Organizational Linkages for Surviving Technological Change: Complementary Assets, Middle Management, and Ambidexterity

By Alva Taylor, Constance E. Helfat. Organ. Sci., 2009

432 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Management Science and Operations Research, Strategy and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c0df271d2b27488b2b7fb8b6492c50e683902fa6

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Management Science and Operations Research

In Strategy and Management

Citations in the corpus

Resource Orchestration to Create Competitive Advantage (2011, background): “In fact, Taylor and Helfat (2009) argue that it is middle managers’ linking of operational and top management information and actions that makes them critical for firms to navigate technological change successfully (i.”
Dynamic Decision Making: A Model of Senior Leaders Managing Strategic Paradoxes (2014, background): “Leaders may become entrenched in existing cognitions and fail to see unique innovation needs (Taylor & Helfat, 2009; Tripsas & Gavetti, 2000).”
Organizational Ambidexterity Through the Lens of Paradox Theory (2015, background): “The role of the middle management as an integrative mechanism is also highlighted as crucial in promoting ambidexterity by Taylor and Helfat (2009), who examine the radical transformation of two high-tech organizations undergoing a transition from an existing technology to a new one.”
Organizational Ambidexterity: Balancing Exploitation and Exploration for Sustained Performance (2009, background): “Kogut and Zander (1992, p. 384) describe “combinative capabilities” as the firm’s ability “to synthesize and apply current and acquired knowledge.””
Cognition and Capabilities: A Multi-Level Perspective (2013, background): “. . . Fungibility Regnér (2008), Taylor and Helfat (2009), and Danneels (2011) Cognition about the applicability of existing capabilities to new environments affects growth patterns Processes . . . Attention Kazanjian and Drazin (1987), Ginsberg (1989, 1990), D’Aveni and MacMillan (1990), Milliken…”
Firm capabilities and growth: the moderating role of market conditions (2016, neutral): “Managerial cognition scholars suggest that cognition about the applicability of existing capabilities to new environments affects growth (Taylor and Helfat 2009; Danneels 2011).”
The elephant in the room of Dynamic Capabilities: Bringing two diverging conversations together (2012, background): “Work has proceeded on the process side of dynamic capabilities (e.g., Martin, 2011; O’Reilly and Tushman, 2008; Taylor and Helfat, 2009), but without giving attention to the uncertainties on the content side.”
Reflections on the 2013 Decade Award—“Exploitation, Exploration, and Process Management: The Productivity Dilemma Revisited” Ten Years Later (2015, background): “…process management activities, we developed theory at lower levels of analysis, allowing us to theorize about mechanisms and influences on individual and group behavior, in multiple functions and processes in organizations (see Mom, van den Bosch, & Volberda, 2009, and Taylor & Helfat, 2009).”
Strategic Renewal of Organizations (2009, background): “Moreover, through extensive communication, coordination, and use of cross-functional teams involving middle managers working in different units, IBM was able to adapt the new technology to meet the needs of its customers (Section III of Table 1) (Taylor and Helfat 2009).”
Distributed Attention and Shared Emotions in the Innovation Process (2016, background): “In ambidextrous structures, the unit focusing on long-term development should not have short-term pressures (Christensen and Bower, 1996; Gilbert, 2005; Taylor and Helfat, 2009).”
Business model innovation for sustainable energy: how German municipal utilities invest in offshore wind energy (2013, background): “For example, technological innovation sometimes requires industry incumbents to a completely new core technology (Taylor and Helfat, 2009).”