Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Automation as Management of Paradoxical Tensions: The Role of Industrial Engineering

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Book cover Organizing for the Digital World

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Information Systems and Organisation ((LNISO,volume 28))

Abstract

In this paper, we explored the introduction of an automated parcel sorting system in a major company in the logistic and parcel delivery industry. Adopting a Grounded Theory approach, we carried out a study that highlighted profound and unexpected organizational implications and management challenges connected to the introduction of the new technology. Our analysis revealed the key role of the Industrial Engineering function as a change agent in devising and managing the introduction of the automated system. In particular, Industrial Engineering actually managed the organizational change by determining the right balance between several opposite dimensions (manual vs. automated; planned vs. emergent; local vs. global). Handling these tensions with a holistic approach may constitute a crucial factor for the change program effectiveness. Contrasting our findings with extant literature, we found resonance with latest works on ambidexterity, interpreted as a firm’s ability to manage tensions. The resulting outcome is a substantive grounded theory of ambidexterity in an automation enhancement program.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Adler, P.S., Goldoftas, B., Levine, D.I.: Flexibility versus efficiency? A case study of model changeovers in the Toyota production system. Organ. Sci. 10(1), 43–68 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Andersen, T.J., Nielsen, B.B.: The effective ambidextrous organization: a model of integrative strategy making processes (2007). Accessed from http://openarchive.cbs.dk/bitstream/handle/10398/7424/2007-12.pdf?sequence=1

  3. Andriopoulos, C., Lewis, M.W.: Exploitation-exploration tensions and organizational ambidexterity: managing paradoxes of innovation. Organ. Sci. 20(4), 696–717 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Atuahene-Gima, K.: Resolving the capability—rigidity paradox in new product innovation. J. Mark. 69(4), 61–83 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Benner, M.J., Tushman, M.L.: Reflections on the 2013 decade award—‘exploitation, exploration, and process management: the productivity dilemma revisited’ ten years later. Acad. Manag. Rev. 40(4), 497–514 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bierly, P.E., Daly, P.S.: Alternative knowledge strategies, competitive environment, and organizational performance in small manufacturing firms. Entrep. Theory Pract. 31(4), 493–516 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Cao, Q., Gedajlovic, E., Zhang, H.: Unpacking organizational ambidexterity: dimensions, contingencies, and synergistic effects. Organ. Sci. 20(4), 781–796 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Chen, E.L., Katila, R.: Rival interpretations of balancing exploration and exploitation: simultaneous or sequential? In: Shane, S. (ed.), Handbook of Technology and Innovation Management, pp. 197–214. Wiley (2008). Accessed from http://maryannfeldman.web.unc.edu/files/2011/11/Contribution-of-Public-Entities_2008.pdf#page=214

  9. Du, W., Pan, S.L., Zuo, M.: How to balance sustainability and profitability in technology organizations: an ambidextrous perspective. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag. 60(2), 366–385 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2012.2206113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Duncan, R.: The ambidextrous organization: designing dual structures for innovation. In: Killman, R.H., Pondy, L.R., Sleven, D. (eds.), The Management of Organization, pp. 167–188. North-Holland, New York (n.d.)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Gibson, C.B., Birkinshaw, J.: The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. Acad. Manag. J. 47(2), 209–226 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Glaser, B.G.: Theoretical Sensitivity: Advances in the Methodology of Grounded Theory. Sociology Press (1978)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Gregory, R.W., Keil, M., Muntermann, J., Mähring, M.: Paradoxes and the nature of ambidexterity in IT transformation programs. Inf. Syst. Res. 26(1), 57–80 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2014.0554

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Gulati, R., Puranam, P.: Renewal through reorganization: the value of inconsistencies between formal and informal organization. Organ. Sci. 20(2), 422–440 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1090.0421

