طراحی و کمی سازی مدل دوسوتوانی سازمانی در راستای تجاری سازی در سازمانهای مبتنی بر فناوری با رویکرد آمیخته (مورد مطالعه: جهاددانشگاهی)

نوع مقاله : مقاله علمی-پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 عضو هیات علمی گروه مدیریت کسب و کار، دانشکده علوم انسانی، دانشگاه علم و فرهنگ

2 دانش آموخته دکتری مدیریت تکنولوژی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد تهران جنوب

10.22034/jtd.2025.2058761.2002
چکیده
پژوهش حاضر با هدف دستیابی به نظریه ای در حوزه دوسوتوانی سازمانی به منظور درک بهتر این پدیده در کسب و کارهای فناورانه جهاد دانشگاهی انجام شده است، استراتژی پژوهش در فاز کیفی مبتنی بر نظریه پردازی داده بنیاد است و روش تجزیه و تحلیل داده های پژوهش حاضر، روش سیستماتیک (مدل نظام مند) اشتراوس وکوربین می باشد و گردآوری اطلاعات با ابزار مصاحبه انجام شده است که بدین ترتیب در فاز کیفی 16 مصاحبه با خبرگان سازمانهای فناورانه جهاد دانشگاهی و 4 مصاحبه تکمیلی نیز برای دستیابی به اشباع نظری، انجام شد و در فاز کمی، روش تحقیق توصیفی-پیمایشی بوده و ابزار گردآوری اطلاعات نیز در این فاز، پرسشنامه بوده است، نتایج نشان دادند که مدیریت دوسوتوانی سازمانی به عنوان مقوله محوری در این تحقیق شناسایی شده است، همچنین مفاهیم زیرمجموعه آن شامل مدیریت ساختار دوسوتوانی، مدیریت فرهنگ نوآورانه و مدیریت فرآیندهای دوسوتوانی می باشند که تشکیل دهنده مقوله محوری بوده اند، بر مبنای نتایج بدست آمده، شرایط علی در این تحقیق مدیریت و رهبری دوسوتوان، منابع انسانی دوسوتوان، ساختارهای چندوجهی می باشند، از سوی دیگر، بسترها فرهنگ دوسوتوانی سازمانی، اسناد بالادستی، فرهنگ جهادی بوده اند؛ همچنین راهبردهای حاصل از مدل نظریه پردازی داده بنیاد، طراحی فرآیندهای منابع انسانی دوسوتوان، طراحی مدل تجاری سازی فناوری، طراحی نظام ارزشیابی دوسوتوانی سازمانی و طراحی نظام تخصیص منابع می باشند؛ از سوی دیگر، ارتباطات نهادی در حوزه علم و فناوری و محیط دوسوتوانی سازمانی به عنوان عوامل مداخله گر و در نهایت ارزش آفرینی، تکمیل زنجیره فناوری، توسعه سازمانی و مدیریت تناقض های سازمانی پیامدهای شناسایی و تبیین عوامل موثر بر دوسوتوانی سازمانی در راستای تجاری سازی در سازمانهای مبتنی بر فناوری بوده‌اند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله English

Designing and explaining an organizational ambidexterity model for commercialization in technology-based organizations with a mixed approach

نویسندگان English

Mohammad Reza Pourabedy 1
Ali Ghafary 2
1 Faculty member, Business Management Department, Faculty of Humanities, University of Science and Culture
2 PhD in Technology Management, Islamic Azad University, South Tehran Branch
چکیده English

