research-article

Understanding IT Value at the Managerial Level: Managerial Ambidexterity, Seizing Opportunities, and the Moderating Role of Information Systems Use

Authors:

Nicholas Roberts,

Hamed Qahri-Saremi,

Leo R. VijayasarathyAuthors Info & Claims

ACM SIGMIS Database: the DATABASE for Advances in Information Systems, Volume 52, Issue 3

Pages 39 - 55

https://doi.org/10.1145/3481629.3481633

Published: 11 August 2021 Publication History

Abstract

Managerial ambidexterity is an important precursor to managerial seizing ability. However, ambidexterity can impose substantial costs. Yet information systems may help reduce these costs. We develop a model that includes an inverted U-shaped relationship between managerial ambidexterity and seizing ability. We propose that a manager's effective use of management support systems will mitigate the decline in seizing ability at higher levels of ambidexterity. We test our model with data collected over two time periods from 172 managers. Our results support our model, thereby generating implications for research and practice in IT value, managerial ambidexterity, and dynamic managerial capabilities.

References

[1]

Adner, R., & Helfat, C. E. (2003). Corporate effects and dynamic managerial capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 24(10), 1011--1025.

[2]

Agarwal, R., & Lucas, H. C. (2005). The information systems identity crisis: Focusing on high-visibility and high-impact research. MIS Quarterly, 29(3), 381--398.

Digital Library

[3]

Agresti, A. (2010). Analysis of ordinal categorical data. Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley.

[4]

Aitchison, J., & Silvey, S. D. (1957). The generalization of probit analysis to the case of multiple responses. Biometrika, 44, 131--140.

[5]

Argote, L., & Miron-Spektor, E. (2011). Organizational learning: From experience to knowledge. Organization Science, 22(5), 1123--1137.

Digital Library

[6]

Augier, M., & Teece, D. J. (2009). Dynamic capabilities and the role of managers in business strategy and economic performance. Organization Science, 20(2), 410--421.

[7]

Bagozzi, R. P., Yi, Y., & Phillips, L. W. (1991). Assessing construct validity in organizational research. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36(3), 421--458.

[8]

Bettis, R. A., & Prahalad, C. K. (1995). The dominant logic: Retrospective and extension. Strategic Management Journal, 16(1), 5--14.

[9]

Bhatt, G., Emdad, A., Roberts, N., & Grover, V. (2010). Building and leveraging information in dynamic environments: The role of IT infrastructure flexibility as enabler of organizational responsiveness and competitive advantage. Information & Management, 47(7--8), 341--349.

Digital Library

[10]

Birkinshaw, J., & Gupta, K. (2013). Clarifying the distinctive contribution of ambidexterity to the field of organization studies. Academy of Management Perspectives, 27(4), 287--298.

[11]

Boes, S., & Winkelmann, R. (2006). Ordered response models. Allgemeines Statistisches Archiv, 90, 167--181.

[12]

Boumgarden, P., Nickerson, J., & Zenger, T. R. (2012). Sailing into the wind: Exploring the relationships among ambidexterity, vacillation, and organizational performance. Strategic Management Journal, 33, 587--610.

[13]

Burton-Jones, A., & Grange, C. (2013). From use to effective use: A representation theory perspective. Information Systems Research, 24(3), 632--658.

[14]

Byrne, B. M. (2006). Structural equation modeling with EQS (2nd ed.). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Digital Library

[15]

Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 233--255.

[16]

Clark, T. D., Jones, M. C., & Armstrong, C. P. (2007). The dynamic structure of management support systems: Theory development, research focus, and direction. MIS Quarterly, 31(3), 579--615.

Digital Library

[17]

Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

[18]

Conboy, K., Mikalef, P., Dennehy, D., & Krogstie, J. (2020). Using business analytics to enhance dynamic capabilities in operations research: A case analysis and research agenda. European Journal of Operational Research, 281(3), 656--672.

[19]

Cyert, R. M., & March, J. G. (1963). A behavioral theory of the firm. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, U.S.A.: Prentice Hall, Inc.

[20]

Davenport, T. H. (2006). Competing on analytics. Harvard Business Review, 84(1), 98--107.

[21]

Devaraj, S., & Kohli, R. (2003). Performance impacts of information technology: Is actual usage the missing link? Management Science, 49(3), 273--289.

Digital Library

[22]

DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147--160.

[23]

Gibson, C. B., & Birkinshaw, J. (2004). The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. Academy of Management Journal, 47(2), 209--226.

