:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:When to be and How to be Ambidextrous? The Relationship Between Environmental Pressures, Innovation Strategy and Organizational Capabilities
作者:黃佩文
作者(外文):Pei-wen Huang
校院名稱:義守大學
系所名稱:管理研究所博士班
指導教授:林麗娟
方世杰
學位類別:博士
出版日期:2010
主題關鍵詞:探索利用雙邊靈活性組織組織靈活性結合能力吸收能力Combinative CapabilitiesExplorationExploitationAmbidexterityAbsorptive CapacitiesAmbidextrousOrganizations
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:0
組織的雙邊靈活性(Organizational ambidexterity)近幾年已在組織管理與知識管理領域成為一個新的研究趨勢(Gibson &; Birkinshaw, 2004; He &; Wong, 2004). 組織雙邊靈活性的中心議題是在探討組織如何利用能力來完成組織中看似兩個矛盾與衝突的活動,例如組織中的微調與調適、進化性改變與變革性的改變; 效率與彈性等(Adler, Goldoftas, &; Levine, 1999; Crossan, Lane, &; White, 1999; Gibson &; Birkinshaw, 2004; Lin, Haibin, &; Demirkan, 2007; Tushman &; O''Reilly, 1996). 而利用(exploitation)與探索(exploration)則是在組織的雙邊靈活性的議題中,一直不斷出現的兩個構面。本篇研究嘗試對此議題在理論上與實證上做一深入的探討。更精確地說,此篇論文的研究問題是,組織何時會選擇所謂的雙邊策略(ambidextrous strategy)? 其次,組織中的高階管理團隊成員所認知的環境壓力會如何影響組織的創新策略的選擇? 是堅持利用型的創新策略? 探索性的創新策略? 還是兩者兼顧的雙邊策略(ambidextrous strategy)?
環境的豐富性、變動性以及複雜性為本篇所研究的環境因素。本研究認為,當組織意識到三者的程度都高時,最有可能選擇一個雙邊的創新策略。然而,即使組織認知到其必須採用雙邊的創新策略時,還需要兩種能力來達成此組織的雙邊靈活性:一是結合能力、另一是吸收能力。藉由這兩種能力,組織的雙邊靈活性才有可能達成。
在實證上我們採用既有的量表來對台灣的產業界做問卷調查,調查的產業主要有電子產業、機械與重金屬產業、醫療產業、製造業等。問卷採取便利抽樣的方式收集,共收集到一百份。結果發現環境因素對組織的創新策略的選擇確實有其影響。而當組織知覺到較大的環境壓力時,並採用雙邊的創新策略,會造成較好的績效表現。另外,組織的結合能力與吸收能力也能夠加強組織的雙邊策略對組織績效的影響。
“Organizational ambidexterity” has become an emerging research trend in both the organizational management and knowledge management field (Gibson & Birkinshaw, 2004; He & Wong, 2004). The central theme on organizational ambidexterity is about organizational capability to simultaneously deal with paradoxical or conflicting activities such as organizational alignment and adaptation; evolutionary and revolutionary change; manufacturing efficiency and flexibility; strategic alliance formation; and even strategic renewal (Adler, Goldoftas, & Levine, 1999; Crossan, Lane, & White, 1999; Gibson & Birkinshaw, 2004; Lin, Haibin, & Demirkan, 2007; Tushman & O''Reilly, 1996). Exploitation and exploration are the most recurrent underlying dimensions regarding organizational ambidexterity. This paper tries to gain more insight on organizational ambidexterity both theoretically and empirically. In particular, our research interest is to investigate why organizations need to be ambidextrous in the first place? What is the impact of environmental pressures perceived by organizations’ top management team on their strategic choices in terms of innovation? What are the internal factors that may enhance organizations’ ambidextrous strategy (adoption of both exploitative and explorative strategies)?
Three main environmental factors have been identified: environmental munificence, dynamism and complexity. Firms choose to be ambidextrous when they confront the environment characterized as munificent, dynamic and complex. It is not easy for firms to simultaneously execute both exploitation and exploration. Two capabilities are essential for accomplish such ambidexterity: combinative capabilities and absorptive capabilities. We posit that both capabilities facilitate firms ambidextrous strategy.
