Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Flying or dying? Organizational change, customer participation, and innovation ambidexterity in emerging economies

  • Published:
Asia Pacific Journal of Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In emerging economies, organizational change is both a difficult challenge and a common phenomenon for high-tech firms. Change can enhance adaptability and leverage knowledge based on dynamic capability perspective, but it can also increase coordination costs and—according to the organizational inertia perspective—prompt conflict. Existing findings about the effect of organizational change on firm performance are inconsistent. Accordingly, this survey study of 213 firms in the Chinese high-tech industry investigates the curvilinear and differential effects of technical and administrative organizational change, as moderated by customer participation and innovation ambidexterity. The results reveal that the effects of technical and administrative change are both U-shaped. At a low level of change, increasing technical or administrative change hinders firm performance, but as the levels increase beyond a critical point, the effect of change becomes positive. Although customer participation strengthens the effect of technical change on firm performance, both customer participation and innovation ambidexterity attenuate the effect of administrative change on firm performance.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aiken, L., & West, S. 1991. Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amburgey, T. L., Kelly, D., & Barnett, W. P. 1993. Resetting the clock: The dynamics of organizational change and failure. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38(1): 51–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J., & Gerbing, D. 1988. Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3): 411–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andriopoulos, C., & Lewis, M. W. 2009. Exploitation-exploration tensions and organizational ambidexterity: Managing paradoxes of innovation. Organization Science, 20(4): 696–717.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Armenakis, A. A., & Harris, S. G. 2009. Reflections: Our journey in organizational change research and practice. Journal of Change Management, 9: 127–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atuahene-Gima, K. 2005. Resolving the capability rigidity paradox in new product innovation. Journal of Marketing, 69(4): 61–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baron, J. N., Hannan, M. T., & Burton, M. D. 2001. Labor pains: Change in organizational models and employee turnover in young, high-tech firms. American Journal of Sociology, 106(4): 960–1012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Battilana, J. 2011. The enabling role of social position in diverging from the institutional status quo: Evidence from the UK National Health Service. Organization Science, 22(4): 817–834.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Battilana, J., & Casciaro, T. 2013. Overcoming resistance to organizational change: Strong ties and affective cooptation. Management Science, 59(4): 819–836.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beer, M., & Nohria, N. 2000. Cracking the code of change. Harvard Business Review, 78(3): 133–141.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carmeli, A., & Halevi, M. Y. 2009. How top management team behavioral integration and behavioral complexity enable organizational ambidexterity: The moderating role of contextual ambidexterity. Leadership Quarterly, 20(2): 207–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cermak, D. S. P., File, K. M., & Prince, R. 1994. Customer participation in service specification and delivery. Journal of Applied Business Research, 2: 90–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Child, J., & Tse, D. K. 2001. China’s transition and its implications for international business. Journal of International Business Studies, 32(1): 5–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cui, A. S., Calantone, R. J., & Griffith, D. A. 2011. Strategic change and termination of interfirm partnerships. Strategic Management Journal, 32(4): 404–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahl, M. S. 2011. Organizational change and employee stress. Management Science, 57(2): 240–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Damanpour, F. 1991. Organizational innovation: A meta-analysis of effects of determinants and moderators. Academy of Management Journal, 34(3): 555–590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Damanpour, F., & Evan, W. M. 1984. Organizational innovation and performance: The problem of organizational lag. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29(3): 392–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Day, G. 1994. The capabilities of market-driven organizations. Journal of Marketing, 58(4): 37–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dobrev, S. D., Kim, T. Y., & Carroll, G. R. 2003. Shifting gears, shifting niches: Organizational inertia and change in the evolution of the US automobile industry, 1885–1981. Organization Science, 14: 264–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fang, E. 2008. Customer participation and the trade-off between new product innovativeness and speed to market. Journal of Marketing, 72(4): 90–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fang, E., Palmatier, R. W., & Evans, K. R. 2008. Influence of customer participation on creating and sharing of new product value. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36(3): 322–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fiss, P. C., & Zajac, E. J. 2006. The symbolic management of strategic change: Sensegiving via framing and decoupling. Academy of Management Journal, 49(6): 1173–1193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, C. G. 2005. Unbundling the structure of inertia: Resource versus routine rigidity. Academy of Management Journal, 48(5): 741–763.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, K. R., & Richards, M. D. 1979. Relative performance deterioration, management and strategic change in rail-based holding companies. Academy of Management Annual Meeting Proceedings, 1:108-112.

