Fostering Team Innovation: Why Is It Important to Combine Opposing Action Strategies?

We develop a framework that provides a general theoretical rationale for the claim made by several authors that combining opposing action strategies fosters team innovation. We distinguish between open and closed strategies and posit that these are opposing but complementary in that each fosters one of two processes necessary for team innovation: open action strategies (e.g., delegative leadership) promote knowledge generation, and closed action strategies (e.g., directive leadership) enhance knowledge integration. We argue that each pole of a pair of opposing action strategies both energizes and detracts from elements of innovation. Thus, it could be expected that combining opposing action strategies leads to an impasse, as the negative effects of each strategy might offset the positive effects of the opposite strategy. There is currently no viable explanation in the literature for why this mutual neutralization may not occur. We aim to fill this gap by explicating why and how opposing action strategies, when implemented simultaneously, do not countervail each other's positive effects, but rather yield positive synergies that fuel team innovation.

[1]  Henrik Bresman,et al.  External Learning Activities and Team Performance: A Multimethod Field Study , 2010, Organ. Sci..

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

[3]  L. Weingart,et al.  Representational gaps, information processing, and conflict in functionally diverse teams , 2007 .

[4]  Allen C. Amason,et al.  Don't Take it Personally: Exploring Cognitive Conflict as a Mediator of Affective Conflict , 2007 .

[5]  Felix C. Brodbeck,et al.  Group Decision Making Under Conditions of Distributed Knowledge: The Information Asymmetries Model. , 2007 .

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

[7]  S. Clegg The SAGE Handbook of Organization Studies , 2006 .

[8]  Deborah Dougherty,et al.  Organizing for Innovation in the 21st Century , 2006 .

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

[10]  Teresa M. Amabile,et al.  Affect and Creativity at Work , 2005 .

[11]  G. V. D. Vegt,et al.  Learning and performance in multidisciplinary teams: The importance of collective team identification , 2005 .

[12]  Ken G. Smith,et al.  Existing Knowledge, Knowledge Creation Capability, and the Rate of New Product Introduction in High-Technology Firms , 2005 .

[13]  Sandra E. Spataro,et al.  Using Self-Categorization Theory to Understand Relational Demography–Based Variations in People's Responsiveness to Organizational Culture , 2005 .

[14]  David Obstfeld Social Networks, the Tertius Iungens Orientation, and Involvement in Innovation , 2005 .

[15]  Dorothy A. Leonard,et al.  When Sparks Fly: Harnessing the Power of Group Creativity , 2005 .

[16]  Aimée A. Kane,et al.  Knowledge transfer between groups via personnel rotation: Effects of social identity and knowledge quality , 2005 .

[17]  G. Labianca,et al.  Group Social Capital and Group Effectiveness: The Role of Informal Socializing Ties , 2004 .

[18]  C. D. De Dreu,et al.  Work group diversity and group performance: an integrative model and research agenda. , 2004, The Journal of applied psychology.

[19]  Asako Miura,et al.  Synergy between Diversity and Similarity in Group-Idea Generation , 2004 .

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

[21]  Claus W. Langfred Too Much of a Good Thing? Negative Effects of High Trust and Individual Autonomy in Self-Managing Teams , 2004 .

[22]  J. Birkinshaw,et al.  THE ANTECEDENTS, CONSEQUENCES AND MEDIATING ROLE OF ORGANIZATIONAL AMBIDEXTERITY , 2004 .

[23]  S. Jackson,et al.  Recent Research on Team and Organizational Diversity: SWOT Analysis and Implications , 2003 .

[24]  D. Beal,et al.  Cohesion and performance in groups: a meta-analytic clarification of construct relations. , 2003, The Journal of applied psychology.

[25]  Deanne N. Den Hartog,et al.  Diversity and team outcomes: the moderating effects of outcome interdependence and group longevity and the mediating effect of reflexivity , 2003 .

[26]  C. D. De Dreu,et al.  Task versus relationship conflict, team performance, and team member satisfaction: a meta-analysis. , 2003, The Journal of applied psychology.

[27]  Marianne W. Lewis,et al.  Control and Collaboration: Paradoxes of Governance , 2003 .

[28]  K. Atuahene–Gima,et al.  The Effects of Centrifugal and Centripetal Forces on Product Development Speed and Quality: How Does Problem Solving Matter? , 2003 .

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

[30]  R. Katila,et al.  SOMETHING OLD, SOMETHING NEW: A LONGITUDINAL STUDY OF SEARCH BEHAVIOR AND NEW PRODUCT INTRODUCTION , 2002 .

[31]  Joseph T. Banas,et al.  Comparing Alternative Conceptualizations of Functional Diversity in Management Teams: Process and Performance Effects , 2002 .

[32]  Kathleen M. Eisenhardt,et al.  Integrating Knowledge in Groups: How Formal Interventions Enable Flexibility , 2002, Organ. Sci..

[33]  Marianne W. Lewis,et al.  PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT TENSIONS: EXPLORING CONTRASTING STYLES OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT , 2002 .

[34]  S. Clegg,et al.  Management Paradoxes: A Relational View , 2002 .

[35]  S. Taggar Individual Creativity and Group Ability to Utilize Individual Creative Resources: A Multilevel Model , 2002 .

[36]  Willow A. Sheremata Finding and solving problems in software new product development , 2002 .

[37]  Deborah Dougherty,et al.  Reimagining the Differentiation and Integration of Work for Sustained Product Innovation , 2001 .