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Gupta, A.K., Smith, K.G., Shalley, C.E.: The interplay between exploration and exploitation. Acad. Manag. J. 49(4), 693–706 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Han, M.: Achieving superior internationalization through strategic ambidexterity. J. Enterp. Cult. 15(1), 43–77 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. He, Z.-L., Wong, P.-K.: Exploration vs. exploitation: an empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis. Organ. Sci. 15(4), 481–494 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Helfat, C.E., Raubitschek, R.S.: Product sequencing: co-evolution of knowledge, capabilities and products. Strateg. Manag. J. 961–979 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Im, G., Rai, A.: Knowledge sharing ambidexterity in long-term interorganizational relationships. Manag. Sci. 54(7), 1281–1296 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Jansen, J.J.P., den Bosch, F.A.J.V., Volberda, H.W.: Exploratory innovation, exploitative innovation, and ambidexterity: the impact of environmental and organizational antecedents. Schmalenbach Bus. Rev. (SBR) 57(4), 351–363 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Jansen, J.J.P., Tempelaar, M.P., van den Bosch, F.A.J., Volberda, H.W.: Structural differentiation and ambidexterity: the mediating role of integration mechanisms. Organ. Sci. 20(4), 797–811 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kang, S.-C., Snell, S.A.: Intellectual capital architectures and ambidextrous learning: a framework for human resource management. J. Manag. Stud. 46(1), 65–92 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Katila, R., Ahuja, G.: Something old, something new: a longitudinal study of search behavior and new product introduction. Acad. Manag. J. 45(6), 1183–1194 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Kyriakopoulos, K., Moorman, C.: Tradeoffs in marketing exploitation and exploration strategies: the overlooked role of market orientation. Int. J. Res. Mark. 21(3), 219–240 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Lavie, D., Rosenkopf, L.: Balancing exploration and exploitation in alliance formation. Acad. Manag. J. 49(4), 797–818 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Lindström, V., Winroth, M.: Aligning manufacturing strategy and levels of automation: a case study. J. Eng. Tech. Manag. 27(3–4), 148–159 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jengtecman.2010.06.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Menguc, B., Auh, S.: The asymmetric effect of ambidexterity on firm performance for prospectors and defenders: the moderating role of marketing orientation. Ind. Mark. Manag. 37(4), 455–470 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Mom, T.J.M., van den Bosch, F.A.J., Volberda, H.W.: Understanding variation in managers’ ambidexterity: investigating direct and interaction effects of formal structural and personal coordination mechanisms. Organ. Sci. 20(4), 812–828 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. O’Reilly III, C.A., Tushman, M.L.: The ambidextrous organization. Harvard Bus. Rev. 82(4), 74–81 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  30. O’Reilly III, C.A., Tushman, M.L.: Ambidexterity as a dynamic capability: resolving the innovator’s dilemma. Res. Organ. Behav. 28, 185–206 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2008.06.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. O’Reilly III, C.A., Tushman, M.L.: Organizational ambidexterity in action: how managers explore and exploit. Calif. Manag. Rev. 53(4), 5–22 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. O’Reilly III, C.A., Tushman, M.L.: Organizational ambidexterity: past, present, and future. Acad. Manag. Perspect. 27(4), 324–338 (2013). https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2013.0025

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Raisch, S.: Exploration vs. exploitation: a metaparadigm view of ambidextrous organizational forms. In: Annual Meetings of the Academy of Management, Atlanta, GA, Aug 2006

    Google Scholar 

  34. Raisch, S., Birkinshaw, J., Probst, G., Tushman, M.L.: Organizational ambidexterity: balancing exploitation and exploration for sustained performance. Organ. Sci. 20(4), 685–695 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Rivkin, J.W., Siggelkow, N.: Balancing search and stability: Interdependencies among elements of organizational design. Manag. Sci. 49(3), 290–311 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Rothaermel, F.T., Deeds, D.L.: Exploration and exploitation alliances in biotechnology: a system of new product development. Strateg. Manag. J. 25(3), 201–221 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Sheremata, W.A.: Centrifugal and centripetal forces in radical new product development under time pressure. Acad. Manag. Rev. 25(2), 389–408 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Simsek, Z., Heavey, C., Veiga, J.F., Souder, D.: A typology for aligning organizational ambidexterity’s conceptualizations, antecedents, and outcomes. J. Manag. Stud. 46(5), 864–894 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2009.00841.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Smith, W.K., Tushman, M.L.: Managing strategic contradictions: a top management model for managing innovation streams. Organ. Sci. 16, 522–536 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Swart, J., Kinnie, N.: Simultaneity of learning orientations in a marketing agency. Manag. Learn. 38(3), 337–357 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Tarafdar, M., Gordon, S.R.: Understanding the influence of information systems competencies on process innovation: a resource-based view. J. Strateg. Inf. Syst. 16(4), 353–392 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Taylor, A., Helfat, C.E.: Organizational linkages for surviving technological change: complementary assets, middle management, and ambidexterity. Organ. Sci. 20(4), 718–739 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Tiwana, A.: Do bridging ties complement strong ties? An empirical examination of alliance ambidexterity. Strateg. Manag. J. 29(3), 251–272 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Tiwana, A., Bharadwaj, A., Sambamurthy, V.: The influence of interunit linkages on technology: an empirical study of the mediating role of knowledge integration. Soc. Sci. Res. Netw. (SSRN) Working Paper (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  45. Tushman, M.L., O’Reilly III, C.A.: The ambidextrous organizations: Managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. Calif. Manag. Rev. 38(4), 8–30 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Tushman, M., O’Reilly III, C.A.: Winning Through Innovation: A Practical Guide to Leading Organizational Change and Renewal. Harvard Business School Press (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  47. Urquhart, C.: Grounded Theory for Qualitative Research: A Practical Guide. Sage (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  48. Winroth, M., Safsten, K., Stahre, J.: Automation strategies: existing theory or ad hoc decisions? Int. J. Manuf. Technol. Manag. 11(1), 98–114 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Winter, S.G., Szulanski, G.: Replication as strategy. Organ. Sci. 12(6), 730–743 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Economics and Business Administration, University of Sassari, Sassari, Italy

    Francesco Virili

  2. Department of Human Sciences and Education, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy

    Cristiano Ghiringhelli

Authors
  1. Francesco Virili
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Cristiano Ghiringhelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Francesco Virili or Cristiano Ghiringhelli .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Informatics, Systems and Communication, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy

    Federico Cabitza

  2. Department of Informatics, Systems and Communication, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy

    Carlo Batini

  3. Department of Management and Technology, Bocconi University, Milan, Italy

    Massimo Magni

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Virili, F., Ghiringhelli, C. (2019). Automation as Management of Paradoxical Tensions: The Role of Industrial Engineering. In: Cabitza, F., Batini, C., Magni, M. (eds) Organizing for the Digital World. Lecture Notes in Information Systems and Organisation, vol 28. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90503-7_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation