Business Model Renewal and Ambidexterity: Structural Alteration and Strategy Formation Process During Transition to a Cloud Business Model

textabstractThis paper presents the findings of a longitudinal study of a large corporation's transition to a new business model in the face of a major transformation in the ICT industry brought about by Cloud computing. We build theory on the process of business model innovation through a qualitative study that investigates how an established firm organizes for an emerging business model. Contrary to previous findings that presented spatial separation as the optimal structural approach for dealing with two competing business models, our findings indicate a need for recursive iterations between different modes of separated and integrated structures in line with the emergent nature of strategic intent toward the new business models. Our analyses reveal strategy formation to be a collective experimental learning process revolving around a number of alternative strategic intentions ranging from incremental evolution and transformation to complete replacement of the existing business model. Given the fundamental differences in the nature and requirements of those alternative intents, iterations between different structural modes and differing combinations proved to be crucial in enabling the organization to make transition to the new business model.

[1]  Stefan H. Thomke,et al.  Managing Experimentation in the Design of New Products , 1998 .

[2]  J. L. Bower,et al.  Strategy making as iterated processes of resource allocation , 2007 .

[3]  Frances J. Milliken Three Types of Perceived Uncertainty About the Environment: State, Effect, and Response Uncertainty , 1987 .

[4]  Kathleen M. Eisenhardt,et al.  Making Fast Strategic Decisions In High-Velocity Environments , 1989 .

[5]  Ranjay Gulati,et al.  Renewal Through Reorganization: The Value of Inconsistencies between Formal and Informal Organization , 2009, Organ. Sci..

[6]  C. Markides Disruptive Innovation: In Need of Better Theory* , 2006 .

[7]  Henry Mintzberg,et al.  Of strategies, deliberate and emergent , 1985, Strategic Management Journal.

[8]  Koenraad Debackere,et al.  Simultaneous experimentation as a learning strategy: Business model development under uncertainty—Relevance in times of COVID ‐19 and beyond , 2013, Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal.

[9]  Anand Swaminathan,et al.  Entry timing, exploration, and firm survival in the early U.S. bicycle industry , 2006 .

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

[11]  S. Kotha Competing on the Internet:: The case of Amazon.com , 1998 .

[12]  Thomas W. Lee,et al.  Using Qualitative Methods in Organizational Research , 1998 .

[13]  Mary Tripsas,et al.  Surviving Radical Technological Change through Dynamic Capability: Evidence from the Typesetter Industry , 1997 .

[14]  R. Stacey The science of complexity: An alternative perspective for strategic change processes , 1995 .

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

[16]  Wendy K. Smith,et al.  Complex Business Models: Managing Strategic Paradoxes Simultaneously , 2010 .

[17]  Elizabeth Garnsey,et al.  Speciation through entrepreneurial spin-off: The Acorn-ARM story , 2008 .

[18]  M. Sosna,et al.  Business Model Innovation through Trial-and-Error Learning , 2010 .

[19]  A. Pettigrew Longitudinal Field Research on Change: Theory and Practice , 1990 .

[20]  Sumit K. Majumdar,et al.  Network effects and the adoption of new technology: evidence from the U.S. telecommunications industry , 1998 .

[21]  Raphael Amit,et al.  Business Model Design: An Activity System Perspective , 2010 .

[22]  Alva Taylor,et al.  The Next Generation: Technology Adoption and Integration through Internal Competition in New Product Development , 2008, Organ. Sci..

[23]  Jörg Sydow,et al.  Organizational Path Dependence: A Process View , 2011 .

[24]  A. Strauss,et al.  The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research aldine de gruyter , 1968 .

[25]  Bob Frisch When teams can't decide. Are stalemates on your leadership team making you a dictator by default? Stop blaming your people--start fixing the process. , 2008, Harvard business review.

[26]  Andrew Tylecote,et al.  Corporate governance and technological dynamism of Chinese firms in mobile telecommunications: A quantitative study , 2008 .

[27]  Sumit K. Majumdar,et al.  New technology adoption in US telecommunications: The role of competitive pressures and firm-level inducements , 1993 .

[28]  Mark W. Johnson,et al.  Seizing the White Space: Business Model Innovation for Growth and Renewal , 2010 .

[29]  G. Pisano,et al.  Disrupted Routines: Team Learning and New Technology Implementation in Hospitals , 2001 .

[30]  H. Chesbrough Business Model Innovation: Opportunities and Barriers , 2010 .

[31]  Lee Fleming,et al.  Finding the organizational sources of technological breakthroughs: the story of Hewlett‐Packard's thermal ink‐jet , 2002 .

[32]  D. Gann,et al.  The Effects of Culture and Structure on Strategic Flexibility During Business Model Innovation , 2012 .

[33]  D. Teece Business Models, Business Strategy and Innovation , 2010 .

[34]  C. Markides Business Model Innovation: What Can the Ambidexterity Literature Teach US? , 2013 .

[35]  George S. Day,et al.  Avoiding the Pitfalls of Emerging Technologies , 2000 .

[36]  C. Gilbert Unbundling the Structure of Inertia: Resource Versus Routine Rigidity , 2005 .

[37]  Thomas Hutzschenreuter,et al.  Strategy-Process Research: What Have We Learned and What Is Still to Be Explored , 2006 .

[38]  Marina Apaydin,et al.  A Multi-Dimensional Framework of Organizational Innovation: A Systematic Review of the Literature , 2010 .

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

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

[41]  A. Langley Strategies for Theorizing from Process Data , 1999 .

[42]  J. Baum,et al.  STRATEGIC DECISION SPEED AND FIRM PERFORMANCE , 2003 .

[43]  R. Boulton,et al.  A BUSINESS MODEL FOR THE NEW ECONOMY , 2000 .

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

[45]  Moshe Farjoun Towards an organic perspective on strategy , 2002 .

[46]  Todd R. Zenger,et al.  Sailing into the wind: Exploring the relationships among ambidexterity, vacillation, and organizational performance , 2012 .

[47]  Ilan Vertinsky,et al.  The formation of green strategies in Chinese firms: matching corporate environmental responses and individual principles , 2004 .

[48]  Fernando Suarez,et al.  Network Effects Revisited: The Role of Strong Ties in Technology Selection , 2005 .

[49]  Henk W. Volberda,et al.  Structural Differentiation and Ambidexterity: The Mediating Role of Integration Mechanisms , 2008, Organ. Sci..

[50]  D. Teece Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy , 1993 .

[51]  L. Melin,et al.  Dynamics of business models - strategizing, critical capabilities and activities for sustained value creation , 2013 .

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

[53]  C. Prahalad,et al.  To revitalize corporate performance, we need a whole new model of strategy. Strategic intent. , 1989, Harvard business review.

[54]  C. Baden‐Fuller,et al.  Business Models and Technological Innovation , 2013 .

[55]  H. Chesbrough Why Companies Should Have Open Business Models , 2007 .

[56]  C. Markides Game-Changing Strategies: How to Create New Market Space in Established Industries by Breaking the Rules , 2008 .

[57]  Dovev Lavie,et al.  Capability Reconfiguration: An Analysis of Incumbent Responses to Technological Change , 2006 .

[58]  A. Cooper,et al.  How established firms respond to threatening technologies , 1992 .

[59]  Mark P. Sharfman,et al.  Conceptualizing and Measuring the Organizational Environment: A Multidimensional Approach , 1991 .

[60]  Jack A. Nickerson,et al.  Being Efficiently Fickle: A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Choice , 2002, Organ. Sci..

[61]  Gregory G. Dess,et al.  Dimensions of Organizational Task Environments. , 1984 .