[38]  R. Wageman How Leaders Foster Self-Managing Team Effectiveness: Design Choices Versus Hands-on Coaching , 2001 .

[39]  Debra L. Shapiro,et al.  Maximizing cross-functional new product teams' innovativeness and constraint adherence: A conflict communications perspective. , 2001 .

[40]  Ezra W. Zuckerman,et al.  Networks, Diversity, and Productivity: The Social Capital of Corporate R&D Teams , 2001 .

[41]  S. Mohammed,et al.  Cognitive Diversity and Consensus in Group Decision Making: The Role of Inputs, Processes, and Outcomes. , 2001, Organizational behavior and human decision processes.

[42]  R. Lord,et al.  Leadership, values, and subordinate self-concepts , 2001 .

[43]  R. Keller,et al.  Cross-Functional Project Groups in Research and New Product Development: Diversity, Communications, Job Stress, and Outcomes , 2001 .

[44]  E. Mannix,et al.  The Dynamic Nature of Conflict: A Longitudinal Study of Intragroup Conflict and Group Performance. , 2001 .

[45]  Laura B. Cardinal Technological Innovation in the Pharmaceutical Industry: The Use of Organizational Control in Managing Research and Development , 2001 .

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

[47]  Kerrie L. Unsworth,et al.  Shopfloor innovation: Facilitating the suggestion and implementation of ideas , 2000 .

[48]  Kenneth S. Law,et al.  CONFLICT MANAGEMENT, EFFICACY, AND PERFORMANCE IN ORGANIZATIONAL TEAMS , 2000 .

[49]  L. Argote,et al.  KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER: A BASIS FOR COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE IN FIRMS , 2000 .

[50]  Willow A. Sheremata Centrifugal and Centripetal Forces in Radical New Product Development Under Time Pressure , 2000 .

[51]  J. Mathieu,et al.  The influence of shared mental models on team process and performance. , 2000, The Journal of applied psychology.

[52]  R. Peterson,et al.  Task Conflict snd Relationship Conflict in Top Management Teams:The Pivotal Role of Intragroup Trust. , 1998 .

[53]  Evelyn Fenton,et al.  Complexities and Dualities in Innovative Forms of Organizing , 2000 .

[54]  Ken A. Smith,et al.  Making Use of Difference: Diversity, Debate, and Decision Comprehensiveness in Top Management Teams , 1999 .

[55]  Michael Frese,et al.  Helping to improve suggestion systems: predictors of making suggestions in companies , 1999 .

[56]  G. Northcraft,et al.  You have printed the following article : Why Differences Make a Difference : A Field Study of Diversity , Conflict , and Performance in Workgroups , 2007 .

[57]  Diether Gebert,et al.  The Open and the Closed Corporation as Conflicting forms of Organization , 1999 .

[58]  K. Eisenhardt,et al.  Exploring the Black Box: An Analysis of Work Group Diversity, Conflict and Performance , 1999 .

[59]  R. Nisbett,et al.  Culture, dialectics, and reasoning about contradiction. , 1999 .

[60]  Sigal G. Barsade,et al.  Being Different Yet Feeling Similar: The Influence Of Demographic Composition And Organizational Culture On Work Processes And Outcomes , 1998 .

[61]  Colin Camerer,et al.  Not So Different After All: A Cross-Discipline View Of Trust , 1998 .

[62]  Subodh P. Kulkarni,et al.  Winning through Innovation: A Practical Guide to Leading Organizational Change and Renewal , 1998 .

[63]  Robert G. Lord,et al.  Implicit theories, self-schemas, and leader-member exchange , 1997 .

[64]  K. Eisenhardt,et al.  The Art of Continuous Change : Linking Complexity Theory and Time-Paced Evolution in Relentlessly Shifting Organizations , 1997 .

[65]  D. Tjosvold Conflict within interdependence: Its value for productivity and individuality. , 1997 .

[66]  M. Glynn Innovative Genius: A Framework for Relating Individual and Organizational Intelligences to Innovation , 1996 .

[67]  A. Kruglanski,et al.  Motivated closing of the mind: "seizing" and "freezing". , 1996, Psychological review.

[68]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  DISPOSITIONAL DIFFERENCES IN COGNITIVE MOTIVATION : THE LIFE AND TIMES OF INDIVIDUALS VARYING IN NEED FOR COGNITION , 1996 .

[69]  R. A. Cooke,et al.  The Impact of Group Interaction Styles on Problem-Solving Effectiveness , 1994 .

[70]  Jeffrey D. Ford,et al.  Logics of Identity, Contradiction, and Attraction in Change , 1994 .

[71]  R. Keller,et al.  Technology-Information Processing Fit and the Performance of R&D Project Groups: A Test of Contingency Theory , 1994 .

[72]  Deborah G. . Ancona,et al.  Bridging the Boundary: External Activity and Performance in Organizational Teams. , 1992 .

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

[74]  E. Schein Organizational Culture and Leadership , 1991 .

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

[76]  K. Cameron,et al.  Paradox and transformation : toward a theory of change in organization and management , 1990 .

[77]  K. Cameron,et al.  Organizational paradox and transformation. , 1988 .

[78]  Mark S. Granovetter Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness , 1985, American Journal of Sociology.

[79]  R. Katz The Effects of Group Longevity on Project Communication and Performance. , 1982 .

[80]  Frank M. Andrews,et al.  Scientists in Organizations , 1968 .

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

[82]  A. Pettigrew,et al.  The Innovating organization , 2000 .

[83]  Tom R. Burns,et al.  The Management of Innovation. , 1963 .