Public sector management: indispensable facilitating factors in sculpting organisational ambidexterity

• Autorzy: Tukiran Martinus , Ghufron Nurul , Sunaryo Widodo , Rusli Zil Irvan , Dalilah Elih

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.17512/pjms.2022.25.1.26

Warianty tytułu

PL

Zarządzanie sektorem publicznym: niezbędne czynniki ułatwiające w rzeźbieniu organizacyjnym

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Organisational ambidexterity, the ability of the organisation to maintain dual attention on exploitation (processing and refining the core production) and exploration (prospecting activities for new opportunities and innovation) to support sustainable growth, has been widely applied in a business organisation. However, the concept of organisational ambidexterity applied in public and nonprofit organisations currently facing unprecedented challenges in carrying out their mission is not much researched. Under the new reform, a public organisation is not only expected to accomplish the mission but also is expected to be innovative. This study aims to fill in the gap by exploring the strategy of the Indonesian super body organisation known as Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi (KPK) or Corruption Eradication Commission in achieving organisational ambidexterity. This body is commissioned as in most comparative studies of corruption between countries; Indonesia is on the top of the pyramid. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) is tested on 200 Indonesian Corruption Eradication Commission officers to confirm the underlying factors. The dynamic interactions among management innovation, organisational adaptation, organisational design, and organisational learning to organisational ambidexterity are examined with path analysis. The research shows the significant impact of all variables as causes for organisational ambidexterity. The model is expected to provide the model for government institutions on managing organisational ambidexterity in line with delivering accountability of mandate fulfilment to respective stakeholders by particular reference to business organisations' concept.

PL

Ambidexterity organizacyjne - zdolność organizacji do utrzymywania podwójnej uwagi na eksploatacji (przetwarzanie i uszlachetnianie podstawowej produkcji) i eksploracji (poszukiwanie nowych możliwości i innowacji) w celu wspierania zrównoważonego rozwoju - znalazła szerokie zastosowanie w organizacji biznesowej. Jednak to, w jaki sposób koncepcja ambidexterity organizacyjnej jest stosowana w organizacjach publicznych i non-profit, które obecnie stoją przed bezprecedensowymi wyzwaniami w realizacji swojej misji, nie jest zbyt wiele zbadane. W ramach nowej reformy od organizacji publicznej oczekuje się nie tylko realizacji misji, ale także innowacyjności. Niniejsze badanie ma na celu wypełnienie luki poprzez zbadanie strategii indonezyjskiej organizacji nadrzędnej znanej jako Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi (KPK) lub Komisja ds. Zwalczania Korupcji w osiąganiu obustronności organizacyjnej. Organ ten jest zlecany, jak w większości badań porównawczych korupcji między krajami; Indonezja znajduje się na szczycie piramidy. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) jest testowana na 200 funkcjonariuszach Indonezyjskiej Komisji ds. Zwalczania Korupcji w celu potwierdzenia podstawowych czynników. Dynamiczne interakcje między innowacjami w zarządzaniu, adaptacją organizacyjną, projektowaniem organizacyjnym i uczeniem się organizacji w zakresie ambizręczności organizacyjnej są badane za pomocą analizy ścieżki. Badania wskazują na istotny wpływ wszystkich zmiennych jako przyczyn ambidexterity organizacyjnej. Oczekuje się, że model zapewni instytucjom rządowym model zarządzania obustronnością organizacyjną zgodnie z zapewnieniem rozliczalności realizacji mandatu odpowiednim interesariuszom poprzez szczególne odniesienie do koncepcji organizacji biznesowych.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

business process; government organisation; organisational ambidexterity; organisational learning

PL

proces biznesowy; organizacja rządowa; ambidexterity organizacyjne; organizacyjne uczenie się

• Wydawca: Czestochowa University of Technology
• Czasopismo: Polish Journal of Management Studies
• Rocznik: 2022
• Tom: Vol. 25, No. 1
• Strony: 425--440
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 69 poz., rys., tab.

Twórcy

autor

Tukiran Martinus

• Pakuan University, Indonesia

autor

Ghufron Nurul

• Jember University, Indonesia

autor

Sunaryo Widodo

• Pakuan University, Indonesia

autor

Rusli Zil Irvan

• Corruption Eradication Commission, Indonesia

autor

Dalilah Elih

• Corruption Eradication Commission, Indonesia

Bibliografia

• 1.Abbas, E. W., Hadi, S. and Rajiani, I., (2018). The prospective innovator in public university by scrutinising particular personality traits. Polish Journal of Management Studies, 18(1), 9-19.
• 2.Avby, G., (2022). An integrative learning approach: combining improvement methods and ambidexterity. The Learning Organization (in press).
• 3.Alfada, A., (2019). The destructive effect of corruption on economic growth in Indonesia: A threshold model. Heliyon, 5(10), e02649.
• 4.Ali, M., Shujahat, M., Ali, Z., Kianto, A., Wang, M. and Bontis, N., (2022). The neglected role of knowledge assets interplay in the pursuit of organisational ambidexterity. Technovation, 114, 102452.
• 5.Bednarova, L., Chovancova, J., Pacana, A. and Ulewicz, R., (2018), The analysis of success factors in terms of adaptation of expatriates to work in international organizations, Polish Journal of Management Studies, 17(1), 59-66.
• 6.Bonett, D. G., Wright, T. A., (2015). Cronbach's alpha reliability: Interval estimation, hypothesis testing, and sample size planning. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36(1), 3-15.
• 7.Brix, J., (2017). Exploring knowledge creation processes as a source of organisational learning: A longitudinal case study of a public innovation project. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 33(2), 113-127.
• 8.Cannaerts, N., Segers, J. and Warsen, R., (2020). Ambidexterity and public organisations: A configurational perspective. Public Performance and Management Review, 43(3), 688-712.
• 9.Chizaryfard, A., Nuur, C. and Trucco, P., (2022). Managing Structural Tensions in the Transition to the Circular Economy: the Case of Electric Vehicle Batteries. Circular Economy and Sustainability, 1-29.
• 10.Christofi, M., Vrontis, D. and Cadogan, J. W., (2021). Micro-foundational ambidexterity and multinational enterprises: A systematic review and a conceptual framework. International Business Review, 101625, 1-17.
• 11.Ciampi, F., Faraoni, M., Ballerini, J. and Meli, F., (2022). The co-evolutionary relationship between digitalisation and organisational agility: Ongoing debates, theoretical developments and future research perspectives. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 176, 121383.
• 12.Clauss, T., Kraus, S., Kallinger, F. L., Bican, P. M., Brem, A. and Kailer, N., (2021). Organisational ambidexterity and competitive advantage: The role of strategic agility in the exploration-exploitation paradox. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 6(4), 203-213.
• 13.Cloutier, C., Ravasi, D., (2020). Identity trajectories: Explaining long-term patterns of continuity and change in organisational identities. Academy of Management Journal, 63(4), 1196-1235.
• 14.Crockett, S. A., (2012). A five-step guide to conducting SEM analysis in counseling research. Counseling Outcome Research and Evaluation, 3, 30-47.
• 15.Cruz, S. S., Paulino, S. R., (2022). Experiences of innovation in public services for sustainable urban mobility. Journal of Urban Management, 11(1), 108-122.
• 16.Demircioglu, M. A., Vivona, R., (2021). Depoliticising the European immigration debate: How to employ public sector innovation to integrate migrants. Research Policy, 50(2), 104150.
• 17.Felício, T., Samagaio, A. and Rodrigues, R., (2021). Adoption of management control systems and performance in public sector organisations. Journal of Business Research, 124, 593-602.
• 18.Ferreras-Méndez, J. L., Llopis, O. and Alegre, J., (2022). Speeding up new product development through entrepreneurial orientation in SMEs: The moderating role of ambidexterity. Industrial Marketing Management, 102, 240-251.
• 19.Grebski M., Mazur M., (2022) Social climate of support for innovativeness. Production Engineering Archives, 28(1), 110-116.
• 20.Hair Jr, J. F., Howard, M. C. and Nitzl, C., (2020). Assessing measurement model quality in PLS-SEM using confirmatory composite analysis. Journal of Business Research, 109, 101-110.
• 21.Halaskova, R., Halaskova, M., Gavurova, B. and Kocisova, K., (2022). The Local Governments Efficiency in the EU Countries: Evaluation by Using the Data Envelopment Analysis. Montenegrin Journal of Economics, 18(1), 127-137.
• 22.Han, G., Bai, Y. and Peng, G., (2022). Creating team ambidexterity: The effects of leader dialectical thinking and collective team identification. European Management Journal, 40(2), 175-181.
• 23.Haque, A.U., Sher, A. and Urbański, M., (2020) Is the role of authentic leadership effective in managing occupational stress and psychological capital? Forum Scientiae Oeconomia, 8(2), 59-77.
• 24.He, J., Ortiz, J., (2021). Sustainable business modeling: The need for innovative design thinking. Journal of Cleaner Production, 298, 126751.
• 25.Hu, L., Bentler, P.M., (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55.
• 26.Houtgraaf, G., (2022). Public sector creativity: triggers, practices and ideas for public sector innovations. A longitudinal digital diary study. Public Management Review, 1-22.
• 27.Hu, Y., Zhang, H. and Gao, Y., (2021). In search of optimal distinctiveness: Balancing conformity and differentiation via organisational learning. Management and Organization Review, 17(4), 690-725.
• 28.Hussain, H.I., Haseeb, M., Kamarudin, F., Dacko-Pikiewicz, Z. and Szczepańska-Woszczyna, K., (2021) The role of globalization, economic growth and natural resources on the ecological footprint in Thailand: Evidence from nonlinear causal estimations. Processes, 9(7), art. no. 1103.
• 29.Johnson, P. C., Laurell, C., Ots, M. and Sandström, C., (2022). Digital innovation and the effects of artificial intelligence on firms’ research and development-Automation or augmentation, exploration or exploitation?. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 179, 121636.
• 30.Kagono, T., Nonaka, I., Okumura, A., Sakakibara, K., Komatsu, Y. and Sakashita, A., (2019). Mechanistic vs. organic management systems: A comparative study of adaptive patterns of American and Japanese firms. In The anatomy of Japanese business (pp. 27-69). Routledge.
• 31.Kassotaki, O., (2022). Review of organisational ambidexterity research. SAGE Open, 12(1), 21582440221082127.
• 32.Kengatharan, N., (2021). A jack of all trades is a master of none: the nexus of firm-specific Human capital, ambidexterity, productivity and firm performance. South Asian Journal of Human Resources Management, 8(1), 79-102.
• 33.Kapler M., (2021) Barriers to the implementation of innovations in information systems in SMEs. Production Engineering Archives, 27 (2), 156-162.
• 34.Kessler, S. R., Nixon, A. E. and Nord, W. R., (2017). Examining organic and mechanistic structures: Do we know as much as we thought?. International Journal of Management Reviews, 19(4), 531-555.
• 35.Kim, G., Lee, W. J., (2021). The Venture Firm's Ambidexterity: Do Transformational Leaders Boost Organisational Learning for Venture Growth?. Sustainability, 13(15), 8126.
• 36.Klein, P. G., Mahoney, J. T., McGahan, A. M. and Pitelis, C. N., (2019). Organisational governance adaptation: Who is in, who is out, and who gets what. Academy of Management Review, 44(1), 6-27.
• 37.Konrad, A. M., Richard, O. C. and Yang, Y., (2021). Both diversity and meritocracy: managing the diversity‐meritocracy paradox with organisational ambidexterity. Journal of Management Studies, 58(8), 2180-2206.
• 38.Lopes, A. V., Farias, J. S., (2022). How can governance support collaborative innovation in the public sector? A systematic review of the literature. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 88(1), 114-130.
• 39.Lundmark, R., Richter, A. and Tafvelin, S., (2022). Consequences of managers' laissez-faire leadership during organisational restructuring. Journal of Change Management, 22(1), 40-58.
• 40.Manca, S., Delfino, M., (2021). Adapting educational practices in emergency remote education: Continuity and change from a student perspective. British Journal of Educational Technology, 52(4), 1394-1413.
• 41.Miceli, A., Hagen, B., Riccardi, M. P., Sotti, F. and Settembre-Blundo, D., (2021). Thriving, not just surviving in changing times: How sustainability, agility and digitalisation intertwine with organisational resilience. Sustainability, 13(4), 2052.
• 42.Müller, J. M., Buliga, O. and Voigt, K. I., (2021). The role of absorptive capacity and innovation strategy in the design of industry 4.0 business Models-A comparison between SMEs and large enterprises. European Management Journal, 39(3), 333-343.
• 43.Newman, J., Mintrom, M. and O'Neill, D., (2022). Digital technologies, artificial intelligence, and bureaucratic transformation. Futures, 136, 102886.
• 44.Ochie, C., Nyuur, R. B., Ludwig, G. and Cunningham, J. A., (2022). Dynamic capabilities and organisational ambidexterity: New strategies from emerging market multinational enterprises in Nigeria. Thunderbird International Business Review.
• 45.Ozawa, K., (2021). Organisational inertia and the dynamics of multiple organisational routines. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 1-10.
• 46.Palm, K., Lilja, J., (2017). Key enabling factors for organisational ambidexterity in the public sector. International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences, 9(1), 2-20.
• 47.Peters, K., Buijs, P., (2022). Strategic ambidexterity in green product innovation: Obstacles and implications. Business Strategy and the Environment, 31(1), 173-193.
• 48.Page, S. B., Bryson, J. M., Crosby, B. C., Seo, D. and Stone, M. M., (2021). Ambidexterity in cross-sector collaborations involving public organisations. Public Performance & Management Review, 44(6), 1161-1190.
