Organizational ambidexterity within supply chain management: a scoping review

Ramdan, Mohamad Rohieszan; Abdullah, Nor Liza; Isa, Rosmah Mat; Hanafiah, Mohd Hizam

doi:10.17270/J.LOG.2021.618

Artykuł - szczegóły

Tytuł artykułu

Organizational ambidexterity within supply chain management: a scoping review

Autorzy

Ramdan Mohamad Rohieszan , Abdullah Nor Liza , Isa Rosmah Mat , Hanafiah Mohd Hizam

Treść / Zawartość

Pełne teksty:

Pobierz

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.17270/J.LOG.2021.618

Warianty tytułu

Języki publikacji

Abstrakty

Background: Organizational ambidexterity is an emerging concept and it permeates too many functional domains in the discussion of organizational performance. The importance of understanding this concept motivates researchers to explore organizational ambidexterity as internal and external capabilities in the context of supply chain. Despite its importance in building oriented capabilities to organizations, little information is known about organizational ambidexterity in supply chain context. The objective of this review is to produce a comprehensive mapping of themes related to organizational ambidexterity studies in supply chain research, particularly in improving firm performance. Method: A scoping review of the literature was conducted using Web of Science (WoS), Scopus and EconBiz databases to identify what is the nature of published scientific literature on this topic and what are the emerging themes of organizational ambidexterity in relation to supply chain studies. Result: This study found three main themes and eleven sub-themes in relation to inter-organization ambidexterity in the supply chain context. The main themes include learning process, outcome and leadership. The review indicates that most of the studies are conducted in understanding learning process. Conclusion: The management of supply chain has a positive association with organizational ambidexterity. Supply chain operations involve selection, development, and implementation of new process(es) or technology (exploitation) - the outcome of a prior search procedure (exploration), which has been described as a sequential approach to exploration and exploitation and both processes are important especially in a dynamic environment. The findings from this scoping review indicate the importance of developing and managing a supply chain that supports exploration and exploitation practices. Therefore, managers should understand that maximizing a firm's current skills is critical to profitability and market share. While continuous refinement of existing knowledge is important, it is the generation and application of new knowledge that leads to increased value (profitability) and competitive advantage. Organizational ambidexterity within supply chain management provides significant benefits to big firms in improving their long-term efficiency. This offers avenue for future research to compare the effect of organizational ambidexterity in small firm.

Słowa kluczowe

scoping review organizational ambidexterity supply chain management supply network

przegląd zakresu literatury oburęczność organizacji zarządzanie łańcuchem dostaw sieć dostaw

Wydawca

Wyższa Szkoła Logistyki

Czasopismo

LogForum

Rocznik

2021

Tom

Vol. 17, no. 4

Strony

531--546

Opis fizyczny

Bibliogr. 59 poz., rys., tab., wykr.

Twórcy

autor

Ramdan Mohamad Rohieszan

rohieszan@fpe.upsi.edu.my

Faculty of Management and Economics, Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris, 35900 Tanjong Malim, Perak, Malaysia, Faculty of Economics and Management, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia. 43600 UKM Bangi, Selangor, Malaysia

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4899-7079

autor

Abdullah Nor Liza

iza@ukm.edu.my

Faculty of Economics and Management, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, 43600 UKM Bangi, Selangor, Malaysia

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2177-9570

autor

Isa Rosmah Mat

rosmah@ukm.edu.my

Faculty of Economics and Management, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, 43600 UKM Bangi, Selangor, Malaysia

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4279-5249

autor

Hanafiah Mohd Hizam

mhhh@ukm.edu.my

Faculty of Economics and Management, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, 43600 UKM Bangi, Selangor, Malaysia

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1053-6488

Bibliografia

1. Abd Aziz N.A., Hanafiah M.H., Abd Latif M.N. 2020. Supply chain management in franchising literature review: synthesis of conclusion. LogForum, 16(4), 521-534. http://doi.org/10.17270/J.LOG.2020.513
2. Adler P.S., Goldoftas B., Levine D.I., 1999. Flexibility versus efficiency? A case study of model changeovers in the Toyota production system. Organization Science, 10(1), 43-68. http://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.10.1.43
3. Andriopoulos C., Lewis M.W., 2009. Exploitation-exploration tensions and organizational ambidexterity: Managing paradoxes of innovation. Organization Science, 20(4), 696-717. http://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1080.0406
4. Aoki K., Wilhelm M., 2017. The role of ambidexterity in managing buyer-supplier relationships: The Toyota case. Organization Science, 28(6), 1080-1097. http://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2017.1156
5. Ardito L., Petruzzelli A.M., Dezi L., Castellano S. 2018. The influence of inbound open innovation on ambidexterity performance: does it pay to source knowledge from supply chain stakeholders? Journal of Business Research, 119(2018), 321-329. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.12.043
6. Arend R.J., Wisner J.D., 2005. Small business and supply chain management: is there a fit? Journal of Business Venturing, 20(3), 403-436. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2003.11.003
7. Arksey H., O'Malley L., 2005. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19-32. http://doi.org/10.1080/1364557032000119616
8. Aslam H., Blome C., Roscoe S., Azhar T.M., 2018. Dynamic supply chain capabilities: How market sensing, supply chain agility and adaptability affect supply chain ambidexterity. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 38(12), 2266-2285. http://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-09-2017-0555
9. Aslam H., Khan A.Q., Rashid K., Rehman S.- u. 2020. Achieving supply chain resilience: the role of supply chain ambidexterity and supply chain agility. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 31(6), 1185-1204. http://doi.org/10.1108/JMTM-07-2019-0263
10. Baum J.A., Calabrese T., Silverman B.S., 2000. Don't go it alone: Alliance network composition and startups' performance in Canadian biotechnology. Strategic Management Journal, 21(3), 267-294. http://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(200003)21:33.0.CO;2-8
11. Baxter P., Jack S., 2008. Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and implementation for novice researchers. The Qualitative Report, 13(4), 544-559. http://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2008.1573
12. Benner M.J., Tushman M.L., 2003. Exploitation, exploration, and process management: The productivity dilemma revisited. Academy of Management Review, 28(2), 238-256. http://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2003.9416096
13. Birkinshaw J., Gibson C.B., 2004. Building an ambidextrous organisation. MIT Sloan Management Review, 45(4), 47-55. http://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1306922
14. Bravo M.I.R., Ruiz-Moreno A., Montes F.J.L., 2018. Examining desorptive capacity in supply chains: the role of organizational ambidexterity. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 38(2), 534-553. http://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-12-2016-0751
15. Cheng J.-H., Lu K.-L., 2017. Enhancing effects of supply chain resilience: insights from trajectory and resource-based perspectives. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 22(4), 329-340. http://doi.org/10.1108/SCM-06-2016-0190
16. Clermont M., Dyckhoff H., 2012. Coverage of business administration literature in Google Scholar: Analysis and comparison with Econbiz, Scopus and Web of Science. Bibliometrie-Praxis und Forschung, 1(1), 1-54. http://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2016850
17. Davis K., Drey N., Gould D., 2009. What are scoping studies? A review of the nursing literature. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 46(10), 1386-1400. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2009.02.010
18. Gu M., Yang L., Huo B. 2020. The impact of information technology usage on supply chain resilience and performance: An ambidexterous view. International Journal of Production Economics, 232(2020), 1-24. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2020.107956
19. Gualandris J., Legenvre H., Kalchschmidt M., 2018. Exploration and exploitation within supply networks. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 38(3), 667-689. http://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-03-2017-0162
20. Gupta A.K., Smith K.G., Shalley C.E., 2006. The interplay between exploration and exploitation. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4), 693-706. http://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2006.22083026
