Deutsch
Bibtex
Cite as text
@Select Types{,
Journal = "Band-1",
Title= "The Organizational Design of Digital Innovation Labs: Enabling Ambidexterity to Develop Digital Innovation",
Author= "Friedrich Holotiuk",
Doi= "https://doi.org/10.30844/wi_2020_j6-holotiuk",
Abstract= "Digitalization requires firms to concentrate necessary capabilities around the development of digital innovation. Particularly, firms are experimenting with setting up digital innovation labs (DILs), which present internal but separate organizational units dedicated to the development of digital innovation. However, there is limited knowledge on how DILs develop digital innovation. To understand how DILs enable ambidexterity and, thus, develop digital innovation, we conducted an exploratory single-case study comprising an organizational as well as a team level analysis with 20 interviews to provide deep insights into the organizational design of a DIL. We uncover the organizational design features of DILs and show how they enable ambidexterity. These findings allow us to explain how DILs develop digital innovation. Furthermore, we find DILs to enable a new way to achieve ambidexterity. We discuss our findings in light of the ambidexterity and digital innovation literature.
",
Keywords= "Digital Innovation Labs, Organizational Design, Ambidexterity, Digital Innovation, Digital Transformation
",
}
Friedrich Holotiuk: The Organizational Design of Digital Innovation Labs: Enabling Ambidexterity to Develop Digital Innovation. Online: https://doi.org/10.30844/wi_2020_j6-holotiuk (Abgerufen 23.11.24)
Open Access
Abstract
Abstract
Digitalization requires firms to concentrate necessary capabilities around the development of digital innovation. Particularly, firms are experimenting with setting up digital innovation labs (DILs), which present internal but separate organizational units dedicated to the development of digital innovation. However, there is limited knowledge on how DILs develop digital innovation. To understand how DILs enable ambidexterity and, thus, develop digital innovation, we conducted an exploratory single-case study comprising an organizational as well as a team level analysis with 20 interviews to provide deep insights into the organizational design of a DIL. We uncover the organizational design features of DILs and show how they enable ambidexterity. These findings allow us to explain how DILs develop digital innovation. Furthermore, we find DILs to enable a new way to achieve ambidexterity. We discuss our findings in light of the ambidexterity and digital innovation literature.
Keywords
Schlüsselwörter
Digital Innovation Labs, Organizational Design, Ambidexterity, Digital Innovation, Digital Transformation
References
Referenzen
1. Kohli, R. & Melville, N.P., 2018. Digital Innovation: A Review and Synthesis. Information Systems Journal, 29(1), pp.200–223.
2. Yoo, Y., Henfridsson, O. & Lyytinen, K., 2010. The New Organizing Logic of Digital Innovation: An Agenda for Information Systems Research. Information Systems Research, 21(4), pp.724–735.
3. Yoo, Y., Boland, R.J., Lyytinen, K. & Majchrzak, A., 2012. Organizing for Innovation in the Digitized World. Organization Science, 23(5), pp.1398–1408.
4. Fichman, R.G., Dos Santos, B.L. & Zheng, Z. (Eric), 2014. Digital Innovation As a Fundamental and Powerful Concept in the Information Systems Curriculum. MIS Quarterly, 38(2), pp.329- A15.
5. Nambisan, S., Lyytinen, K., Majchrzak, A. & Song, M., 2017. Digital Innovation Management: Reinventing Innovation Management Research in a Digital Wolrd. MIS Quarterly, 41(1), pp.223– 238.
6. Magadley, W. & Birdi, K., 2009. Innovation Labs: An Examination into the Use of Physical Spaces to Enhance Organizational Creativity. Creativity and Innovation Management, 18(4), pp.315–325.
7. March, J.G., 1991. Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning. Org. Science, 2(1), pp.71–87.
8. Ducan, R.B., 1976. The Ambidextrous Organization: Designing Dual Structures for Innovation. In The Management of Organization Design. New York: North Holland, pp. 167–188.
9. Gibson, C. & Birkinshaw, J., 2004. The Antecedents, Consequences, and Mediating Role of Organizational Ambidexterity. Academy of Management Journal, 47(2), pp.209–226.
10. Tilson, D., Lyytinen, K. & Sørensen, C., 2010. Digital Infrastructures: The Missing IS Research Agenda. Information Systems Research, 21(4), pp.1–12.
11. Henfridsson, O., Mathiassen, L. & Svahn, F., 2014. Managing Technological Change in the Digital Age: The Role of Architectural Frames. Journal of Information Technology, 29(1), pp.27–
43.
12. Tripsas, M., 2009. Technology, Identity, and Inertia Through the Lens of “The Digital Photography Company.” Organization Science, 20(2), pp.441–460.
13. Svahn, F., Mathiassen, L. & Lindgren, R., 2017. Embracing Digital Innovation in Incumbent Firms: How Volvo Managed Competing Concerns. MIS Quarterly, 41(1), pp.239–253.
14. Tushman, M.L. & O’Reilly III, C.A., 1996. The Ambidextrous Organization: Managing Evolutionary and Revolutionary Change. California Management Review, 38(4), pp.8–30.
15. Birkinshaw, J. & Gibson, C., 2004. Building Ambidexterity into an Organisation. MIT Sloan Management Review, pp.47–55.
16. Tushman, M.L. & Romanelli, E., 1985. Organizational evolution: A metamorphosis model of convergence and reorientation. Research in Organizational Behavior, 7, pp.171–222.
17. O’Reilly III, C.A. & Tushman, M.L., 2013. Organizational Ambidextiry: Past, Present, and Future. The Academy of Management Perspective, 27(4), pp.324–338.
18. Gupta, A.K., Smith, K.G. & Shalley, C.E., 2006. The interplay between exploration and exploitation in SMEs. Academy ofManagement Journal, 49(4), pp.693–706.
19. Fecher, F., Winding, J., Hutter, K. & Füller, J., 2018. Innovation labs from a participants’ perspective. Journal of Business Research, 86.
20. Garud, R., Tuertscher, P. & Van De Ven, A.H., 2013. Perspectives on Innovation Processes. Academy of Management Annals, 7(1), pp.775–819.
21. O’Reilly III, C.A. & Tushman, M.L., 2008. Ambidexterity as a Dynamic Capability: Resolving the Innovator’s Dilemma. Research in Organizational Behavior, 28, pp.185–206.
22. Yin, R.K., 2009. Case Study Research: Design and Methods, New York: Sage Publications.
23. Keles, A., 2017. Digital Labs – Deutsche Konzerne auf dem Innovationspfad. Crisp Research. Available at: https://www.crisp-research.com/publication/digital-labs-deutsche-konzerne-aufdem- innovationspfad/ [Accessed August 1, 2019].
24. Paré, G., 2004. Investigating Information Systems with Positivist Case Research. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 13(1), pp.233–264.
25. Eisenhardt, K.M., 1989. Building Theories from Case Study Research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), pp.532–550.
26. Myers, M.D. & Newman, M., 2007. The Qualitative Interview in IS Research: Examining the Craft. Information and Organization.
27. Mayring, P., 2015. Qualitative Content Analysis: Theoretical Background and Procedures. In C. K. A. Bikner-Ahsbahs & N. Presmeg, eds. Approaches to Qualitative Research in Mathematics Education: Examples of Methodology and Methods. Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 365–380.
28. Vahlne, J.E. & Jonsson, A., 2017. Ambidexterity as a dynamic capability in the globalization of the multinational business enterprise (MBE): Case studies of AB Volvo and IKEA. International Business Review.
29. Raisch, S., Birkinshaw, J., Probst, G. & Tushman, M.L., 2009. Organizational Ambidexterity: Balancing Exploitation and Exploration for Sustained Performance. Org. Science, 20(4), pp.685– 695.
30. Holotiuk, F. & Beimborn, D., 2019. Temporal Ambidexterity: How Digital Innovation Labs Connect Exploration and Exploitation for Digital Innovation. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Systems. Munich.
31. Ebers, M., 2017. Organisationsmodelle für Innovation. Schmalenbachs Zeitschrift für betriebswirtschaftliche Forschung, 69(1), pp.81–109.
32. Gregory, R.W., Keil, M., Muntermann, J., Mähring, M., Keil, M. & Mähring, M., 2015. Paradoxes and the Nature of Ambidexterity in IT Transformation Programs. Information Systems Research, 26(1), pp.57–80.