What will happen to Brazilian automotive subsidiaries after their parent companies make the transition to electric mobility

In the medium and long term, the automotive industry worldwide is expected to undergo radical discontinuous changes which will shake up a previously more or less stable industry. All serious automotive industry forecasts now anticipate that electric mobility will become established – in the industrialised countries at least – with fundamentally new vehicle concepts. Due to the long transition phase especially in the emerging markets, management of the 'ambidexterity' of optimising the existing technology and developing radically new ones is required. This article specifically examines the Brazilian automotive industry in the transition to electric mobility, i.e., the research question of what will happen to the Brazilian subsidiaries of international automotive companies after their parent companies make the transition to electric mobility. To answer this question, 30 top managers of automotive manufacturers, suppliers and industry associations as well as consultants and academics were interviewed in Brazil between January and March 2010.

[1]  M. Tushman,et al.  Ambidextrous Organizations: Managing Evolutionary and Revolutionary Change , 1996 .

[2]  D. Leonard-Barton.  CORE CAPABILITIES AND CORE RIGIDITIES: A PARADOX IN MANAGING NEW PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT , 1992 .

[3]  C. Gersick.  REVOLUTIONARY CHANGE THEORIES: A MULTILEVEL EXPLORATION OF THE PUNCTUATED EQUILIBRIUM PARADIGM , 1991 .

[4]  K. Atuahene–Gima,et al.  Resolving the Capability–Rigidity Paradox in New Product Innovation , 2005 .

[5]  C. Bartlett,et al.  Linking organizational context and managerial action: The dimensions of quality of management , 2007 .

[6]  A. Glass,et al.  Intellectual property rights and quality improvement , 2007 .

[7]  M. Lubatkin,et al.  Ambidexterity and Performance in Small-to Medium-Sized Firms: The Pivotal Role of Top Management Team Behavioral Integration , 2006 .

[8]  A. Lewin,et al.  Co-evolutionary Dynamics Within and Between Firms: From Evolution to Co-evolution , 2003 .

[9]  Paul R. Milgrom,et al.  The Economics of Modern Manufacturing: Technology, Strategy, and Organization , 1990 .

[10]  A. Heene,et al.  Managing articulated knowledge in competence-based competition , 1996 .

[11]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  The myopia of learning , 1993 .

[12]  Curtis W. Cook,et al.  The management of change , 1974 .

[13]  E. Lai,et al.  International intellectual property rights protection and the rate of product innovation , 1998 .

[14]  J. Seabra,et al.  Green house gases emissions in the production and use of ethanol from sugarcane in Brazil: the 2005/2006 averages and a prediction for 2020. , 2008 .

[15]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  Temporarily Divide to Conquer: Centralized, Decentralized, and Reintegrated Organizational Approaches to Exploration and Adaptation , 2003 .

[16]  Paul R. Milgrom,et al.  Economics, Organization and Management , 1992 .

[17]  H. Barkema,et al.  Learning Through Acquisitions , 2001 .

[18]  J. March.  Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning , 1991, STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI.

[19]  Zeki Simsek,et al.  A Typology for Aligning Organizational Ambidexterity's Conceptualizations, Antecedents, and Outcomes , 2009 .

[20]  Marcos Amatucci,et al.  The Brazilian biofuel alternative , 2010 .

[21]  Curba Morris Lampert,et al.  Entrepreneurship in the large corporation: a longitudinal study of how established firms create breakthrough inventions , 2001 .

[22]  Zeki Simsek.  Organizational Ambidexterity: Towards a Multilevel Understanding , 2009 .

[23]  Julian Birkinshaw,et al.  Organizational Ambidexterity: Balancing Exploitation and Exploration for Sustained Performance , 2009, Organ. Sci..

[24]  E. Helpman.  Innovation, Imitation, and Intellectual Property Rights , 1992 .

[25]  C. Gibson,et al.  THE ANTECEDENTS , CONSEQUENCES , AND MEDIATING ROLE OF ORGANIZATIONAL AMBIDEXTERITY , 2004 .

[26]  Amy Jocelyn Glass,et al.  Intellectual property rights and foreign direct investment , 2002 .

[27]  Kenichi Ohmae,et al.  Triad power : the coming shape of global competition , 1985 .

[28]  Zi-Lin He,et al.  Exploration vs. Exploitation: An Empirical Test of the Ambidexterity Hypothesis , 2004, Organ. Sci..

[29]  Mary J. Benner,et al.  Exploitation, Exploration, and Process Management: The Productivity Dilemma Revisited , 2003 .

[30]  J. Birkinshaw,et al.  Organizational Ambidexterity: Antecedents, Outcomes, and Moderators , 2008 .

[31]  Ken G. Smith,et al.  The interplay between exploration and exploitation. , 2006 .

[32]  Constance E. Helfat,et al.  Organizational Linkages for Surviving Technological Change: Complementary Assets, Middle Management, and Ambidexterity , 2008, Organ. Sci..

[33]  Constantine Andriopoulos,et al.  Exploitation-Exploration Tensions and Organizational Ambidexterity: Managing Paradoxes of Innovation , 2009, Organ. Sci..

[34]  Lee G. Branstetter,et al.  Do Stronger Intellectual Property Rights Increase International Technology Transfer? Empirical Evidence from U.S. Firm-Level Panel Data , 2004 .

[35]  Robert A. Burgelman.  Strategy as Vector and the Inertia of Coevolutionary Lock-in , 2002 .

[36]  Peter J. Lane,et al.  Strategizing Throughout the Organization: Managing Role Conflict in Strategic Renewal , 2000 .

[37]  Marco Iansiti,et al.  Special Issue: Organizational Design: Organization Design and Effectiveness over the Innovation Life Cycle , 2006, Organ. Sci..

[38]  Wendy K. Smith,et al.  Managing Strategic Contradictions: A Top Management Model for Managing Innovation Streams , 2005 .

[39]  M. Tushman,et al.  The ambidextrous organization. , 2004, Harvard business review.

[40]  Erik Ferguson.  Travel Demand Management , 1998 .

[41]  P. Lawrence,et al.  Organization and Environment: Managing Differentiation and Integration , 1967 .