The current research aims to develop a theory in the field of organizational ambidexterity to better understand this phenomenon in the technology-based businesses of ACECR. The research strategy in the qualitative phase is based on grounded theory, and the data analysis method used in this research is the systematic approach (Strauss and Corbin's systematic model). Data collection was conducted through interviews. Accordingly, in the qualitative phase, 16 interviews were conducted with experts from ACECR's technology-based organizations, and 4 supplementary interviews were also conducted to achieve theoretical saturation. In the quantitative phase, the research method was descriptive-survey, and the data collection tool in this phase was a questionnaire. The results showed that organizational ambidexterity management was identified as the core category in this research. Its sub-concepts include ambidexterity structure management, innovative culture management, and ambidexterity processes management, which constituted the core category. Based on the obtained results, the causal conditions in this research are ambidextrous management and leadership, ambidextrous human resources, and multi-faceted structures. On the other hand, the contexts were organizational ambidexterity culture, upstream documents, and Jihadi culture. Furthermore, the strategies resulting from the grounded theory model are designing ambidextrous human resource processes, designing a technology commercialization model, designing an organizational ambidexterity evaluation system, and designing a resource allocation system. On the other hand, institutional communications in the field of science and technology and the organizational ambidexterity environment were identified as intervening factors. Finally, value creation, completion of the technology chain, organizational development, and organizational paradox management were the consequences identified and explained as factors influencing organizational ambidexterity in line with commercialization in technology-based organizations.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Organizational ambidexterity
exploration and exploitation
ambidexterity of technological organizations
technological businesses
mixed approach
پورعابدی، محمدرضا (1394). طراحی وتبیین مدل چیره دستی در سازمان های علمی وفناورانه مورد مطالعه جهاددانشگاهی، رساله دکتری؛ استاد راهنما: دکتر سید محمد مقیمی.
پورعابدی، محمدرضا و غفاری، علی. (1396). شناسایی و بررسی مولفه های مدیریت و رهبری دوسوتوان در سازمانهای مبتنی بر علم و فناوری با رویکرد آمیخته (مطالعه موردی: جهاددانشگاهی). فصلنامه توسعه تکنولوژی صنعتی، 15(30), 13-24.
صفردوست، عاطیه، قاضی نوری، سید سروش، منطقی، منوچهر، نقی زاده، محمد و بامداد صوفی، جهانیار. (1400). تبیین نقش ناهمگونی شبکه در توسعه عملکرد شرکت‌ها در شبکه های نوآوری مبتنی بر رویکرد دوسوتوانی (مطالعه موردی: شرکت های زیست دارویی). فصلنامه توسعه تکنولوژی صنعتی، 19(45)، 77-84. doi: 10.22034/jtd.2021.247833
غفاری، علی (1403). طراحی و تبیین مدل دوسوتوانی سازمانی در سازمان های علمی و فناورانه در راستای تجاری سازی (مورد مطالعه جهاددانشگاهی)، رساله دکتری؛ استاد راهنما: دکتر غلامرضا هاشم زاده خوراسگانی.
منطقی، منوچهر، نقی زاده، محمد، صفردوست، عاطیه و محمد روضه سرا، مریم. (1394). تحلیلی بر نقش دوسوتوانی سازمانی در ایجاد، رشد و موفقیت شرکت‌های زایشیفصلنامه توسعه تکنولوژی صنعتی، 13 (26): 17-28.
Abazeed, R. (2020). Impact of strategic capabilities on organizational ambidexterity in the commercial banks in Jordan: The mediating role of knowledge management. Management Science Letters, 10(7), 1445-1456.
Ahammad, M. F., Glaister, K. W., & Junni, P. (2019). Organizational ambidexterity and human resource practices. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 30(4), 503-507.
Ahammad, M., Basu, S., Munjal, S., Clegg, J., & Shoham, O. (2021). Strategic agility, environmental uncertainties and international performance: the perspective of indian firms. Journal of World Business, 56(4), 101218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2021.101218
Ansah, M. O., Addai-Boamah, N., Bamfo, A. B., & Ry-Kottoh, L. A. (2021). Organizational ambidexterity and financial performance in the banking industry: evidence from a developing economy. Journal of Financial Services Marketing, 1-14.
Asif, M. (2017). Exploring the antecedents of ambidexterity: a taxonomic approach. Management Decision, 55(7), 1489-1505. https://doi.org/10.1108/md-12-2016-0895
Ayuri, D. P., & Nasution, Y. (2022, March). The Effect of Organizational Learning Capability and Inspirational Leadership to Individual Ambidexterity in Improving Team Performance in Public Sector Organizations. In 7th Sriwijaya Economics, Accounting, and Business Conference (SEABC 2021) (pp. 266-272). Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/aebmr.k.220304.035
Benner, M. J., & Tushman, M. (2002). Process management and technological innovation: A longitudinal study of the photography and paint industries. Administrative science quarterly, 47(4), 676-707.
Birkinshaw, J., Crilly, D., Bouquet, C., & Lee, S. Y. (2016). How do firms manage strategic dualities? A process perspective. Academy of Management Discoveries, 2(1), 51-78.
Brion, S., Mothe, C., & Sabatier, M. (2010). The impact of organisational context and competences on innovation ambidexterity. International Journal of Innovation Management, 14(02), 151-178.