[24]

Haans, R. F. J., Pieters, C., & He, Z.-L. (2016). Thinking about U: Theorizing and testing U- and inverted U-shaped relationships in strategy research. Strategic Management Journal, 37, 1177--1195.

[25]

Hammer, M. (2004). Deep change: How operational innovation can transform your company. Harvard Business Review, 82(4), 84--93.

[26]

Helfat, C. E., Finkelstein, S., Mitchell, W., Peteraf, M. A., Singh, H., Teece, D. J., & Winter, S. G. (2007). Dynamic capabilities: Understanding strategic change in organizations. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

[27]

Helfat, C. E., & Martin, J. A. (2015). Dynamic managerial capabilities: Review and assessment of managerial impact on strategic change. Journal of Management, 41(5), 1281--1312.

[28]

Helfat, C. E., & Peteraf, M. A. (2015). Managerial cognitive capabilities and the microfoundations of dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 36(6), 831--850.

[29]

Hill, S. A., & Birkinshaw, J. M. (2010). Idea sets: Conceptualizing and measuring a new unit of analysis in entrepreneurship research. Organizational Research Methods, 13(1), 85--113.

[30]

Hodgkinson, G. P., & Healey, M. P. (2011). Psychological foundations of dynamic capabilities: Reflexion and reflection in strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 32, 1500--1516.

[31]

Hosack, B., Hall, D., Paradice, D., & Courtney, J. F. (2012). A look toward the future: Decision support systems research is alive and well. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 13(5), 315--340.

[32]

Janssen, M., Van der Voort, H., & Wahyudi, A. (2017). Factors influencing big data decision-making quality. Journal of Business Research, 70, 338--345.

[33]

Keller, T., & Weibler, J. (2015). What it takes and costs to be an ambidextrous leader: Linking leadership and cognitive strain to balancing exploration and exploitation. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 22(1), 54--71.

[34]

Kiron, D., Prentice, P. K., & Ferguson, R. B. (2014). Raising the bar with analytics. MIT Sloan Management Review, 55(2), 29--33.

[35]

Kohli, R., & Grover, V. (2008). Business value of IT: An essay on expanding research directions to keep up with the times. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 9(1), 23--29.

[36]

Kowalczyk, M., & Buxmann, P. (2015). An ambidextrous perspective on business intelligence and analytics support in decision processes: Insights from a multiple case study. Decision Support Systems, 80, 1--13.

Digital Library

[37]

Lampel, J. S., J. (2000). Probing the unobtrusive link: Dominant logic and the design of joint ventures at General Electric. Strategic Management Journal, 21(5), 593--602.

[38]

Laureiro-Martinez, D., Brusoni, S., Canessa, N., & Zollo, M. (2015). Understanding the exploration--exploitation dilemma: An fMRI study of attention control and decision-making performance. Strategic Management Journal, 36(3), 319--338.

[39]

Laureiro-Martinez, D., Brusoni, S., & Zollo, M. (2010). The neuroscientific foundations of the exploration-exploitation dilemma. Journal of Neuroscience, Psychology, and Economics, 3(2), 95--115.

[40]

Lavie, D., Stettner, U., & Tushman, M. L. (2010). Exploration and exploitation within and across organizations. The Academy of Management Annals, 4(1), 109--155.

[41]

Levinthal, D. A., & March, J. G. (1993). The myopia of learning. Strategic Management Journal, 14(Special Issue), 95--112.

[42]

Lindell, M. K., & Whitney, D. J. (2001). Accounting for common method variance in cross-sectional designs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(1), 114--121.

[43]

Lu, Y., & Ramamurthy, K. (2011). Understanding the link between information technology capability and organizational agility: An empirical examination. MIS Quarterly, 35(4), 931--954.

Digital Library

[44]

MacKenzie, S. B., Podsakoff, P. M., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2011). Construct measurement and validation procedures in MIS and behavioral research: Integrating new and existing techniques. MIS Quarterly, 35(2), 293--334.

Digital Library

[45]

March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71--87.

Digital Library

[46]

March, J. G. (1996). Continuity and change in theories of organizational action. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(2), 278--287.

[47]

March, J. G. (2006). Rationality, foolishness, and adaptive intelligence. Strategic Management Journal, 27(3), 201--214.

[48]

McKelvey, R., & Zavoina, W. (1975). A statistical model for the analysis of ordered level dependent variables. Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 4, 103--120.

