Volume 36, Issue 4 (Winter 2024)
JMDP 2024, 36(4): 131-158 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Ghafary A, Hashem Zadeh Khorasghani G R. (2024). Identifying and Explaining Factors Affecting Organizational Ambidexterity for the Development of Technological Businesses of ACECR, Based on Qualitative Approach. JMDP. 36(4), 131-158. doi:10.61186/jmdp.36.4.131
URL: http://jmdp.ir/article-1-4675-en.html
URL: http://jmdp.ir/article-1-4675-en.html
1- South Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
2- Department of Technology Management, South Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran. ,gh_hashemzadeh@azad.ac.ir
2- Department of Technology Management, South Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran. ,
Abstract: (1336 Views)
Purpose: The aim of this research was to develop a framework for identifying and explaining the factors influencing organizational ambidexterity in scientific and technological tourism organizations affiliated to ACECR.
Methodology: The research approach was qualitative, and its strategy was based on Grounded Theory. Technology specialists of the country's ACECR comprised the statistical population including managers, faculty members and experts, all of whom had experience and expertise in the field of technological businesses in tourism domain. The data were collected through a semi-structured method applying ATLAS.ti software.
Findings: After analyzing the interview texts, we identified the dimensions of organizational ambivalence including the ability of the organization to explore and exploit the tourism areas and to utilize the relevant technology for innovation, as the pivotal factor, in the subsidiaries. Then, causal, mediating, and moderating variables were developed in the final framework. The findings show that multi-faceted management and leadership, diverse human resources, and structural variety are effective factors of the establishment of organizational ambidexterity. In addition, the establishment of organizational ambidexterity in scientific and technological tourism organizations of ACECR leads to such consequences as value creation, completion of the technology chain, organizational development, and reduction of organizational contradictions.
Originality: Identifying the key factors of success in this field can open the way for organizations which are active in the tourism industry. The research results can serve as a basis for formulating policies and macro plans in this area. The interdisciplinary nature of this study, which combines management knowledge and technology, can be considered as the contribution of this research.
Methodology: The research approach was qualitative, and its strategy was based on Grounded Theory. Technology specialists of the country's ACECR comprised the statistical population including managers, faculty members and experts, all of whom had experience and expertise in the field of technological businesses in tourism domain. The data were collected through a semi-structured method applying ATLAS.ti software.
Findings: After analyzing the interview texts, we identified the dimensions of organizational ambivalence including the ability of the organization to explore and exploit the tourism areas and to utilize the relevant technology for innovation, as the pivotal factor, in the subsidiaries. Then, causal, mediating, and moderating variables were developed in the final framework. The findings show that multi-faceted management and leadership, diverse human resources, and structural variety are effective factors of the establishment of organizational ambidexterity. In addition, the establishment of organizational ambidexterity in scientific and technological tourism organizations of ACECR leads to such consequences as value creation, completion of the technology chain, organizational development, and reduction of organizational contradictions.
Originality: Identifying the key factors of success in this field can open the way for organizations which are active in the tourism industry. The research results can serve as a basis for formulating policies and macro plans in this area. The interdisciplinary nature of this study, which combines management knowledge and technology, can be considered as the contribution of this research.
Keywords: Organizational Ambidexterity, Business Development, Technological Businesses, Tourism, Qualitative Approach.
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
Development Process
Received: Aug 22 2023 | Accepted: Nov 18 2023 | ePublished: May 06 2024
Received: Aug 22 2023 | Accepted: Nov 18 2023 | ePublished: May 06 2024
References
1. Aftab, J., Veneziani, M., Sarwar, H., & Ishaq, M. I. (2022). Organizational Ambidexterity, Firm Performance, and Sustainable Development: Mediating Role of Entrepreneurial Orientation in Pakistani SMEs. Journal of Cleaner Production, 367(1), 132956. [DOI:10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.132956]
2. Al-Mubaraki, H. M., & Busler, M. (2017). Challenges and Opportunities of Innovation and Incubators As a Tool for Knowledge-Based Economy. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 6(1), 1-18. [DOI:10.1186/s13731-017-0075-y]
3. Bluhm, D. J., Harman, W., Lee, T. W., & Mitchell, T. R. (2011). Qualitative Research in Management: A Decade of Progress. Journal of Management Studies, 48(8), 1866-1891. [DOI:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2010.00972.x]
4. Cao, Q., Gedajlovic, E., & Zhang, H. (2009). Unpacking Organizational Ambidexterity: Dimensions, Contingencies, and Synergistic Effects. Organization Science, 20(4), 781-796. [DOI:10.1287/orsc.1090.0426]
5. Chakma, R., Paul, J., & Dhir, S. (2021). Organizational Ambidexterity: A Review and Research Agenda. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 68(1), 1-17.
6. Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide through Qualitative Analysis. Sage Publications.
7. Chen, Y. (2017). Dynamic Ambidexterity: How Innovators Manage Exploration and Exploitation. Business Horizons, 60(3), 385-394. [DOI:10.1016/j.bushor.2017.01.001]
8. Farjoun, M. (2010). Beyond Dualism: Stability and Change as a Duality. Academy of Management Review, 35(2), 202-225. [DOI:10.5465/AMR.2010.48463331]
9. Gibson, C. B., & Birkinshaw, J. (2004). The Antecedents, Consequences, and Mediating Role of Organizational Ambidexterity. Academy of Management Journal, 47(2), 209-226. [DOI:10.2307/20159573]
10. Gretzel, U., Fuchs, M., Baggio, R., Hoepken, W., Law, R., Neidhardt, J., Pesonen, J., Zanker, M., & Xiang, Z. (2020). e-Tourism beyond COVID-19: A Call for Transformative Research. Information Technology & Tourism, 22(1), 187-203. [DOI:10.1007/s40558-020-00181-3] []
11. Hillemane, B. S. M., Satyanarayana, K., & Chandrashekar, D. (2019). Technology Business Incubation for Start-Up Generation: A Literature Review toward a Conceptual Framework. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 25(7), 1471-1493. [DOI:10.1108/IJEBR-02-2019-0087]
12. Hughes, M., Hughes, P., Morgan, R. E., Hodgkinson, I. R., & Lee, Y. (2021). Strategic Entrepreneurship Behaviour and the Innovation Ambidexterity of Young Technology-Based Firms in Incubators. International Small Business Journal, 39(3), 202-227. [DOI:10.1177/0266242620943776]
13. Junni, P., Sarala, R. M., Taras, V., & Tarba, S. Y. (2013). Organizational Ambidexterity and Performance: A Meta-Analysis. Academy of Management Perspectives, 27(4), 299-312. [DOI:10.5465/amp.2012.0015]
14. Kahlke, R. M. (2014). Generic Qualitative Approaches: Pitfalls and Benefits of Methodological Mixology. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 13(1), 37-52. [DOI:10.1177/160940691401300119]
15. Kammerlander, N., Burger, D., Fust, A., & Fueglistaller, U. (2015). Exploration and Exploitation in Established Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises: The Effect of CEOs' Regulatory Focus. Journal of Business Venturing, 30(4), 582-602. [DOI:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2014.09.004]
16. Kassotaki, O. (2017). Ambidexterity and Leadership: A Multilevel Analysis of the Aerospace and Defense Organizations. University of Warwick.
