Group-Level Exploration and Exploitation: A Computer Simulation-Based Analysis

Organisational research has studied the tension between exploration and exploitation for years. In essence, this body of research agrees on the necessity of a balance between explora-tive and exploitative processes to prevent an organisation from falling into a learning trap. Thus, to enhance the active management of this balance in organisations, a deeper theoretical understanding of the factors that influence the development of exploration and exploitation has to be gained. One of the recently discussed factors is the interplay between exploration and exploitation on different organisational levels. This paper picks up this discussion. It pro-vides an in-depth, computer simulation-based analysis of the performance of organisational types with varying degrees of within-group and between-group exploration and exploitation in situations of different degrees of task complexity. The findings indicate that a high share of between-group processes as compared to within-group processes positively influences the organisational performance level and that dependent on task complexity the optimal share of exploration and exploitation varies.

[1]  Robert Axelrod,et al.  Advancing the art of simulation in the social sciences , 1997, Complex..

[2]  Pietro Terna,et al.  How to build and use agent-based models in social science , 2000 .

[3]  Bjarne Espedal,et al.  Do Organizational Routines Change as Experience Changes? , 2006 .

[4]  Mauro Birattari,et al.  Swarm Intelligence , 2012, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[5]  G. Nigel Gilbert,et al.  Simulation for the social scientist , 1999 .

[6]  H. Greve.  Exploration and exploitation in product innovation , 2007 .

[7]  J. Ruiz Moreno.  [Organizational learning]. , 2001, Revista de enfermeria.

[8]  M. Feldman.  Organizational Routines as a Source of Continuous Change , 2000 .

[9]  Joshua M. Epstein,et al.  Agent-based computational models and generative social science , 1999, Complex..

[10]  B. Menguc,et al.  Balancing exploration and exploitation: The moderating role of competitive intensity , 2005 .

[11]  Markku V. J. Maula,et al.  Exploration, exploitation, and financial performance: analysis of S&P 500 corporations , 2009 .

[12]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  Learning from Experience in Organizations , 1985 .

[13]  Tom J. M. Mom,et al.  Investigating Managers' Exploration and Exploitation Activities: The Influence of Top-Down, Bottom-Up, and Horizontal Knowledge Inflows , 2006 .

[14]  H. Dawid,et al.  On economic applications of the genetic algorithm: a model of the cobweb type , 1998 .

[15]  Johan P. Olsen,et al.  THE UNCERTAINTY OF THE PAST: ORGANIZATIONAL LEARNING UNDER AMBIGUITY* , 1975 .

[16]  Bjarne Espedal.  In the Pursuit of Understanding How to Balance Lower and Higher Order Learning in Organizations , 2008 .

[17]  John R. Koza,et al.  Hidden Order: How Adaptation Builds Complexity. , 1995, Artificial Life.

[18]  H. Greve,et al.  Superman or the Fantastic Four? Knowledge Combination and Experience in Innovative Teams , 2006 .

[19]  H. Volberda,et al.  Exploring Exploration Orientation and its Determinants: Some Empirical Evidence , 2004 .

[20]  H. Simon,et al.  The New Science of Management Decision, Revised Edition. , 1977 .

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

[22]  Simon Rodan.  Exploration and Exploitation Revisited: Extending March's Model of Mutual Learning , 2005 .

[23]  H. Simon.  Bounded Rationality and Organizational Learning , 1991 .

[24]  M. Crossan,et al.  From Questions to Answers: Reviewing Organizational Learning Research , 2004 .

[25]  Christina Fang,et al.  Balancing Exploration and Exploitation through Structural Design: The Isolation of Subgroups and Organization Learning , 2008 .

[26]  Michael X Cohen,et al.  Organizational Routines Are Stored as Procedural Memory: Evidence from a Laboratory Study , 1994 .

[27]  Jan W. Rivkin,et al.  WHEN EXPLORATION BACKFIRES: UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES OF MULTILEVEL ORGANIZATIONAL SEARCH , 2006 .

[28]  M. Feldman,et al.  Reconceptualizing Organizational Routines as a Source of Flexibility and Change , 2003 .

[29]  G. Hodgson,et al.  Balancing Inertia, Innovation, and Imitation in Complex Environments , 2006 .

[30]  Edmund Chattoe,et al.  Just How (Un)realistic are Evolutionary Algorithms as Representations of Social Processes? , 1998, J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul..

[31]  Henk W. Volberda,et al.  Exploratory Innovation, Exploitative Innovation and Peformance: Effects of Organizational Antecedents and Environmental Moderators , 2006, Manag. Sci..

[32]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning , 2007 .

[33]  Eric Bonabeau,et al.  Agent-based modeling: Methods and techniques for simulating human systems , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[34]  Kathleen M. Carley.  Organizational Learning and Personnel Turnover , 1992 .

[35]  M. Shubik,et al.  A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. , 1964 .

[36]  Lori Rosenkopf,et al.  Balancing Exploration and Exploitation in Alliance Formation , 2006 .

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

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

[39]  Bart van Looy,et al.  Technological Activities and Their Impact on the Financial Performance of the Firm: Exploitation and Exploration within and between Firms , 2009 .

[40]  Kathleen M. Carley,et al.  The Contingent Effects of Transactive Memory: When Is It More Beneficial to Know What Others Know? , 2006, Manag. Sci..

[41]  John H. Holland,et al.  Genetic Algorithms and the Optimal Allocation of Trials , 1973, SIAM J. Comput..

[42]  J. Brown,et al.  Organizational Learning and Communities-of-Practice: Toward a Unified View of Working, Learning, and Innovation , 1991 .

[43]  HolmqvistMikael.  Experiential Learning Processes of Exploitation and Exploration Within and Between Organizations , 2004 .

[44]  Henk W. Volberda,et al.  The Multifaceted Nature of Exploration and Exploitation: Value of Supply, Demand, and Spatial Search for Innovation , 2007, Organ. Sci..

[45]  F. Rothaermel.  Strategic Management Journal Research Note Incumbent's Advantage through Exploiting Complementary Assets via Interfirm Cooperation , 2022 .

[46]  Roger J. Calantone,et al.  Adding Interpersonal Learning and Tacit Knowledge to March's Exploration-Exploitation Model , 2006 .

[47]  A. H. Gilbert,et al.  Adaptive Learning of Process Control and Profit Optimization Using a Classifier System , 1995, Evolutionary Computation.

[48]  James D. Thompson.  Organizations in Action , 1967 .

[49]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  ABSORPTIVE CAPACITY: A NEW PERSPECTIVE ON LEARNING AND INNOVATION , 1990 .

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

[51]  Jan W. Rivkin,et al.  Balancing Search and Stability: Interdependencies Among Elements of Organizational Design , 2003, Manag. Sci..

[52]  Ray Reagans,et al.  Network Structure and Knowledge Transfer: The Effects of Cohesion and Range , 2003 .

[53]  David Lazer,et al.  The Network Structure of Exploration and Exploitation , 2007 .

[54]  S. Mezias,et al.  An Organizational Learning Model of Convergence and Reorientation , 1992 .

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

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

[57]  W. Vanhaverbeke,et al.  Exploration and Exploitation in Innovation: Reframing the Interpretation , 2008 .