21. He Z.-L., Wong P.-K. 2004. Exploration vs. exploitation: An empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis. Organization Science, 15(4), 481-494. http://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1040.0078
22. Hodgkinson G.P., Ford J.K., 2014. Narrative, meta-analytic, and systematic reviews: What are the differences and why do they matter? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35(S1), S1-S5. http://doi.org/10.1002/job.1918
23. Huang Y.-F., Lu L.-H. 2020. The differentiated and ambidextrous influence of network flexibility on exploratory and exploitative partnership formations. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 50(6), 577-599. http://doi.org/10.1108/IJPDLM-02-2019-0057
24. Im G., Rai A., 2008. Knowledge sharing ambidexterity in long-term interorganizational relationships. Management Science, 54(7), 1281-1296. http://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1080.0902
25. Im G., Rai A., Lambert L.S., 2019. Governance and resource‐sharing ambidexterity for generating relationship benefits in supply chain collaborations. Decision Sciences, 50(4), 656-693. http://doi.org/10.1111/deci.12353
26. Jermsittiparsert K., Pithuk L. 2019. Exploring the nexus between supply chain ambidexterity, supply chain agility, supply chain adaptability and the marketing sensing of manufacturing firms in Indonesia. Humanities & Social Sciences Reviews, 7(2), 555-562. http://doi.org/10.18510/hssr.2019.7266
27. Kraus S., Breier M., Dasí-Rodríguez S., 2020. The art of crafting a systematic literature review in entrepreneurship research. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 16(3), 1023-1042. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-020-00635-4
28. Kristal M.M., Huang X., Roth A.V., 2010. The effect of an ambidextrous supply chain strategy on combinative competitive capabilities and business performance. Journal of Operations Management, 28(5), 415-429. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2009.12.002
29. Levac D., Colquhoun H., O'Brien K.K., 2010. Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implementation Science, 5(1), 1-9. http://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-5-69
30. Levinthal D.A., March J.G., 1993. The myopia of learning. Strategic management journal, 14(S2), 95-112. http://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250141009
31. Luu T., 2017. Market responsiveness: antecedents and the moderating role of external supply chain integration. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 32(1), 30-45. http://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-07-2015-013
32. March J.G., 1991. Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71-87. http://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2.1.71
33. McGrath R.G., 2001. Exploratory learning, innovative capacity, and managerial oversight. Academy of Management Journal, 44(1), 118-131. http://doi.org/10.5465/3069340
34. McNamara P., Baden-Fuller C., 1999. Lessons from the Celltech case: Balancing knowledge exploration and exploitation in organizational renewal. British Journal of Management, 10(4), 291-307. http://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.00140
35. Mehdi M., Ahmed S., 2019. Exploration factors affecting an ambidextrous supply chain. International Journal of Logistics Systems and Management, 32(2), 195-219. http://doi.org/10.1504/IJLSM.2019.09758
36. Moher D., Shamseer L., Clarke M., Ghersi D., Liberati A., Petticrew M., Shekelle P., Stewart L., A. 2015. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and metaanalysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Systematic Reviews, 4(1), 1-9. http://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-4-1
37. O’Reilly III C.A., Tushman M.L., 2007. Ambidexterity as a dynamic capability: Resolving the innovator's dilemma. Research in Organizational Behavior, 28(2007), 185-206. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2008.06.002
38. O’Reilly III C.A., Tushman M.L., 2013. Organizational ambidexterity: Past, present, and future. Academy of Management Perspectives, 27(4), 324-338. http://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2013.0025
39. Ojha D., Acharya C., Cooper D., 2018. Transformational leadership and supply chain ambidexterity: Mediating role of supply chain organizational learning and moderating role of uncertainty. International Journal of Production Economics, 197(2018), 215-231. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2018.01.001
40. Ojha D., Struckell E., Acharya C., Patel P.C., 2018. Supply chain organizational learning, exploration, exploitation, and firm performance: A creation-dispersion perspective. International Journal of Production Economics, 204(2018), 70-82. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2018.07.025
41. Partanen J., Kohtamäki M., Patel P.C., Parida V., 2020. Supply chain ambidexterity and manufacturing SME performance: The moderating roles of network capability and strategic information flow. International Journal of Production Economics, 221(2020), 1-12. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2019.08.005
42. Pertusa-Ortega E.M., Molina-Azorín J.F., Tarí J.J., Pereira-Moliner J., López-Gamero M.D., 2020. The microfoundations of organizational ambidexterity: A systematic review of individual ambidexterity through a multilevel framework. BRQ Business Research Quarterly, 23(2020), 1-17. http://doi.org/10.1177/2340944420929711
43. Petrosino A., Boruch R.F., Soydan H., Duggan L., Sanchez-Meca J., 2001. Meeting the challenges of evidence-based policy: The Campbell Collaboration. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 578(1), 14-34. http://doi.org/10.1177/000271620157800102
44. Pham M.T., Rajić A., Greig J.D., Sargeant J.M., Papadopoulos A., McEwen S.A., 2014. A scoping review of scoping reviews: advancing the approach and enhancing the consistency. Research Synthesis Methods, 5(4), 371-385. http://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1123
45. Powell W.W., Koput K.W., Smith-Doerr L., 1993. Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(1), 116-145. http://doi.org/10.2307/2393988
46. Pu X., Wang Z., Chan F.T.S., 2018. Leveraging open E-logistic standards to achieve ambidexterity in supply chain. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 60(4), 347-358. http://doi.org/10.1080/08874417.2018.1488543
47. Puranam P., Singh H., Zollo M., 2006. Organizing for innovation: Managing the coordination-autonomy dilemma in technology acquisitions. Academy of Management Journal, 49(2), 263-280. http://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2006.20786062
48. Rojo-Gallego-Burin A., Llorens-Montes F.J., Perez-Arostegui M.N., Stevenson M., 2020. Ambidextrous supply chain strategy and supply chain flexibility: the contingent effect of ISO 9001. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 120(9), 1691-1714. http://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-01-2020-0038
49. Rojo-Gallego-Burin A., Llorens-Montes J., Perez-Arostegui M.N., 2016. The impact of ambidexterity on supply chain flexibility fit. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 21(4), 433-452. http://doi.org/10.1108/SCM-08-2015-0328
50. Rojo-Gallego-Burin A., Perez-Arostegui M.N., Llorens-Montes J., 2020. Ambidexterity and IT competence can improve supply chain flexibility? A resource orchestration approach. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 26(2), 1-15. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.pursup.2020.100610
51. Sánchez A.D., Del Río M.d.l.C., García J.Á., 2016. Bibliometric analysis of publications on wine tourism in the databases Scopus and WoS. European Research on Management and Business Economics, 23(1), 8-15. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.iedeen.2016.02.001
52. Shukor A.A.A., Newaz M.S., Rahman M.K., Taha A.Z., 2020. Supply chain integration and its impact on supply chain agility and organizational flexibility in manufacturing firms. International Journal of Emerging Markets, ahead-of-print(2020), 1-24. http://doi.org/10.1108/IJOEM-04-2020-0418
53. 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. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2009.00841.x
54. Song M., Di Benedetto C.A., 2008. Supplier's involvement and success of radical new product development in new ventures. Journal of Operations Management, 26(1), 1-22. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2007.06.001
55. Tuan L.T., 2016. Organisational ambidexterity and supply chain agility: The mediating role of external knowledge sharing and moderating role of competitive intelligence. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications, 19(6), 583-603. http://doi.org/10.1080/13675567.2015.1137278
56. Tushman M.L., O'Reilly III C.A., 1996. Ambidextrous organizations: Managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. California Management Review, 38(4), 8-30. http://doi.org/10.2307/41165852
57. Wamba S.F., Dubey R., Gunasekaran A., Akter S., 2020. The performance effects of big data analytics and supply chain ambidexterity: The moderating effect of environmental dynamism. International Journal of Production Economics, 222(2020), 1-14. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2019.09.019
58. Wei S., Ke W., Liu H., Wei K.K., 2019. Supply chain information integration and firm performance: Are explorative and exploitative IT capabilities complementary or substitutive? Decision Sciences, 51(3), 464-499. http://doi.org/10.1111/deci.12364
59. Zakrzewska-Bielawska A., 2021. Ambidextrous Strategy: Antecedents, Strategic Choices, and Performance (1st Edition ed.). New York: Routledge. http://doi.org/10.4324/9781003127772

Uwagi

Opracowanie rekordu ze środków MNiSW, umowa Nr 461252 w ramach programu "Społeczna odpowiedzialność nauki" - moduł: Popularyzacja nauki i promocja sportu (2021).

Typ dokumentu

Bibliografia

Identyfikator YADDA

bwmeta1.element.baztech-8648657f-f57c-488d-a974-eb4bf7806c00