- مبلغ: ۸۶,۰۰۰ تومان
- مبلغ: ۹۱,۰۰۰ تومان
We investigate the organizational dysfunctions that can interfere with the implementation of structural ambidexterity as a dynamic capability. We find that these dysfunctions give rise to competency traps characterized by interlinked cognitive, organizational and behavioral dimensions, that can severely compromise structural ambidexterity. Further, from the perspective of network ambidexterity, we also find that the inventions of the explorative unit can be treated as external to the focal organization, mirroring the dynamics of portfolio resources found in the context of strategic alliances. Our findings extend understanding of organizational ambidexterity as a dynamic capability, in particular how competency traps can severely compromise ambidexterity; and how network-like effects can adversely shape intra-firm dynamics.
5. Discussion: competency traps and dynamics of portfolio resources at Xerox
5.1. Competency traps Within the perspective of organizational ambidexterity as a dynamic capability, we shed light on the organizational dysfunctions that can compromise structural ambidexterity. We do so via the concepts of competency traps (Levitt & March, 1988), dominant logic (Prahalad and Bettis, 1986) and portfolio resources (Srivastava and Gnyawali, 2011). We also draw from the concept of dynamic capabilities, particularly the idea that an organization's processes, asset positions and historical paths can both enable but also constrain its ability to sense opportunities, seize them and reconfigure itself (Teece, 2007; Teece et al., 1997). When opportunities are seen to be consistent with existing organizational capabilities and configurations, top managers are likely to pursue them. If opportunities are seen to be outside the organizational core business, then the dynamic capabilities act as competency traps, constraining the pursuit of commercialization of technologies and ultimately strategic renewal. We find that dominant logic is related to the cognitive dimension of competency traps, disjointed inventions to the behavioral dimension, and inter-unit organizational tensions to the organizational dimension of competency traps.