17. Kassotaki, O. (2022). Review of Organizational Ambidexterity Research. SAGE Open, 12(1), 1-22. [DOI:10.1177/21582440221082127]
18. Kassotaki, O., Paroutis, S., & Morrell, K. (2019). Ambidexterity Penetration across Multiple Organizational Levels in an Aerospace and Defense Organization. Long Range Planning, 52(3), 366-385. [DOI:10.1016/j.lrp.2018.06.002]
19. Konjkav-Monfared, A., Khalilian, M. M., & Saeida-Ardekani, S. (2019). Structural Model of Brand Ambidexterity Impact on Brand Commitment through Brand's Performance, Image and Reputation. Management and Development Process, 32(1), 113-133. [In Farsi] [DOI:10.29252/jmdp.32.1.113]
20. Koryak, O., Lockett, A., Hayton, J., Nicolaou, N., & Mole, K. (2018). Disentangling the Antecedents of Ambidexterity: Exploration and Exploitation. Research Policy, 47(2), 413-427. [DOI:10.1016/j.respol.2017.12.003]
21. Leitão, J., Pereira, D., & Gonçalves, Â. (2022). Business Incubators, Accelerators, and Performance of Technology-Based Ventures: A Systematic Literature Review. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 8(1), 46. [DOI:10.3390/joitmc8010046]
22. Levinthal, D. A., & March, J. G. (1993). The Myopia of Learning. Strategic Management Journal, 14(S2), 95-112. [DOI:10.1002/smj.4250141009]
23. Li, Z., Gao, Q., Shen, K., & Zhang, J. (2018). The Effect of Executive Incentives on FDI Ambidexterity: Evidence from Chinese Multinational Enterprises. Chinese Management Studies, 12(4), 756-773. [DOI:10.1108/CMS-01-2018-0383]
24. Liang, H., Wang, N., & Xue, Y. (2022). Juggling Information Technology (IT) Exploration and Exploitation: A Proportional Balance View of IT Ambidexterity. Information Systems Research, 33(4), 1386-1402. [DOI:10.1287/isre.2022.1105]
25. Lin, H.-E., & McDonough III, E. F. (2011). Investigating the Role of Leadership and Organizational Culture in Fostering Innovation Ambidexterity. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 58(3), 497-509. [DOI:10.1109/TEM.2010.2092781]
26. Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry: Sage Publications. [DOI:10.1016/0147-1767(85)90062-8]
27. Lium, K. (2015). Organizational Ambidexterity; Antecedents, Events and Outcome-Balancing Exploration and Exploitation, the Long Term Sustainability Imperative. Norwegian University of Science and Technology.
28. Lubatkin, M. H., Simsek, Z., Ling, Y., & Veiga, J. F. (2006). Ambidexterity and Performance in Small-to Medium-Sized Firms: The Pivotal Role of Top Management Team Behavioral Integration. Journal of Management, 32(5), 646-672. [DOI:10.1177/0149206306290712]
29. Luger, J., Raisch, S., & Schimmer, M. (2018). Dynamic Balancing of Exploration and Exploitation: The Contingent Benefits of Ambidexterity. Organization Science, 29(3), 449-470. [DOI:10.1287/orsc.2017.1189]
30. March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71-87. [DOI:10.1287/orsc.2.1.71]
31. McCarthy, I. P., & Gordon, B. R. (2011). Achieving Contextual Ambidexterity in R&D Organizations: A Management Control System Approach. R&D Management, 41(3), 240-258. [DOI:10.1111/j.1467-9310.2011.00642.x]
32. Mihalache, M., & Mihalache, O. R. (2016). Organizational Ambidexterity and Sustained Performance in the Tourism Industry. Annals of Tourism Research, 56(1), 142-144. [DOI:10.1016/j.annals.2015.10.011]
33. Nagle, D. S., & Vidon, E. S. (2021). Purchasing Protection: Outdoor Companies and the Authentication of Technology Use in Nature-Based Tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 29(8), 1253-1269. [DOI:10.1080/09669582.2020.1828432]
34. Park, O., Bae, J., & Hong, W. (2019). High-Commitment HRM System, HR Capability, and Ambidextrous Technological Innovation. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 30(9), 1526-1548. [DOI:10.1080/09585192.2017.1296880]
35. Pelagio Rodriguez, R., & Hechanova, M. R. M. (2014). A Study of Culture Dimensions, Organizational Ambidexterity, and Perceived Innovation in Teams. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 9(3), 21-33. [DOI:10.4067/S0718-27242014000300002]
36. Prasetio, A. B., Aboobaider, B. b. M., & Ahmad, A. b. (2022). Organizational Ambidexterity as an Outcome of Quality Dimensions and Triple Helix: The Role of Technology Readiness and User Satisfaction. Sustainability, 14(21), 14237. [DOI:10.3390/su142114237]
37. Rahnavard, F., Jokar, A., Taherpour, H., & Rasouli, M. (2019). Developing a Social Accountability Framework for Public Organizations in Iran. Public Organizations Management, 7(2), 115-134. [In Farsi] [DOI:10.30473/ipom.2019.36912.2905]
38. Raisch, S., & Tushman, M. L. (2016). Growing New Corporate Businesses: From Initiation to Graduation. Organization Science, 27(5), 1237-1257. [DOI:10.1287/orsc.2016.1081]
39. Sahi, G. K., Gupta, M. C., & Cheng, T. (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, 220(1), 107395. [DOI:10.1016/j.ijpe.2019.05.014]