Brown, S. L., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (1997). The art of continuous change: Linking complexity theory and time-paced evolution in relentlessly shifting organizations. Administrative science quarterly, 1-34.
Bruton, G. D., Ahlstrom, D., & Puky, T. (2009). Institutional differences and the development of entrepreneurial ventures: A comparison of the venture capital industries in Latin America and Asia. Journal of International Business Studies, 40, 762-778.
Burgelman, R. A. (2002). Strategy as vector and the inertia of coevolutionary lock-in. Administrative science quarterly, 47(2), 325-357.
Carlile, P. R., & Christensen, C. M. (2005). The cycles of theory building in management research. Cambridge, MA: Division of Research, Harvard Business School.
Çelik, D., & Uzunçarşılı, Ü. (2023). Is the Effect of Organizational Ambidexterity and Technological Innovation Capability on Firm Performance Mediated by Competitive Advantage? An Empirical Research on Turkish Manufacturing and Service Industries. SAGE Open, 13(4), 21582440231206367.
Cuervo-Cazurra, A., & Dau, L. A. (2009). Promarket reforms and firm profitability in developing countries. Academy of Management Journal, 52(6), 1348-1368.
Diab, A. A. A., & Mohamed Metwally, A. B. (2019). Institutional ambidexterity and management control: The role of religious, communal and political institutions. Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 16(3), 373-402.
Duncan, R. B. (1976). The ambidextrous organization: Designing dual structures for innovation. The management of organization, 1(1), 167-188.
Eisenhardt, K. M. (2000). Paradox, spirals, ambivalence: The new language of change and pluralism. Academy of Management Review, 25(4), 703-705.
Floyd, S. W., & Lane, P. J. (2000). Strategizing throughout the organization: Managing role conflict in strategic renewal. Academy of management review, 25(1), 154-177.
Ghemawat, P., & Ricart Costa, J. E. I. (1993). The organizational tension between static and dynamic efficiency. Strategic management journal, 14(S2), 59-73.
Ghoshal, S., & Bartlett, C. A. (1990). The multinational corporation as an interorganizational network. Academy of management review, 15(4), 603-626.
Gopinath, U., Nawaz, N., Gajenderan, V., & Balasubramaniyan, H. (2021). Antecedents of emotional intelligence: perceived organizational support impact on ambidextrous behavior of standalone business school faculty. Sustainability, 13(15), 8227. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13158227
Gretzel, U., Fuchs, M., Baggio, R., Hoepken, W., Law, R., Neidhardt, J., ... & Xiang, Z. (2020). e-Tourism beyond COVID-19: a call for transformative research. Information Technology & Tourism, 22, 187-203. DOI: 10.1007/s40558-020-00181-3
He, Z. L., & Wong, P. K. (2004). Exploration vs. exploitation: An empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis. Organization science, 15(4), 481-494.'
Hill, S. A., & Birkinshaw, J. (2014). Ambidexterity and survival in corporate venture units. Journal of management, 40(7), 1899-1931.
Hwang, B. N., Lai, Y. P., & Wang, C. (2023). Open innovation and organizational ambidexterity. European Journal of Innovation Management, 26(3), 862-884.
Jansen, J. J., Tempelaar, M. P., Van den Bosch, F. A., & Volberda, H. W. (2009). Structural differentiation and ambidexterity: The mediating role of integration mechanisms. Organization science, 20(4), 797-811.
Kafetzopoulos, D. (2020). Organizational ambidexterity: antecedents, performance and environmental uncertainty. Business Process Management Journal, 27(3), 922-940. https://doi.org/10.1108/bpmj-06-2020-0300
Kang, J. (2014). Roles of board of directors in organizational ambidexterity. Journal of Management and Strategy, 5(4). https://doi.org/10.5430/jms.v5n4p99
Katou, A. (2021). Building a multilevel integrated framework of ambidexterity: the role of dynamically changing environment and human capital management in the performance of greek firms. Global Business and Organizational Excellence, 40(6), 17-27. https://doi.org/10.1002/joe.22131
Lin, H., McDonough, E., Lin, S., & Lin, C. (2012). Managing the exploitation/exploration paradox: the role of a learning capability and innovation ambidexterity. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 30(2), 262-278. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2012.00998.x
Low, S. (2004). Behind the gates: Life, security, and the pursuit of happiness in fortress America. Routledge.
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.
Luo, Y., & Rui, H. (2009). An ambidexterity perspective toward multinational enterprises from emerging economies. Academy of Management Perspectives, 23(4), 49-70.
Mahr, F. (2010). Hybrid strategy and firm performance: The moderating role of individual and technological ambidexterity. In Aligning Information Technology, Organization, and Strategy: Effects on Firm Performance (pp. 89-139). Wiesbaden: Gabler. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-8349-8940-6_4
March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization science, 2(1), 71-87.
Marshal, A. G., & Grosshans, P. B. (1991). Fourier transformion cyclotron resonance mass spectrometry: the teenage years. Analytical Chemistry, 63(4), 215A-229A.
Neuendorf, K. A. (2002). Defining content analysis. Content analysis guidebook, 10-27.
