Organizations that can successfully develop both radical and incremental innovations positively impact sustained competitive advantage, dramatically improving their chances of survival and success in both dynamic and stable environments (Han et al. 2001; Tushman and O'Reilly 1996). Experimentation and radical innovation are mandatory knowledge assets for competitive play in emerging markets, but efficiency and incremental innovation are essential for mature markets (He and Wong 2004; Tushman and O'Reilly 1996). The attainment of dual focus between radical and incremental innovation is challenging and calls for organizational architectures of sometimes conflicting processes, structure, and culture (cf, Tushman and O'Reilly 1996; Wind and Mahajan 1997). While prior research has investigated the structural and cultural determinants (Duncan 1976; Gibson and Birkenshaw 2004), there is a significant lack of research addressing the third major element of business processes. Without winning business processes in place that influence both exploration and exploitation, a successful portfolio mix of radical and incremental product innovations that maximize customer value and benefits will not be fully realized, and firm performance will suffer. Through core business processes, marketing's role and influence is significant in increasing customer value creation in the resulting product innovations. By mapping the "inside-out" and "outside-in" processes of a market-driven organization (Day 1994) into the Srivastava et al. (1999) core business process framework, this dissertation develops and tests a model of business process influence on dual focus in innovation strategies in the context of the high technology manufacturing environment. Each of these processes is critical in generating maximum customer value and is an explicit input into strategic choices and decisions (Srivastava et al. 1999). Specifically, it is argued and proposed that the Product Development Management (PDM) process, comprised of the processes of market experimentation, technology monitoring, and technology competence, predominantly influences exploration while the Supply Chain Management (SCM) process, comprised of the processes of channel bonding and quality process management, predominantly influences exploitation. The Customer Relationship Management (CRM) process, encompassing the processes of lead user collaboration, competitor benchmarking, and current customer knowledge process, acts as a moderator to add dual focus to these extremes by interacting with PDM processes to enhance exploitation and with SCM processes to enhance exploration. Furthermore, it is proposed that firms successfully achieving a dual focus have greater firm performance than firms entrenched in either extreme. Hypotheses were tested with data collected from a nationwide sample of high technology manufacturers. The results largely supported the main effect hypotheses of the PDM processes and SCM processes on exploration and exploitation. Additionally, the hypothesis of a positive interaction between exploration and exploitation on firm performance was also supported, however no visible support was garnered for the moderating impacts of CRM processes on PDM and SCM processes as hypothesized. Post hoc analyses were performed, bringing additional insight into dual focus based on the successful implementation of opposing businesses processes. Specifically, dual focus firms were shown to have multiple processes in place that impact both types of innovation strategies and that these firms implement these processes to a greater extent than those firms operating in the more extreme positions. Academic and managerial implications are discussed, as well as study limitations and exciting future research directions.

Na busca pela viabilidade do negócio, as empresas devem considerar e lidar com os cenários atuais e futuros. Para tanto, algumas procuram adquirir habilidades em extrair resultados de seus recursos atuais pelas inovações incrementais enquanto exploram simultaneamente novas competências para desenvolver inovações mais radicais que proporcionem perspectivas futuras de negócios, e por esta característica dual tais companhias são classificadas de organizações ambidestras. Contudo, o desafio de administrar simultaneamente as duas atividades geram paradoxos - as tensões ambidestras - que influenciam tanto as escolhas estratégicas de implementação quanto as mudanças na arquitetura organizacional para inovação. Logo, o propósito deste trabalho é investigar a influência destas tensões na arquitetura organizacional e identificar quais são os fatores que colaboram com as mudanças. Os resultados apontam que os fatores externos competição e especificidades do mercado são determinantes na adoção de estratégias ambidestras; já entre os fatores internos, o modelo de negócios, as crenças e a capacidade inovadora vigente são direcionadores na escolha da arquitetura organizacional para inovação. Além disso, as características das tensões ambidestras, a intensidade dessa dualidade e sua ortogonalidade estratégica em relação à atual capacidade inovadora também interferem nas mudanças da arquitetura organizacional. Esta tese propõe ainda um modelo vetorial para explicar as influências e os fenômenos analisados. / In the pursuit of business viability, companies must consider and deal with current and future scenarios. For such, some companies seek acquiring skills in extracting results from their present resources for incremental innovations whilst simultaneously exploring new competences to develop more radical innovations that provide them future business prospects, and due to this dual characteristic such companies are classified as ambidextrous organizations. However, the challenge of simultaneously administering the two activities creates paradoxes - the ambidextrous tensions - that influence both the strategic choices of implementation and the changes in the organizational architecture for innovation. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to investigate the influence of these tensions in the organizational architecture and to identify which factors collaborate with those changes. The results indicate the external factors of competition and specificities of the market are decisive in the adoption of ambidextrous strategies; whereas amongst internal factors, the business model, the beliefs and the current innovative ability are drivers in the choice of the organizational architecture for innovation. Furthermore, the characteristics of the ambidextrous tensions, the intensity of this duality and its strategic orthogonality regarding the current innovative ability also interfere in the changes of the organizational architecture. This thesis also proposes a vectorial model to explain such analyzed phenomena and influences.

Na busca pela viabilidade do negócio, as empresas devem considerar e lidar com os cenários atuais e futuros. Para tanto, algumas procuram adquirir habilidades em extrair resultados de seus recursos atuais pelas inovações incrementais enquanto exploram simultaneamente novas competências para desenvolver inovações mais radicais que proporcionem perspectivas futuras de negócios, e por esta característica dual tais companhias são classificadas de organizações ambidestras. Contudo, o desafio de administrar simultaneamente as duas atividades geram paradoxos - as tensões ambidestras - que influenciam tanto as escolhas estratégicas de implementação quanto as mudanças na arquitetura organizacional para inovação. Logo, o propósito deste trabalho é investigar a influência destas tensões na arquitetura organizacional e identificar quais são os fatores que colaboram com as mudanças. Os resultados apontam que os fatores externos competição e especificidades do mercado são determinantes na adoção de estratégias ambidestras; já entre os fatores internos, o modelo de negócios, as crenças e a capacidade inovadora vigente são direcionadores na escolha da arquitetura organizacional para inovação. Além disso, as características das tensões ambidestras, a intensidade dessa dualidade e sua ortogonalidade estratégica em relação à atual capacidade inovadora também interferem nas mudanças da arquitetura organizacional. Esta tese propõe ainda um modelo vetorial para explicar as influências e os fenômenos analisados. / In the pursuit of business viability, companies must consider and deal with current and future scenarios. For such, some companies seek acquiring skills in extracting results from their present resources for incremental innovations whilst simultaneously exploring new competences to develop more radical innovations that provide them future business prospects, and due to this dual characteristic such companies are classified as ambidextrous organizations. However, the challenge of simultaneously administering the two activities creates paradoxes - the ambidextrous tensions - that influence both the strategic choices of implementation and the changes in the organizational architecture for innovation. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to investigate the influence of these tensions in the organizational architecture and to identify which factors collaborate with those changes. The results indicate the external factors of competition and specificities of the market are decisive in the adoption of ambidextrous strategies; whereas amongst internal factors, the business model, the beliefs and the current innovative ability are drivers in the choice of the organizational architecture for innovation. Furthermore, the characteristics of the ambidextrous tensions, the intensity of this duality and its strategic orthogonality regarding the current innovative ability also interfere in the changes of the organizational architecture. This thesis also proposes a vectorial model to explain such analyzed phenomena and influences.