40. Saldaña, J. (2021). The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers: Sage Publications.
41. Scott, P., Stokes, P., Rowland, C., & Gordon, D. (2017). Destination Marketing in the United Kingdom and Organizational Ambidexterity: Exploitative Dilemmas and Exploratory Prospects? Proceedings of the 10th Annual Conference of the EuroMed Academy of Business.
42. Scott, R. P. (2019). An Exploratory Investigation into Destination Marketing and Place Marketing in Cheshire and Warrington: The Need for Organizational Ambidexterity. Liverpool John Moores University (United Kingdom).
43. Seraphin, H. (2020). Organizational Ambidexterity in Tourism Research: A Systematic Review. Tourism Analysis, 25(1), 137-152. [DOI:10.3727/108354220X15758301241701]
44. Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. (2011). Toward a Theory of Paradox: A Dynamic Equilibrium Model of Organizing. Academy of Management Review, 36(2), 381-403. [DOI:10.5465/AMR.2011.59330958]
45. Smith, W. K., & Tushman, M. L. (2005). Managing Strategic Contradictions: A Top Management Model for Managing Innovation Streams. Organization Science, 16(5), 522-536. [DOI:10.1287/orsc.1050.0134]
46. Spear, H. J., & Lock, S. (2003). Qualitative Research on Adolescent Pregnancy: A Descriptive Review and Analysis. Journal of Pediatric Nursing, 18(6), 397-408. [DOI:10.1016/S0882-5963(03)00160-X] [PMID]
47. Strauss, A. L. & Corbin, J. A. (1998). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory: Sage Publications.
48. UNWTO Report (2020). Impact of COVID-19 on Global Tourism Made Clear as UNWTO Counts the Cost of Standstill. 28 July. [https://www.unwto.org/news/impact-of-covid-19-on-global-tourism-made-clear-as-unwto-counts-the-cost-]
49. Vishlaghi, M., Moghaddam, A., Sepahvand, R., & Azar, A. (2023). Interpretive Structural Modeling for Strategic Renewal Drivers in Iranian Development Organizations. Management and Development Process, 36(1), 145-170. [In Farsi] [http://jmdp.ir/article-1-4433-en.html] [DOI:10.61186/jmdp.36.1.119]
50. Vo Thanh, T., Seraphin, H., Okumus, F., & Koseoglu, M. A. (2020). Organizational Ambidexterity in Tourism Research: A Systematic Review. Tourism Analysis, 25(1), 137-152. [DOI:10.3727/108354220X15758301241701]
51. Voss, G. B., Sirdeshmukh, D., & Voss, Z. G. (2008). The Effects of Slack Resources and Environmental Threat on Product Exploration and Exploitation. Academy of Management Journal, 51(1), 147-164. [DOI:10.5465/amj.2008.30767373]
52. Wilden, R., Hohberger, J., Devinney, T. M., & Lavie, D. (2018). Revisiting James March (1991): whither Exploration and Exploitation? Strategic Organization, 16(3), 352-369. [DOI:10.1177/1476127018765031]
53. Yao, L., Wei, L., & Yuyang, L. (2021). Strategic Alliances, Market Ambidexterity and Performance of Rural Start-Ups. Journal of Southwest University Social Science Edition, 47(1), 62-71.
54. Yunita, T., Sasmoko, S., Bandur, A., & Alamsjah, F. (2023). Organizational Ambidexterity: The Role of Technological Capacity and Dynamic Capabilities in the Face of Environmental Dynamism. Heliyon, 9(4), 1-12. [DOI:10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e14817] [PMID] []
55. Zahoor, N., Khan, Z., Marinova, S., & Cui, L. (2024). Ambidexterity in Strategic Alliances: An Integrative Review of the Literature. International Journal of Management Reviews, 26(1), 82-109. [DOI:10.1111/ijmr.12348]
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. |
