construction Management and Economics.

    Volume (Year): 30 (2012)
    Issue (Month): 5 (March)
    Pages: 399-409

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:taf:conmgt:v:30:y:2012:i:5:p:399-409
    DOI: 10.1080/01446193.2012.679948
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    Order Information: Web:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:conmgt:v:30:y:2012:i:5:p:399-409. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Chris Longhurst)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.