Role of metaroutines in shaping multi-level ambidexterity

Abstract

Many authors in the fields of strategic management, organizational theory and organizational behavior have suggested that long-term organization performance depends on the organization’s ability to simultaneously exploit current capabilities and explore new opportunities/capabilities. Organizational researchers have utilized the concept of ambidexterity “…the ability of humans to use both hands with equal skill, as a metaphor for organizations that are equally dexterous at exploiting and exploring” (Simsek, 2009, p. 597). Organizational ambidexterity refers to “an organization’s ability to be aligned and efficient in its management of today’s business demands while simultaneously being adaptive to changes in the environment” (Raisch & Birkinshaw, 2008, p. 375). March (1991) simulated the interplay between distinct sets of organizational activities (exploration, and exploitation) and highlighted inherent incompatibilities between the two using an organizational learning approach. Since then, significant research in the field has uncovered three distinct types of organizational ambidexterity: structural, temporal and contextual. These types focus on the bifurcation of exploration and exploitation activities across organizational structures, time and contexts respectively. Although previous works in the field have highlighted various aspects of organizational ambidexterity, recent ambidexterity studies have also pointed at the lack of integrative models spanning multiple levels of analysis (for example, see Birkinshaw and Gupta, 2013; Simsek, 2009) in the field and call for more research to address the gap. The scarcity of ambidexterity research incorporating multiple levels of analysis, in the same study, using the available conceptual lenses led us to explore nested dynamics of organizational ambidexterity within the new product introduction initiatives at two large automotive firms in India. The study utilized two in-depth multi-level case studies to highlight the ambidexterity dynamics across strategic, business-unit and functional levels using a semi-structured guide. The respondents were scattered across various geographical locations in India. Thematic analysis was used to analyze the interview responses. It was found that the existing mechanisms of understanding ambidexterity at play do not offer full explanatory power in the sample. On the other hand, the visualization of the new product introduction efforts in the sample firms as metaroutines offered satisfactory explanatory power. It is found that certain ostensive (like lean processes and focus on commonality) and performative aspects (like creative recombination) of the new product introduction efforts of sample firms, visualized as metaroutines, aid in promoting multi-level ambidexterity. Organizational routines are defined as “repetitive patterns of interdependent organizational actions.” (Parmigiani & Howard-Grenville, 2011, p. 417) involving multiple actors. The routines literature suggests three kinds of routines: metaroutines (higher order routines bringing about changes in or creating new lower level organizational routines), decision-making routines (routines aiding in strategic decisions like investment, pricing etc.) and operating routines (standardized procedures for day to day activities). Previous work on routines suggest two aspects of routines: ostensive (ideal/schematic) and performative (actual enactment). Further, extant research identifies process, structure and governance mechanisms coordinating multiple actors as micro-foundations of routines. Although some researchers have pointed at a relationship between routines (including metaroutines) and organizational ambidexterity, studies detailing the various interactions of routines (and specifically metaroutines) with multi-level ambidexterity have been largely absent in the literature.Further, the study argues that metaroutine enabled approaches to ambidexterity offer a distinct fourth form when compared with other academically established forms of structural, contextual and temporal ambidexterity. Using a data/text mining based systematic literature review, this thesis also identifies the current boundaries of research in the field of ambidexterity. Analyzing abstracts of 504 works on ambidexterity (in the last two decades), eight themes are inductively derived to indicate the current boundaries of the field. The analysis in the study suggests that although the role of processes in organizational ambidexterity has been studied, focus on routines in ambidexterity literature is very low. The field of organizational ambidexterity is rooted in the organizational learning literature. To further understand the impact of the identified embedded theme of commonality, this study implements a stochastic probability simulation extending the base model used by March (1991). It is found that in the case of low socialization rates of individuals within the organization and high organizational learning rate from the individuals, commonality has largely no benefits for organizational knowledge. However, in other combinations of socialization rates and organizational learning rates benefits of commonality are evident. In summary, the study attempts to add to the organizational ambidexterity literature by delving into the dynamics of how metaroutines impact multi-level ambidexterity. Metaroutine enabled ambidexterity is offered as a distinct and novel type of ambidexterity. Centralized, firm level metaroutines like the new product introduction metaroutines (found in the sample firms) are uniquely positioned to handle multi-level ambidexterity dynamics. Metaroutines, due to certain embedded aspects (discussed in the thesis), can affect the nature of ambidexterity questions across levels while coordinating the various levels towards common organizational goals. One such aspect, i.e. commonality has been explored in further detail. Although the thesis encapsulates how metaroutines enable multi-level ambidexterity in a new product development efforts of automotive firms, the thesis cannot generalize the qualitative findings beyond the context and industry studied.