O'Reilly III, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2011). Organizational ambidexterity in action: How managers explore and exploit. California management review, 53(4), 5-22.
Petro, Y., Ojiako, U., Williams, T., & Marshall, A. (2019). Organizational ambidexterity: A critical review and development of a project-focused definition. Journal of Management in Engineering, 35(3), 03119001.
Porter, M. E. (1985). Technology and competitive advantage. Journal of business strategy, 5(3), 60-78.
Prasetio, A., Aboobaider, B., & Ahmad, A. (2022). Organizational ambidexterity as an outcome of quality dimensions and triple helix: the role of technology readiness and user satisfaction. Sustainability, 14(21), 14237. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142114237
Pugliese, A., Bezemer, P. J., Zattoni, A., Huse, M., Van den Bosch, F. A., & Volberda, H. W. (2009). Boards of directors' contribution to strategy: A literature review and research agenda. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 17(3), 292-306.
Raisch, S., & Birkinshaw, J. (2008). Organizational ambidexterity: Antecedents, outcomes, and moderators. Journal of management, 34(3), 375-409.
Rothaermel, F. and Alexandre, M. (2009). Ambidexterity in technology sourcing: the moderating role of absorptive capacity. Organization Science, 20(4), 759-780. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1080.0404
Schulze, P., Heinemann, F., & Abedin, A. (2008). Balancing exploitation and exploration. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2008(1), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.5465/ambpp.2008.33622934
Sheremata, W. A. (2000). Centrifugal and centripetal forces in radical new product development under time pressure. Academy of management review, 25(2), 389-408.
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.
Sinha, S. (2019). The emergent-strategy process of initiating organizational ambidexterity. Journal of Strategy and Management, 12(3), 382-396. https://doi.org/10.1108/jsma-12-2018-0140
Siriwardhana, Y., De Alwis, C., Gür, G., Ylianttila, M., & Liyanage, M. (2020). The fight against the COVID-19 pandemic with 5G technologies. IEEE Engineering Management Review, 48(3), 72-84. DOI: 10.1109/EMR.2020.3017451
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.
Taleghani, G. R., & Ghafary, A. (2014). Providing a management model for the development of sports tourism. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 120, 289-298.
Tarba, S. Y., Jansen, J. J., Mom, T. J., Raisch, S., & Lawton, T. C. (2020). A microfoundational perspective of organizational ambidexterity: Critical review and research directions. Long Range Planning, 53(6), 102048.
Tetenbaum, T., & Laurence, H. (2011). Leading in the chaos of the 21st century. Journal of Leadership Studies, 4(4), 41-49.
Trieu, H. D., Nguyen, P. V., Tran, K. T., Vrontis, D., & Ahmed, Z. (2023). Organisational resilience, ambidexterity and performance: the roles of information technology competencies, digital transformation policies and paradoxical leadership. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, Vol. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOA-05-2023-3750
Turner, N., & Lee-Kelley, L. (2013). Unpacking the theory on ambidexterity: An illustrative case on the managerial architectures, mechanisms and dynamics. Management learning, 44(2), 179-196.
Tushman, M. L., & O'Reilly III, C. A. (1996). Ambidextrous organizations: Managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. California management review, 38(4), 8-29.
Tushman, M. L., & Romanelli, E. (1985). Organizational evolution: A metamorphosis model of convergence and reorientation. Research in Organizational Behavior, 7, 171–222.
Valle, M., & O’Mara, K. J. (2013). The new reality: Holding on and letting go. Journal of Executive Education, 9(1), 2.
Volberda, H. W., & Lewin, A. Y. (2003). Co‐evolutionary dynamics within and between firms: From evolution to co-evolution. Journal of management studies, 40(8), 2111-2136.
 Volberda, H. W., Baden-Fuller, C., & Van Den Bosch, F. A. (2001). Mastering strategic renewal: Mobilising renewal journeys in multi-unit firms. Long range planning, 34(2), 159-178.
Wu, H. (2017, May). Exploring the Origin, Definition and Measurement of Organizational Ambidexterity. In 3rd Annual International Conference on Management, Economics and Social Development (ICMESD 17) (pp. 1-6). Atlantis Press.
Xiao, P., Zhang, H., Sun, X., Zhang, F., Du, X., & Liu, G. (2022). International ambidexterity and innovation performance: The moderating role of the host country's institutional quality. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 7(3), 100218.
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).
Zang, J. and Li, Y. (2016). Technology capabilities, marketing capabilities and innovation ambidexterity. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 29(1), 23-37. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2016.1194972.
Zhang, Y., Waldman, D. A., Han, Y. L., & Li, X. B. (2015). Paradoxical leader behaviors in people management: Antecedents and consequences. Academy of management journal, 58(2), 538-566.
 
 
دوره 24، شماره 63
بهار 1405
صفحه 45-64

  • تاریخ دریافت 03 اردیبهشت 1404
  • تاریخ بازنگری 25 اردیبهشت 1404
  • تاریخ پذیرش 10 خرداد 1404