• 49.Palmi, P., Corallo, A., Prete, M. I. and Harris, P., (2021). Balancing exploration and exploitation in public management: Proposal for an organisational model. Journal of Public Affairs, 21(3), e2245.
• 50.Pereira-Moliner, J., Pertusa-Ortega, E. M., Tarí, J. J., López-Gamero, M. D. and Molina-Azorín, J. F., (2016). Organizational design, quality management and competitive advantage in hotels. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 28(4), 762-784.
• 51.Rajiani, I., Ismail, N., (2019). Management innovation in balancing technology innovation to harness universities performance in the era of community 4.0. Polish Journal of Management Studies, 19 (1), 309-321.
• 52.Prabowo, H. Y., (2021). Days of post-pandemic future: re-imagining corruption practices in a world that won’t stop changing. Journal of Financial Crime, 29 (2), 541-563.
• 53.Riana, I G., Suparna, G., Suwandana, I G. M., Kot S. and Rajiani I., (2020). Human resource management in promoting innovation and organisational performance. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 18(1), 107-118.
• 54.Rödl, M. B., Boons, F. and Spekkink, W. (2022). From responsible to responsive innovation: A systemic and historically sensitive approach to innovation processes. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 174, 121231.
• 55.Ronquillo, J. C., Popa, A. and Willems, J., (2021). Toward an understanding of the role of human resources in cultivating a climate for innovation in nonprofit and public organisations. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organisations, 32(5), 1126-1138.
• 56.Sandhu, S., Kulik, C. T., (2019). Shaping and being shaped: How organisational structure and managerial discretion co-evolve in new managerial roles. Administrative Science Quarterly, 64(3), 619-658.
• 57.Sjödin, D., Parida, V., Kohtamäki, M. and Wincent, J., (2020). An agile co-creation process for digital servitisation: A micro-service innovation approach. Journal of Business Research, 112, 478-491.
• 58.Simionescu, M., Szeles, M. R., Gavurova, B. and Mentel, U., (2021). The Impact of Quality of Governance, Renewable Energy and Foreign Direct Investment on Sustainable Development in Cee Countries. Front. Environ. Sci., 9, 765927.
• 59.Smith, W. K., Besharov, M. L., (2019). Bowing before dual gods: How structured flexibility sustains organisational hybridity. Administrative Science Quarterly, 64(1), 1-44.
• 60.Straková, J., Rajiani, I., Pártlová, P., Váchal, J. and Dobrovič, J., (2020). Use of the value chain in the process of generating a sustainable business strategy on the example of manufacturing and industrial enterprises in the Czech Republic. Sustainability, 12(4), 1520.
• 61.Subanti, S., Riani, A.L., Pratiwi, H., Lestari, E.P. and Hakim, A.R., (2021). The Links between Economic Reform and Corruption: Evidence from Selected Asian Countries. Montenegrin Journal of Economics, 17(3), 87-97.
• 62.Subiyakto, B., Widyanti, R., Basuki, and Syaharuddin, (2020). Revitalising public university innovativeness through learning organisation. Polish Journal of Management Studies, 21(1), 369-381.
• 63.Todisco, L., Mangia, G., Canonico, P. and Tomo, A., (2022). Effects of Covid-19 on public administration: smart working as an organisational revolution. In H.R. analytics and digital hr practices (pp. 51-72). Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore.
• 64.Yan, J., Tsinopoulos, C. and Xiong, Y., (2021). Unpacking the impact of innovation ambidexterity on export performance: Microfoundations and infrastructure investment. International Business Review, 30(1), 101766.
• 65.Yuan, R., Luo, J., Liu, M. J. and Yu, J., (2022). Understanding organisational resilience in a platform-based sharing business: The role of absorptive capacity. Journal of Business Research, 141, 85-99.
• 66.Wenzel, M., Danner-Schröder, A. and Spee, A. P., (2021). Dynamic capabilities? Unleashing their dynamics through a practice perspective on organisational routines. Journal of Management Inquiry, 30(4), 395-406.
• 67.Xiao, Y., Cen, J. and Soberg, P., (2021). The impact of disruption on the relationship between exploitation, exploration, and organisational adaptation. Frontiers in Sociology, 6, 757160-757160.
• 68.Zu, J., Wang, J. and Ma, J., (2022). Ambidexterity in a rapidly changing environment of China: top management team decision making and sustained performance. Sustainability, 14(7), 3894.
• 69.Ziaran, P., Fedorko, R., Gavurova, B. and Bacik, R., (2021). Motivational factors at work of e-commerce and e-business employees. What is the difference between genders? Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 9(1), 23-36.

Uwagi

Opracowanie rekordu ze środków MEiN, umowa nr SONP/SP/546092/2022 w ramach programu "Społeczna odpowiedzialność nauki" - moduł: Popularyzacja nauki i promocja sportu (2022-2023).