Building ambidextrous organizations through intellectual capital: a proposal for a multilevel model

  1. Susana Fernández-Pérez de la Lastra 1
  2. Natalia García-Carbonell 1
  3. Fernando Martín-Alcázar 1
  4. Gonzalo Sánchez-Gardey 1
  1. 1 Universidad de Cádiz
    info

    Universidad de Cádiz

    Cádiz, España

    ROR https://ror.org/04mxxkb11

Revista:
Intangible Capital

ISSN: 1697-9818

Año de publicación: 2017

Volumen: 13

Número: 3

Páginas: 668-693

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.3926/IC.972 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAcceso abierto editor

Otras publicaciones en: Intangible Capital

Resumen

Purpose: This paper proposes an alternative theoretical model to describe, from a multilevel perspective, the way in which ambidexterity is built across different organizational levels, through specific combinations of the facets of intellectual capital—human, social and organizational capital. Design/methodology/approach: In this study, main arguments from intellectual capital, strategic human resource management (SHRM) and multilevel literature are integrated. The intellectual capital literature provides our model with the input (human capital), mechanisms (social capital) and the infrastructure (organizational capital) required to create ambidextrous capabilities; the multilevel perspective reveals the context in which ambidexterity is reached, and the strategic human resource management literature provides the model with the specific mechanisms (policies and practices) and conditions required by ambidexterity (HRM flexibility and horizontal fit). Findings: Although the literature widely recognizes ambidexterity as a potential source of sustainable competitive advantage, the processes by which organizations complement exploration and exploitation activities still remain unclear. This study sheds some light on the analysis of these complex dynamics, explaining how ambidextrous capabilities can arise from different alternative combinations of human, social and organizational capital. Originality/value: The paper expands the extant literature in the field, describing different paths to achieving organizational ambidexterity. The configurational approach adopted adds value to the proposed model, as it helps to explaining alternative synergistic mixes of ambidextrous intellectual capital at different organizational levels.

€ Ver financiación

Información de financiación

The researchproject described in this paper was developed under the Research Group SEJ-449 funded by the Andalusian Government (Andalusian Plan for R&D&I 2007-2013) and the Research Projects ECO2011- 26982 and ECO2014-56580-R, funded by the Spanish Ministry for Science and Technology (Non-oriented Fundamental Research Projects Subprogram).