<p><p>The ability to deal with change gains in importance due to the fast moving environment. The current crisis reveals that it is not sufficient for companies to react. They need to be prepared and implement change continuously. The significance of Change Management is justified as the competence to deal with change can be considered decisive for gaining competitive advantage. Organizations need to change in order to sustain.</p><p>Several theories and concepts exist to increase an organization's efficiency in terms of handling changes. The theoretical framework is settled on four issues within Change Management: change, drivers for change, implementation and roles in an organization. It is of prior importance to identify the nature of the specific change as well as the driving forces for it.</p><p>By this, information for the implementation process is provided. We present strategies for implementing and also steps or ingredients which have to be unconditionally considered. We try to point out some facilitators for implementation such as organizational learning.</p><p>We finally describe four key roles that are  influencing implementation of change. However, we especially focus on leaders and employees and compare top-down and bottom-up implementation.</p><p>We proceed with the same basis of four parts to analyze the discussions we led with change agents.</p><p>Finally we propose key factors we believe that organizations need to lead a change process successfully.</p></p>

The ability to deal with change gains in importance due to the fast moving environment. The current crisis reveals that it is not sufficient for companies to react. They need to be prepared and implement change continuously. The significance of Change Management is justified as the competence to deal with change can be considered decisive for gaining competitive advantage. Organizations need to change in order to sustain. Several theories and concepts exist to increase an organization's efficiency in terms of handling changes. The theoretical framework is settled on four issues within Change Management: change, drivers for change, implementation and roles in an organization. It is of prior importance to identify the nature of the specific change as well as the driving forces for it. By this, information for the implementation process is provided. We present strategies for implementing and also steps or ingredients which have to be unconditionally considered. We try to point out some facilitators for implementation such as organizational learning. We finally describe four key roles that are  influencing implementation of change. However, we especially focus on leaders and employees and compare top-down and bottom-up implementation. We proceed with the same basis of four parts to analyze the discussions we led with change agents. Finally we propose key factors we believe that organizations need to lead a change process successfully.

Orientador: Prof. Dr. Anderson Orzari Ribeiro / Dissertação (mestrado) - Universidade Federal do ABC, Programa de Pós-Graduação em Engenharia e Gestão da Inovação, 2017. / Inovações tecnológicas no setor da saúde são observadas em novos produtos, serviços e processos utilizados para diagnosticar, monitorar, prevenir e indicar o tratamento mais adequado aos pacientes. Neste setor, a vasta gama de doenças conhecidas representa um enorme desafio para a elaboração de novos diagnósticos e tratamentos, ainda mais quando se considera redução dos custos e o prolongamento da vida ativa dos cidadãos. O presente estudo, cuja amostra é uma empresa de medicina diagnóstica reconhecida por suas práticas de gestão de inovação, pretende analisar o processo de implantação de inovações da empresa e questiona como uma ferramenta de engenharia pode ser complementar a gestão de inovação, apoiando a integração necessária entre as diversas unidades de negócio envolvidas no lançamento de uma inovação. Para responder a essa pergunta, faz-se uso de uma abordagem de engenharia de sistemas, mais especificamente, a aplicação do método de engenharia de sistemas no modelo de ciclo de vida do sistema. Os resultados demonstraram que a ferramenta traz uma visão instrutiva do processo de design e desenvolvimento de um conceito inovador de serviço, produto ou processo, podendo ser complementar à gestão de inovação. Sugere-se que a metodologia aplicada possa ser projetada para outras empresas, e também ser utilizada para desenvolvimento de um software de suporte à gestão de inovação. / Innovations in healthcare are present in new products, services and processes used to diagnose, monitor, prevent and indicate the most appropriate treatment to the patients. The known diseases represent a huge challenge to elaborate new diagnosis procedures and treatments, considering especially lengthening people¿s life and cost reduction. This present study, which uses a medical diagnostic company recognized for innovation as a sample, intends to analyse the process to implement innovations the company. The question it aims to understand is if a system engineering method can be used to complement innovation management, in order to understand the steps it take until innovation launch and also to have a better integration between different businesses units involved in innovation launch processes. To answer this question, a system engineer approach is used as methodology, more specifically, the system engineering life cycle model. Results shows that the methodology provides an instructive view of innovations design and development processes, which may be complementary to innovation management. The results also suggest that the methodology can be used in other companies, and can be applied to design a software to support innovation management.

組織在持續發展的進程中會逐漸的由有機型轉而為機械型組織的狀態，然而隨著外在環境趨向超競爭的型態，使其核心技術將有過時之虞，所以組織必須成立新部門以隨時觀察並利用外在之機會，因此組織內新舊部門並列的現象成為企業運作實務的常態。不過新舊部門之間並非必然只能夠各自獨立運作，其間能夠透過持續倡導「可容納新舊部門」的願景下，讓新舊部門透過組織高層主持的跨部委員會之居中協調達到提升彼此績效之正向螺旋效果，如此之組織形式在文獻上稱為「雙面式組織」。 本研究之進行首先由內而外探討雙面式組織定義與內在核心構成要素：其核心概念分為由高層主導之結構性雙面式思維，其用意在於由高層設立跨部會機制以影響成員行為，而系絡性雙面式思維在於由基層員工主動引導跨部會行動，進而影響高層做出相對應之措施，而以上概念對應外在的組織構成形式則可分為結構性、系絡性與混合結構與系絡性之雙面式組織三種；而其間之知識管理模式主要概念在於「先讓成員從共同擬定價值觀，之後再使成員自發性的針對議題進分享彼此知識並進一步及於知識的整合與創造」。 接續以NTT DoCoMo研發i-mode系統為例，說明雙面式組織在企業實務運作之「從封閉平台之電信加值思維到開放平台之網路創值思維」的策略重思考、「透過具跨部門性質之策略性社群與凝聚各策略性社群共識之領導性策略事業群」的組織轉型與「主持策略性社群內 / 間互動與雙面式組織內部之知識發掘、擴散與累積」之變革管理的議題，並透過對個案評論與不同個案之輔助以期使雙面式組織之具體運作使說明更為全面。 在個案描述與評論之後，本研究針對雙面式組織的運行提出以下的三個推論：第一，組織高層應在可容納新舊部門思維之共同目標前提下，確立新舊部門之間的分工與合作機制，以免新舊部門因為彼此爭利而落得兩敗俱傷的局面；第二，在雙面式組織的有效運作中，各社群領導人富有包容力的領導方式與具備前瞻性的領導眼光是其成功的關鍵；第三，組織結構式雙面性與系絡式雙面性思維之運作過程是一體兩面且環環相扣，而且當雙面式組織的運作模式被長期使用時，組織內部的運作會同時包含以上所提及之兩種思維。 / As time goes by, organizational structure will be transformed from organic to mechanic form. However, organization must start a new division because the condition of hyper-competition would make core technology become obsolete. Therefore it is so common that new and old divisions co-exist in an organization, but they are not necessarily operated independently. Between them can both attain higher positive-spiral performance through the cross-division committee under “compatible of new and old divisions” vision and such the organizational structure is called “Ambidextrous Organization” in literatures. In this research, ambidextrous organization will be discussed from inner sides to outer ones: starting from the definition and core composing thoughts: structural ambidexterity, which means training employees’ behaviors to be ambidextrous through structural changes, and contextual ambidexterity, which means upper managers’ ambidextrous actions are stimulated from middle or lower employees. Following the core composing parts matches not only the external structural forms: structural ambidextrous organization, contextual ambidextrous organization, and organization which mix the thoughts of structural and contextual ambidexterity but also the process from value resonance of co-workers to knowledge sharing and creation. Following the case analyzing method will be used to explain the operation of ambidextrous organization putting into practice: Take NTT DoCoMo for instance, this research will show the strategic rethinking of” from close platform of telecom value-added concept to open platform of internet value-creation concept”, the corporate transformation of” cross-divisional strategic community and leadership-based strategic community which converge a common consensus of all strategic communities” and the change management of” directing the interaction among strategic communities and knowledge discovering, distributing, and accumulating”. Case comment and other supportive cases will be mentioned to fully analyze the concrete operation of ambidextrous organization. After the case description and comment, this research will further propose three propositions: First, high level managers should take visions comparable of new and old divisions or they would be in serious wrangling over the resources. Second, considerate and visionary leading competence is the key to successfully managing the operation of ambidextrous organization. Third, structural and contextual ambidexterity thoughts are interactive and mutual-inclusive, especially when using the system of ambidextrous organization for a long time.