Towards theAmbidexterity of Service Processes: Implications for the Managing of IT Usage and Organization Learning

In this study, we develop a conceptual model to illuminate how firms can better compete through service basing on a process view. In accordance with the thought of organizational ambidexterity, we firstly suggest that the efficiency and flexibility in the operation of service process are equally important for organizations desiring to achieve a superior service performance. Additionally, considering that the ambidextrous behavior of organization members is an effective mechanism to attain ambidexterity, we identify two kinds of service behaviors as the crux to promote the ambidextrous state of service processes, concerning IT usage of service personnel and learning behavior of service leaders respectively.

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

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

[3]  Jason Bennett Thatcher,et al.  Moving Beyond Intentions and Toward the Theory of Trying: Effects of Work Environment and Gender on Post-Adoption Information Technology Use , 2005, MIS Q..

[4]  Rainer A. Sommer.  Business process flexibility: a driver for outsourcing , 2003, Ind. Manag. Data Syst..

[5]  Ann E. Marucheck,et al.  Service Management - Academic Issues and Scholarly Reflections from Operations Management Researchers , 2007, Decis. Sci..

[6]  S. Hunt,et al.  The Comparative Advantage Theory of Competition , 1995 .

[7]  Roland T. Rust,et al.  What academic research tells us about service , 2006, CACM.

[8]  Robert W. Zmud,et al.  The Nature and Determinants of IT Acceptance, Routinization, and Infusion , 1993, Diffusion, Transfer and Implementation of Information Technology.

[9]  Mary Jo Bitner,et al.  Moving Forward and Making a Difference: Research Priorities for the Science of Service , 2010 .

[10]  C. Lovelock,et al.  Whither Services Marketing? , 2004 .

[11]  Francis Gouillart,et al.  Build the co-creative enterprise. , 2010, Harvard business review.

[12]  Ritu Agarwal,et al.  Organizational Mechanisms for Enhancing User Innovation in Information Technology , 1999, MIS Q..

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

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

[15]  M. Venkatraman.  It-enabled business transformation: from automation to business scope redefinition , 1994 .

[16]  Michael R. Wade,et al.  The Resource-Based View and Information Systems Research: Review, Extension, and Suggestions for Future Research , 2004, MIS Q..

[17]  Stephen L. Vargo,et al.  Competing through service: Insights from service-dominant logic , 2007 .

[18]  P. Ghemawat,et al.  Organizational tension between static and dynamic efficiency, The , 1993 .

[19]  Richard B. Chase,et al.  Constructing an empirically derived measure for customer contact , 1995 .

[20]  U. Karmarkar.  Will you survive the services revolution? , 2004, Harvard business review.

[21]  Uday M. Apte,et al.  A history of research in service operations: What's the big idea? , 2007 .

[22]  Richard A. D'Aveni,et al.  New Organizational Forms and Strategies for Managing in Hypercompetitive Environments , 1996 .

[23]  Patrick T. Harker,et al.  Customer Efficiency, Channel Usage, and Firm Performance in Retail Banking , 2007, Manuf. Serv. Oper. Manag..

[24]  Scott E. Sampson,et al.  Foundations and Implications of a Proposed Unified Services Theory , 2006 .

[25]  Michael R. Bowers,et al.  Trading Places: Employees as Customers, Customers as Employees , 1990 .

[26]  Pilar Jerez-Gómez,et al.  Organizational learning capability: a proposal of measurement , 2005 .

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

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

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

[30]  R. Katila,et al.  Something Old, Something New: A Longitudinal Study of Search Behavior and New Product Introduction , 2002 .

[31]  P. Adler,et al.  Flexibility Versus Efficiency? a Case Study of Model Changeovers in the Toyota Production System , 1999 .

[32]  Marianne W. Lewis.  Exploring Paradox: Toward a More Comprehensive Guide , 2000 .

[33]  Stephen L. Vargo,et al.  Evolving to a New Dominant Logic for Marketing , 2004 .

[34]  M. Hammer,et al.  How process enterprises really work. , 1999, Harvard business review.