[49]

Melville, N., Kraemer, K., & Gurbaxani, V. (2004). Review: Information technology and organizational performance: An integrative model of IT business value. MIS Quarterly, 28(2), 283--322.

Digital Library

[50]

Mikalef, P., & Pateli, A. (2017). Information technology-enabled dynamic capabilities and their indirect effect on competitive performance: Findings from PLS-SEM and fsQCA. Journal of Business Research, 70, 1--16.

[51]

Mom, T. J. M., Van den Bosch, F. A. J., & Volberda, H. W. (2009). Understanding variation in managers' ambidexterity: Investigating direct and interaction effects of formal structural and personal coordination mechanisms. Organization Science, 20(4), 812--828.

Digital Library

[52]

Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York, New York, U.S.A.: McGraw-Hill, Inc.

[53]

O'Reilly, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2004). The ambidextrous organization. Harvard Business Review, 82(4), 74--81.

[54]

O'Reilly, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2008). Ambidexterity as a dynamic capability: Resolving the innovator's dilemma. Research in Organizational Behavior, 28, 185--206.

[55]

O'Reilly, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2011). Organizational ambidexterity in action: How managers explore and exploit. California Management Review, 53(4), 5--22.

[56]

O'Reilly, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2013). Organizational ambidexterity: Past, present, and future. Academy of Management Perspectives, 27(4), 324--338.

[57]

Ocasio, W. (1997). Towards an attention-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 18(Special Issue), 187--206.

[58]

Papachroni, A., Heracleous, L., & Paroutis, S. (2016). In pursuit of ambidexterity: Managerial reactions to innovation-efficiency tensions. Human Relations, 69(9), 1791--1822.

[59]

Petter, S., Straub, D., & Rai, A. (2007). Specifying formative constructs in information systems research. MIS Quarterly, 31(4), 623--656.

Digital Library

[60]

Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879--903.

[61]

Prahalad, C. K., & Bettis, R. A. (1986). The dominant logic: A new linkage between diversity and performance. Strategic Management Journal, 7(6), 485--501.

[62]

Ramiller, N. C., & Pentland, B. T. (2009). Management implications in information systems research: The untold story. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 10(6), 474--494.

[63]

Roberts, N., Galluch, P. S., Dinger, M., & Grover, V. (2012). Absorptive capacity and information systems research: Review, synthesis, and directions for future research. MIS Quarterly, 36(2), 625--648.

Digital Library

[64]

Roberts, N., & Thatcher, J. (2009). Conceptualizing and testing formative constructs: Tutorial and annotated example. The DATA BASE for Advances in Information Systems, 40(3), 9--39.

Digital Library

[65]

Rogan, M., & Mors, M. L. (2014). A network perspective on individual-level ambidexterity in organizations. Organization Science, 25(6), 1860--1877.

Digital Library

[66]

Sabherwal, R., & Jeyaraj, A. (2015). Information technology impacts on firm performance: An extension of Kohli and Devaraj (2003). MIS Quarterly, 39(4), 809--836.

Digital Library

[67]

Salvato, C., & Rerup, C. (2011). Beyond collective entities: Multilevel research on organizational routines and capabilities. Journal of Management, 37(2), 468--490.

[68]

Schwarz, A., Rizzuto, T., Carraher-Wolverton, C., Roldan, J. L., & Barrera-Barrera, R. (2017). Examining the impact and detection of the "urban legend' of common method bias. The DATA BASE for Advances in Information Systems, 48(1), 93--119.

Digital Library

[69]

Sherr, I. (2013). Apple's magic wears thin as its earnings disappoint. The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887324539304578260222730515836

[70]

Simon, H. (1976). Administrative behavior: a study of decision making processes in administrative organization. New York, New York, U.S.A.: Free Press.

[71]

Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319--1350.

[72]

Tempelaar, M. P., & Rosenkranz, N. A. (2019). Switching hats: The effect of role transition on individual ambidexterity. Journal of Management, 45(4), 1517--1539.

[73]

Troianovski, A., Gryta, T., & Sherr, I. (2013). New worry for Apple. The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887323485704578257393880660184

[74]

Tushman, M. L., & O'Reilly, C. A. (1996). Ambidextrous organizations: Managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. California Management Review, 38(4), 8--30.

Cited By

Varmus MKubina MMičiak MŠarlák M(2024)Integrated Sports Information Systems: Enhancing Data Processing and Information Provision for Sports in SlovakiaSystems10.3390/systems1206019812:6(198)Online publication date: 7-Jun-2024
https://doi.org/10.3390/systems12060198
Ye HChua C(2024)Effect of Ambidexterity on Contestants’ Creative Performance in Open Innovation ContestsProduction and Operations Management10.1177/10591478241305874Online publication date: 22-Dec-2024
https://doi.org/10.1177/10591478241305874
Windeler JHarrison ASundrup R(2024)Under the Radar or Into the Spotlight: How Does Social Presence Affect Minorities in Virtual Groups?ACM SIGMIS Database: the DATABASE for Advances in Information Systems10.1145/3663682.366368855:2(98-119)Online publication date: 3-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3663682.3663688
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Understanding IT Value at the Managerial Level: Managerial Ambidexterity, Seizing Opportunities, and the Moderating Role of Information Systems Use
1. Information systems
  1. Information retrieval
  2. Information systems applications
    1. Decision support systems

Recommendations

Information technology use as a learning mechanism: the impact of it use on knowledge transfer effectiveness, absorptive capacity, and franchisee performance

This study aims to contribute to the literature through the theoretical development and empirical investigation of the role of information technology use in organizational learning. We develop a theoretical framework that unpacks organizational learning ...
A comprehensive conceptualization of post-adoptive behaviors associated with information technology enabled work systems

For the last 25 years, organizations have invested heavily in information technology to support their work processes. In today's organizations, intra- and interorganizational work systems are increasingly IT-enabled. Available evidence, however, ...
Configurations for Achieving Organizational Ambidexterity with Digitization
Organizational ambidexterity refers to the capability of businesses to balance the pursuit of radical innovation simultaneously with incremental innovation. It echoes the popular notion that to thrive well in a competitive economy, businesses need to ...
Due to digitization, new mechanisms have emerged for achieving organizational ambidexterity, defined as the ability to pursue both efficiency and flexibility while balancing exploitation and exploration. This study investigates the role of digitization in ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM SIGMIS Database: the DATABASE for Advances in Information Systems

ACM SIGMIS Database: the DATABASE for Advances in Information Systems Volume 52, Issue 3

August 2021

97 pages

ISSN:0095-0033

EISSN:1532-0936

DOI:10.1145/3481629

Editors:
Deborah J. Armstrong
Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL
,
Tom Stafford
Louisiana Tech University, Ruston, LA
,
Mohamed Tazkarji
Louisiana Tech University, Ruston, LA
,
Heidi Seward
Baylor University, Waco, TX

Issue’s Table of Contents

Copyright © 2021 Copyright is held by the owner/author(s).

Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 11 August 2021

Published in SIGMIS Volume 52, Issue 3

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

6
Total Citations
View Citations
258
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)24
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1

Reflects downloads up to 04 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Varmus MKubina MMičiak MŠarlák M(2024)Integrated Sports Information Systems: Enhancing Data Processing and Information Provision for Sports in SlovakiaSystems10.3390/systems1206019812:6(198)Online publication date: 7-Jun-2024
https://doi.org/10.3390/systems12060198
Ye HChua C(2024)Effect of Ambidexterity on Contestants’ Creative Performance in Open Innovation ContestsProduction and Operations Management10.1177/10591478241305874Online publication date: 22-Dec-2024
https://doi.org/10.1177/10591478241305874
Windeler JHarrison ASundrup R(2024)Under the Radar or Into the Spotlight: How Does Social Presence Affect Minorities in Virtual Groups?ACM SIGMIS Database: the DATABASE for Advances in Information Systems10.1145/3663682.366368855:2(98-119)Online publication date: 3-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3663682.3663688
Cheng CShiu E(2023)The relative values of big data analytics versus traditional marketing analytics to firm innovation: An empirical studyInformation & Management10.1016/j.im.2023.10383960:7(103839)Online publication date: Nov-2023
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2023.103839
Heubeck T(2023)Looking back to look forward: a systematic review of and research agenda for dynamic managerial capabilitiesManagement Review Quarterly10.1007/s11301-023-00359-zOnline publication date: 27-Jul-2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-023-00359-z
Majhi SPattanayak A(2023)Information Technology Adoption and Managerial Improvisation Capability: A NeuroIS PerspectiveTransfer, Diffusion and Adoption of Next-Generation Digital Technologies10.1007/978-3-031-50188-3_33(379-386)Online publication date: 13-Dec-2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-50188-3_33

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Figures

Tables

Media

View Issue’s Table of Contents