How top management team behavioral integration and behavioral complexity enable organizational ambidexterity: The moderating role of contextual ambidexterity

By Abraham Carmeli, Meyrav Yitzack Halevi. 2009

360 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Management Science and Operations Research, Strategy and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e1631dc9e804ebf45529f87911ee9b647b3b3327

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

What Have We Learned That Is Critical in Understanding Leadership Perceptions and Leader-Performance Relations? (2014, background): “…consider the importance of time (Bluedorn & Jaussi, 2008; Sonnentag, 2012), complexity in self and interpersonal processes (Uhl-Bien, Marion, & McKelvey, 2007), and adaptability to meet the needs of complex environments as processes evolve with time (Carmeli & Halevi, 2009; UhlBien & Marion, 2009).”
Organizational Ambidexterity Through the Lens of Paradox Theory (2015, background): “Carmeli and Halevi (2009) extend this line of thinking by arguing that top management team processes (such as behavioral integration) and capacities (such as behavioral complexity) can lead to organizational ambidexterity provided that the appropriate supportive organizational context is in place. S”
Paradox theory and the paradox of success (2019, background): “…in the strategic management literature as scholars have brought a paradox theory into the study of innovation processes (Andriopoulos & Lewis, 2009; Atuahene-Gima, 2005), top management teams (Carmeli & Halevi, 2009), CEO strategies (Fredberg, 2014), and strategy work (Dameron & Torset, 2014).”
Mechanisms for Managing Ambidexterity: A Review and Research Agenda (2013, neutral): “In line with this, Carmeli and Halevi (2009) theorise that TMT behavioural integration gives rise to behavioural complexity in a team, which in turn enables strategic decisions balancing exploitation and exploration.”
The combined influence of top and middle management leadership styles on absorptive capacity (2012, background): “Such individuals would be exposed to leaders who are expected to shift from one behaviour type to another as they constantly juggle to align their behaviours to the changing context (Bass et al., 2003; Carmeli and Halevi, 2009).”
Understanding the changing nature of psychological contracts in 21st century organizations (2017, background): “The concept of organizational fluidity refers to an organization’s ability to act symbiotically with its environment (Carmeli & Halevi, 2009; Schreyögg & Sydow, 2010), and it is characterized by networks rather than hierarchies, spontaneous interaction rather than formal programs and structured…”
Dynamic Decision Making: A Model of Senior Leaders Managing Strategic Paradoxes (2014, background): “…& Volberda, 2008) who have more decisionmaking authority (Mom, van den Bosch, & Volberda, 2009) and top management teams with more behavioral integration (Carmeli & Halevi, 2009; Lubatkin, Simsek, Yan, & Veiga, 2006) or social integration (Jansen, Tempelaar, van den Bosch, & Volberda, 2009).”
The coopetition paradox and tension: The moderating role of coopetition capability (2016, background): “…2008; Andriopoulos & Lewis, 2008), and rather consider it is managers at the top who coordinate and integrate the spatially or temporally separated units (Cameli & Halevi, 2009; Helfat & Winter, 2011), we assume that internal tension is not desirable and beneficial, and thus needs to be reduced.”
How CEO empowering leadership shapes top management team processes: Implications for firm performance (2011, background): “…processes and outcomes has become ever more abundant, we have yet to gain a good understanding of the processes by which the TMTmay better manage its complex tasks (Carmeli & Halevi, 2009; Carmeli & Schaubroeck, 2006; Lubatkin, Simsek, Ling, & Veiga, 2006; Pettigrew, 1992; Smith & Tushman, 2005).”