  • Greenwood, R., & Hinings, C. R. 2006. Radical organizational change. In S. R. Clegg, C. Hardy, T. B. Lawrence, & W. R. Nord. (Eds.). Handbook of organization studies. London: Sage.

  • Greve, H. R. 1998. Performance, aspirations, and risky organizational change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43(1): 58–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Han, J. K., Kim, N., & Srivastava, R. K. 1998. Market orientation and organizational performance: Is innovation a missing link?. Journal of Marketing, 62(4): 30–45.

  • Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. H. 1984. Structural inertia and organizational change. American Sociological Review, 49(2): 149–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haveman, H. A. 1992. Between a rock and a hard place: Organizational change and performance under conditions of fundamental environmental transformation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37: 48–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoskisson, R. E., Eden, L., Lau, C. M., & Wright, M. 2000. Strategy in emerging economies. Academy of Management Journal, 43(3): 249–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Im, S., & Workman, J. P. 2004. Market orientation, creativity, and new product performance in high-technology firms. Journal of Marketing, 68(2): 114–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jansen, J. J. P., van den Bosch, F. A. J., & Volberda, H. W. 2005. Managing potential and realized absorptive capacity: How do organizational antecedents matter?. Academy of Management Journal, 48(6): 999–1015.

  • Jansen, J. J. P., van den Bosch, F. A. J., & Volberda, H. W. 2006. Exploratory innovation, exploitative innovation, and performance: Effects of organizational antecedents and environmental moderators. Management Science, 52(11): 1661–1674.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaworski, B. J., & Kohli, A. K. 1993. Market orientation: Antecedents and consequences. Journal of Marketing, 57(3): 53–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Judge, W., & Elenkov, D. 2005. Organizational capacity for change and environmental performance: Empirical assessment of Bulgarian firms. Journal of Business Research, 58: 893–901.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Judge, W., Naoumova, I., & Douglas, T. 2009. Organizational capacity for change and firm performance in a transition economy. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 20(8): 1737–1752.

  • Keister, L. A. 2002. Adapting to radical change: Strategy and environment in piece-rate adoption during China’s transition. Organization Science, 13(5): 459–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelley, S. W., Donnelly, J. R., James, H., & Skinner, S. J. 1990. Customer participation in service production and delivery. Journal of Retailing, 3: 315–334.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, D., & Amburgey, T. L. 1991. Organizational inertia and momentum: A dynamic model of technical change. Academy of Management Journal, 34(3): 591–612.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klarner, P., & Raisch, S. 2013. Move to the beat—Rhythm of change and firm performance. Academy of Management Journal, 56: 160–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleinschmidt, E. J., & Cooper, R. G. 1991. The impact of product innovativeness on performance. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 8(4): 240–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kraatz, M. S., & Zajac, E. J. 2001. How organizational resources affect strategic change and performance in turbulent environments: Theory and evidence. Organization Science, 12(5): 632–657.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leana, C. R., & Barry, B. 2000. Stability and change as simultaneous experiences in organizational life. Academy of Management Review, 25(4): 753–759.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levinthal, D. A., & March, J. G. 1993. The myopia of learning. Strategic Management Journal, 14: 95–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naranjo-Gil, D., Hartmann, F., & Maas, V. S. 2008. Top management team heterogeneity, strategic change, and operational performance. British Journal of Management, 19(3): 222–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oreg, S. 2003. Resistance to change: Developing an individual differences measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(4): 680–693.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peng, M. W., & Heath, P. S. 1996. The growth of the firm in planned economies in transition: Institutions, organizations, and strategic choice. Academy of Management Review, 21(2): 492–528.