Financiadores

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Appelbaum, E., Bailey, T., Berg, P., & Kalleberg, A. (2000). Manufacturing competitive advantage: The effects of high performance work systems on plant performance and company outcomes. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press
  • Barney, J. B., & Wright, P. M. (1998). On becoming a strategic partner: The role of human resources in gaining competitive advantage. Human Resource Management, 37(1), 31-46. https://doi.org/10.1002/ (SICI)1099-050X(199821)37:1<31::AID-HRM4>3.0.CO;2-W
  • Bontis, N. (1998). Intellectual capital: An exploratory study that develops measures and models. Management Decision, 36(2), 63-76. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251749810204142
  • Bunderson, J.S., & Sutcliffe, K.M. (2001). Comparing alternative conceptualizations of functional diversity in management teams: Process and performance effects. Academy of Management Journal, 45(5), 875-893. https://doi.org/10.2307/3069319
  • Burgelman, R.A. (2002). Strategy as vector and the inertia of Coevolutionary lock-in. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47(2), 325. https://doi.org/10.2307/3094808
  • Coleman, J.S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94(s1), S95. https://doi.org/10.1086/228943
  • Delery, J.E. (1998). Issues of fit in strategic human resource management: Implications for research. Human Resource Management Review, 8(3), 289-309. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1053-4822(98)90006-7
  • Dougherty, D. (1992). Interpretive barriers to successful product innovation in large firms. Organization Science, 3(2), 179-202. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.3.2.179
  • Eisenhardt, K.M., & Sull, D.N. (2001). Strategy as simple rules. Harvard Business Review, 79(1), 106-119
  • Gibson, C.B., & Birkinshaw, J. (2004). The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity'. Academy of Management Journal, 47(2), 209-226. https://doi.org/10.2307/20159573
  • Gilson, L.L., Mathieu, J.E., Shalley, C.E., & Ruddy, T.M. (2005). Creativity and standardization: complementary or conflicting drivers of team effectiveness. Academy of Management Journal, 48(3), 521-531. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2005.17407916
  • Gupta, A.K., Smith, K.G., & Shalley, C.E. (2006). The interplay between exploration and exploitation. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4), 693-706. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2006.22083026
  • Hansen, N.K., Güttel, W.H., & Swart, J. (2017). HRM in dynamic environments: Exploitative, exploratory, and ambidextrous HR architectures. Manuscript submitted for publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2016.1270985
  • Iansiti, M. (1993). Real-world R&D: Jumping the product generation gap. Harvard Business Review, 71(3), 138-147
  • Jansen, J.J.P., Simsek, Z., & Cao, Q. (2012). Ambidexterity and performance in multiunit contexts: Cross-level moderating effects of structural and resource attributes. Strategic Management Journal, 33(11), 1286-1303. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.1977
  • Jansen, J.J.P., van den Bosch, F.A.J., & Volberda, H.W. (2006). Exploratory innovation, exploitative innovation, and performance: Effects of organizational antecedents and environmental moderators. Management Science, 52(11), 1661-1674. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1060.0576
  • Kang, S.-C., Morris, S.S., & Snell, S.A. (2007). Relational archetypes, organizational learning, and value creation: Extending the human resource architecture. Academy of Management Review, 32(1), 236-256. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2007.23464060
  • Kang, S.-C., & Snell, S.A. (2009). Intellectual capital architectures and ambidextrous learning: A framework for human resource management. Journal of Management Studies, 46(1), 65-92. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2008.00776.x
  • Kang, S.-C., Snell, S.A., & Swart, J. (2012). Options-based HRM, intellectual capital, and exploratory and exploitative learning in law firms' practice groups. Human Resource Management, 51(4), 461-485. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21484
  • Ketkar, S. & Sett, P.K. (2009). HR flexibility and firm performance: Analysis of a multi-level causal model. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 20(5), 1009-1038. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585190902850240
  • Kostopoulos, K.C., Bozionelos, N., & Syrigos, E. (2015). Ambidexterity and unit performance: Intellectual capital antecedents and cross-level moderating effects of human resource practices. Human Resource Management, 54(S1), s111-s132. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21705
  • Kozlowski, S.W.J., & Klein, K.J. (2000). A multilevel approach to theory and research in organizations: Contextual, temporal, and emergent processes. In K.J. Klein & S.W.J. Kozlowski (Eds), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions (pp. 3-90). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass
  • Laureiro-Martínez, D., Brusoni, S., Canessa, N., & Zollo, M. (2015). Understanding the explorationexploitation dilemma: An fMRI study of attention control and decision-making performance. Strategic Management Journal, 36(3), 319-338. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2221
  • Lavie, D., Stettner, U., & Tushman, M.L. (2010). Exploration and exploitation within and across organizations. The Academy of Management Annals, 4(1), 109-155. https://doi.org/10.1080/19416521003691287
  • Leana, C.R., & van Buren, H.J. (1999). Organizational social capital and employment practices. The Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 538-555. https://doi.org/10.2307/259141
  • Leonard-Barton, D. (1992). Core capabilities and core rigidities: A paradox in managing new product development. Long Range Planning, 26(1), 111-125. https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-6301(93)90313-5
  • Lepak, D.P., Liao, H., Chung, Y., & Harden, E.E. (2006). A conceptual review of human resource management systems in strategic human resource management research. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 25(1), 217-271. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-7301(06)25006-0
  • March, J.G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71-87.https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2.1.71
  • Martín-Alcázar, F., Romero-Fernández, P.M., & Sánchez-Gardey, G. (2005). Strategic human resource management: Integrating the universalistic, contingent, configurational and contextual perspectives. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 16(5), 633-659. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585190500082519
  • Mura, M., Radaelli, G., Spiller, N., Lettieri, E., & Longo, M. (2014). The effect of social capital on exploration and exploitation. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 15(3), 430-450. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-05-2014-0057
  • Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of management review, 23(2), 242-266
  • Ordoñez-de Pablos, P., & Parreño-Fernández, J. (2012). Hacia una conceptualización del conocimiento de la empresa: un análisis ontológico. Revista Icade. Revista de las Facultades de Derecho y Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales, 72, 31-47
  • Orlikowski, W.J. (2002). Knowing in practice: Enacting a collective capability in distributed organizing'. Organization Science, 13(3), 249-273. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.13.3.249.2776
  • Papachroni, A., Heracleous, L., & Paroutis, S. (2014). Organizational ambidexterity through the lens of paradox theory: Building a novel research agenda. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 51(1), 71-93. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886314553101
  • Ployhart, R.E., & Moliterno, T.P. (2011). Emergence of the human capital resource: A multilevel model. Academy of Management Review, 36(1), 127-150. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2009.0318
  • Samnani, A.-K. & Singh, P. (2013). Exploring the fit perspective: An ethnographic approach. Human Resource Management, 52(1), 123-144. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21516
  • Shane, S. (2000). Prior knowledge and the discovery of entrepreneurial opportunities. Organization Science, 11(4), 448-469. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.11.4.448.14602
  • Simsek, Z., Heavey, C., Veiga, J.F., & Souder, D. (2009). A typology for aligning organizational ambidexterity's conceptualizations, antecedents, and outcomes. Journal of Management Studies, 46(5), 864-894. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2009.00841.x
  • Subramaniam, M., & Youndt, M.A. (2005). The influence of intellectual capital on the types of innovative capabilities. Academy of Management Journal, 48(3), 450-463. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2005.17407911
  • Thornhill, S., & Amit, R. (2003). Learning about failure: Bankruptcy, firm age, and the resource-based view. Organization Science, 14(5), 497-509. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.14.5.497.16761
  • Turner, N., Maylor, H., & Swart, J. (2015). Ambidexterity in projects: An intellectual capital perspective. International Journal of Project Management, 33(1), 177-188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2014.05.002
  • Wright, P.M., & Snell, S.A. (1998). Toward a unifying framework for exploring fit and flexibility in strategic human resource management. The Academy of Management Review, 23(4), 756. https://doi.org/10.2307/259061
  • Yang, C.-C. & Lin, C.Y.-Y. (2009). Does intellectual capital mediate the relationship between HRM and organizational performance? Perspective of a healthcare industry in Taiwan. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 20(9), 1965-1984. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585190903142415
  • Youndt, M.A., Subramaniam, M., & Snell, S.A. (2004). Intellectual capital profiles: An examination of investments and Returns. Journal of Management Studies, 41(2), 335-361. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2004.00435.x
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet