IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-04474481.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Is ambidexterity a way of managing paradoxes? Lessons from a multiple-case study

Author

Listed:
  • Amaury Grimand

    (CEREGE [Poitiers, La Rochelle] - Centre de recherche en gestion [EA 1722] - UP - Université de Poitiers = University of Poitiers - ULR - La Rochelle Université, IAE Poitiers - Institut d'Administration des Entreprises (IAE) - Poitiers - UP - Université de Poitiers = University of Poitiers)

  • Ewan Oiry

    (CEREGE [Poitiers, La Rochelle] - Centre de recherche en gestion [EA 1722] - UP - Université de Poitiers = University of Poitiers - ULR - La Rochelle Université, ESG-UQAM - École des Sciences de la Gestion [UQAM] - UQAM - Université du Québec à Montréal = University of Québec in Montréal, IAE Poitiers - Institut d'Administration des Entreprises (IAE) - Poitiers - UP - Université de Poitiers = University of Poitiers)

  • Aurélien Ragaigne

    (CEREGE [Poitiers, La Rochelle] - Centre de recherche en gestion [EA 1722] - UP - Université de Poitiers = University of Poitiers - ULR - La Rochelle Université, IAE Poitiers - Institut d'Administration des Entreprises (IAE) - Poitiers - UP - Université de Poitiers = University of Poitiers)

Abstract

Paradoxes are progressively considered as a central form of organizational management. However, their management remains unclear. Dilemma (that consists of focusing on one element of the paradox) and compromise appear to be limited. This paper explores the idea that ambidexterity could be an innovative way of managing paradoxes. To show this, it presents three case studies that illustrate the limitations of dilemma and compromise and underline that ambidextries could be a way of managing paradoxes.

Suggested Citation

  • Amaury Grimand & Ewan Oiry & Aurélien Ragaigne, 2015. "Is ambidexterity a way of managing paradoxes? Lessons from a multiple-case study," Post-Print hal-04474481, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-04474481
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-04474481v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-04474481v1/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Brivot, Marion & Gendron, Yves, 2011. "Beyond panopticism: On the ramifications of surveillance in a contemporary professional setting," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 135-155, April.
    2. 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.
    3. Abu Rahaman & Dean Neu & Jeff Everett, 2010. "Accounting for Social†Purpose Alliances: Confronting the HIV/AIDS Pandemic in Africa," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(4), pages 1093-1129, December.
    4. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    5. Gilsing, V.A. & Nooteboom, B., 2004. "Co-evolution in innovation systems: the case of pharmaceutical biotechnology," Working Papers 04.09, Eindhoven Center for Innovation Studies.
    6. Sawsen Dhifallah & Valérie Chanal & Christian Defélix, 2008. "Quelle gestion des ressources humaines dans les organisations ambidextres ?," Revue française de gestion, Lavoisier, vol. 0(7), pages 161-175.
    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. Aurélie Dudézert & Pierre Fayard & Cécile Gaumand & Ewan Oiry, 2014. "Au-delà de l’ambidextrie : les apports de l’approche japonaise du management des connaissances," Post-Print hal-02971531, HAL.
    2. Li, Mingxiang, 2021. "Exploring novel technologies through board interlocks: Spillover vs. broad exploration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    3. Elizabeth J. Altman & Frank Nagle & Michael L. Tushman, 2013. "Innovating Without Information Constraints: Organizations, Communities, and Innovation When Information Costs Approach Zero," Harvard Business School Working Papers 14-043, Harvard Business School, revised Sep 2014.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Jiewei Zu & Jianan Wang & Jun Ma, 2022. "Ambidexterity in a Rapidly Changing Environment of China: Top Management Team Decision Making and Sustained Performance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-20, March.
    7. Brion, Sébastien & Mothe, Caroline & Sabatier, Mareva, 2007. "What impacts more on innovation : Organizational context or individual competences ?," MPRA Paper 10595, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Koryak, Oksana & Lockett, Andy & Hayton, James & Nicolaou, Nicos & Mole, Kevin, 2018. "Disentangling the antecedents of ambidexterity: Exploration and exploitation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 413-427.
    9. Oana Buliga & Christian W. Scheiner & Kai-Ingo Voigt, 2016. "Business model innovation and organizational resilience: towards an integrated conceptual framework," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 86(6), pages 647-670, August.
    10. Ning Jia, 2019. "Corporate innovation strategy and disclosure policy," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 52(1), pages 253-288, January.
    11. Andreea N. Kiss & Dirk Libaers & Pamela S. Barr & Tang Wang & Miles A. Zachary, 2020. "CEO cognitive flexibility, information search, and organizational ambidexterity," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(12), pages 2200-2233, December.
    12. Giovanni Gavetti, 2012. "PERSPECTIVE—Toward a Behavioral Theory of Strategy," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 267-285, February.
    13. Liu Li, 2020. "Trade-Off Exploration and Exploitation as Moderators: How does Technological Heterogeneity among Cooperators Affect Firms Financial Performance?," Asian Economic and Financial Review, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 10(4), pages 380-398, April.
    14. Yu Zhou & Guangjian Liu & Xiaoxi Chang & Ying Hong, 2021. "Top-down, bottom-up or outside-in? An examination of triadic mechanisms on firm innovation in Chinese firms," Asian Business & Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 20(1), pages 131-162, February.
    15. Burgers, J. Henri & Jansen, Justin J.P. & Van den Bosch, Frans A.J. & Volberda, Henk W., 2009. "Structural differentiation and corporate venturing: The moderating role of formal and informal integration mechanisms," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 206-220, May.
    16. 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.
    17. Gomes, Paulo J. & Silva, Graça Miranda & Sarkis, Joseph, 2020. "Exploring the relationship between quality ambidexterity and sustainable production," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 224(C).
    18. Mittone, Luigi & Morreale, Azzurra & Ritala, Paavo, 2024. "Initial conditions and path dependence in explorative and exploitative learning: An experimental study," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    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. Jeon, Euiju & Maula, Markku, 2022. "Progress toward understanding tensions in corporate venture capital: A systematic review," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 37(4).

    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:hal:journl:hal-04474481. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.