    Google Scholar 

  • Podsakoff, P. M., Scott, B. M., Lee, J., & 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quigley, T. J., & Hambrick, D. C. 2012. When the former CEO stays on as board chair: Effects on successor discretion, strategic change, and performance. Strategic Management Journal, 33(7): 834–859.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raisch, S., & Birkinshaw, J. 2008. Organizational ambidexterity: Antecedents, outcomes, and moderators. Journal of Management, 34(3): 375–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simsek, Z. 2009. Organizational ambidexterity: Towards a multilevel understanding. Journal of Management Studies, 46(4): 597–624.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Staber, U., & Sydow, J. 2002. Organizational adaptive capacity: A structuration perspective. Journal of Management Inquiry, 11(4): 408–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. 1997. Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7): 509–533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsoukas, H. 1996. The firm as a distributed knowledge system: A constructionist approach. Strategic Management Journal, 17(1): 11–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. 2004. Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing. Journal of Marketing, 68(January): 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venkatraman, N., Lee, C. H., & Iyer, B. 2007. Strategic ambidexterity and sales growth: A longitudinal test in the software sector. Working paper, available at: http://www.softwareecosystems.com/SMJManuscript_revised.pdf.

  • Wang, F., Huang, M., & Shou, Z. 2015. Business expansion and firm efficiency in the commercial banking industry: Evidence from the US and China. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 32(2): 551–569.

  • Wischnevsky, J. D. 2004. Change as the winds change: The impact of organizational transformation on firm survival in a shifting environment. Organizational Analysis, 12(4): 361–377.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ye, J., Datelina, M., & Jagdip, S. 2007. Strategic change implementation and performance loss in the front lines. Journal of Marketing, 71: 156–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zajac, E. J., Kraatz, M. S., & Bresser, R. K. F. 2000. Modeling the dynamics of strategic fit: A normative approach to strategic change. Strategic Management Journal, 21(4): 429–453.Zajac, E. J., & Shortell, S. M. 1989. Changing generic strategies: Likelihood, direction, and performance implications. Strategic Management Journal, 10(5): 413–430.

  • Zhan, W., & Chen, R. 2008. Dynamic capability and IJV performance: The effect of exploitation and exploration capabilities. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 30(2): 601–632.

  • Zhang, Y., & Rajagopalan, N. 2010. Once an outsider, always an outsider? CEO origin, technical OC, and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 31(3): 334–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou, K. Z., Tse, D., & Li, J. J. 2006. Organizational changes in emerging economies: Drivers and consequences. Journal of International Business Studies, 37(2): 248–263.

  • Zhou, K. Z., & Wu, F. 2010. Technological capability, strategic flexibility, and product innovation. Strategic Management Journal, 31(5): 547–561.

  • Zhou, K. Z., Yim, C. K., & Tse, D. K. 2005. The effects of strategic orientations on technology- and market-based breakthrough innovations. Journal of Marketing, 69(2): 42–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the financial support from National Natural Science Foundation Grant of China (71402049, 71573079, and 71602056) and Humanity and Social Science Fund of the Ministry of Education of China (14YJC630118 and 16YJC630006).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Business, Hunan Normal University, Changsha, 410000, China

    Man Chen

  2. School of Business Administration, Hunan University, Changsha, 410082, China

    Zhi Yang & Feng Wang

  3. College of Business, City University of Hong Kong, Kowloon Tong, Hong Kong

    Wenyu Dou

Authors
  1. Man Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Zhi Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Wenyu Dou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Feng Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Feng Wang.

Appendix

Appendix

Table 5 Measurement items and reliability and validity assessments
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chen, M., Yang, Z., Dou, W. et al. Flying or dying? Organizational change, customer participation, and innovation ambidexterity in emerging economies. Asia Pac J Manag 35, 97–119 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-017-9520-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-017-9520-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation