The role of formalization and organizational trust as antecedents of ambidexterity: An investigation on the organic agro-food industry

IF 3.8 4区 管理学 Q2 BUSINESS Brq-Business Research Quarterly Pub Date : 2020-10-18 DOI:10.1177/2340944420966331
Odette Chams-Anturi, M. Moreno-Luzon, P. Romano
{"title":"The role of formalization and organizational trust as antecedents of ambidexterity: An investigation on the organic agro-food industry","authors":"Odette Chams-Anturi, M. Moreno-Luzon, P. Romano","doi":"10.1177/2340944420966331","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article investigates the influence of specific key organizational factors (i.e., enabling formalization, coercive formalization, and trust) as antecedents of ambidexterity. Moreover, we propose a new way of operationalizing ambidexterity, under a holistic vision, including the synergies between exploration and exploitation. The study has been developed in the Spanish organic agro-food industry; a total of 239 usable responses were received from two respondents from each company—the general manager and the quality manager. The findings show that enabling formalization and organizational trust are positively related to ambidexterity, but contrary to our predictions, we found no evidence to show that coercive formalization is related to ambidexterity. In turn, we found different results for trust as a moderating factor on the types of formalization and ambidexterity.","PeriodicalId":46891,"journal":{"name":"Brq-Business Research Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/2340944420966331","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Brq-Business Research Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2340944420966331","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

This article investigates the influence of specific key organizational factors (i.e., enabling formalization, coercive formalization, and trust) as antecedents of ambidexterity. Moreover, we propose a new way of operationalizing ambidexterity, under a holistic vision, including the synergies between exploration and exploitation. The study has been developed in the Spanish organic agro-food industry; a total of 239 usable responses were received from two respondents from each company—the general manager and the quality manager. The findings show that enabling formalization and organizational trust are positively related to ambidexterity, but contrary to our predictions, we found no evidence to show that coercive formalization is related to ambidexterity. In turn, we found different results for trust as a moderating factor on the types of formalization and ambidexterity.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
形式化和组织信任作为双元性前因的作用——对有机农产品食品行业的调查
本文研究了特定的关键组织因素(即,使能正规化,强制正规化和信任)作为双元性的前因的影响。此外,我们提出了一种在整体视野下实现二元性的新方法,包括勘探和开发之间的协同作用。这项研究在西班牙有机农业食品行业得到了发展;每个公司的总经理和质量经理两名受访者共收到239份可用的回复。研究结果表明,授权形式化和组织信任与双灵巧性呈正相关,但与我们的预测相反,我们没有发现证据表明强制性形式化与双灵巧性有关。反过来,我们发现信任作为正规化和双元性类型的调节因素的不同结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
6.90%
发文量
14
期刊最新文献
Strategic supplier performance in a competitive landscape: Enhancing organizational performance through lean supply chain management Leading a post-pandemic workforce: Understanding employees’ changing work ethic How to improve quality investing Uncertainty’s impact on adaptive performance in the post-COVID era: The moderating role of perceived leader’s effectiveness Strategy-making: The use and misuse of artifacts to achieve common understanding
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1