To test the theoretical hypotheses, we conduct a survey using established measures. The sampling frame is the firms in high-tech industry or the related industries in Taiwan. At the end of the survey, 100 valid sample is analyzed to examine the hypothesized relationship. Our conclusion is that, environmental pressures did have significant impact on firms’ choice of innovation strategy. The fitness between higher degree of environmental pressures perceived by the top management teams and ambidextrous innovation strategy (engaging in exploration and exploitation simultaneously) would result in better performance. Firms combinative capabilities and absorptive capacities are two facilitators to enhance the relationship between ambidextrous strategy and firms’ performance in terms of new product development and financial conditions.
[1]Adler, P. S., Goldoftas, B., & Levine, D. I. (1999). Flexibility Versus Efficiency? A Case Study of Model Changeovers in the Toyota Production System. Organizationnew window
Science, 10(1), 43.new window
[2]Aldrich, H. E. (1979). Organizations and Environments NJ: Prenticce-Hall:Englewood Cliffs
[3]Allen, T. J. (1977). Managing the Flow of Technology Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
[4]Ancona, D. G., Goodman, P. S., Lawrence, B. S., & Tushman, M. L. (2001). Time: A New Research Lens Academy of Management Review, 26(4), 645-563.
[5]Barney, J. (1991). Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99.new window
[6]Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The Moderator-mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical
Considerations. Journal Of Personality And Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182.
[7]Benner, M. (2002). Process Management, Technological Innovation, and Organizational Adaptation. Unpublished Ph.D., Columbia University, United States–New York.
[8]Benner, M. J., & Tushman, M. L. (2003). Exploitation, Exploration, and Process Management: The Productivity Dilemma Revisited. Academy of Management. The
Academy of Management Review, 28(2), 238.
[9]Bettis, R. A., & Hitt, M. A. (1995). The New Competitive Landscape. Strategic Management Journal, 16, 7-19.
[10]Bierly, P. E. I., & Daly, P. S. (2007). Alternative Knowledge Strategies, Competitive Environment, and Organizational Performance in Small Manufacturing
Firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 31(4), 493.
[11]Birkinshaw, J., & Gibson, C. (2004). Building Ambidexterity Into an Organization. MIT Sloan Management Review, 45(4), 47.
[12]Blackburn, R., & Cummings, L. L. (1982). Cognitions of Work Unit Structure.
Academy of Management Journal, 25(4), 836-854.
[13]Boer, M. d., Van den Bosch, F. A. J., & Volberda, H. W. (1999). Managing Organizational Knowledge Integration in the Emerging Multimedia Complex Journal
of Management Studies, 36(3), 379-398.
[14]Carmeli, A., & Halevi, M. Y. (2009). How Top Management Team Behavioral Integration and Behavioral Complexity Enable Organizational Ambidexterity: The
Moderating Role of Contextual Ambidexterity. Leadership Quarterly, 20(2), 207-218.
[15]Cohen, W. M., Levin, R. C., & Mowery, D. C. (1987). Firm Size and R&D Intensity: A Re-examination Journal of Industrial Economics, 35(4), 543.
[16]Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1),new window
128-152.
[17]Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1994). Fortune Favors the Prepared Firm. Management Science, 40(2), 227-251.
[18]Colbert, B. A. (2004). The Complex Resource-based View: Implications for Theory and Practice in Strategic Human Resource Management Academy of Management Review, 29(3), 341-358.
[19]Damanpour, F. (1991). Organizational Innovation: A Meta-Analysis of Effects of Determinants and Moderators. Academy of Management Journal, 34(3), 555.
[20]De Visser, M., Faems, D., Van Looy, B., Visscher, K., & De Weerd-Nederhof, P. (2009). Ambidexterity in NPD:
The Impact of Differentiated Integration Structures on Innovation Performance. Academy of Management Proceedings, 1-6.
[21]Desphande, R., & Zaltman, G. (1982). Factors Affecting the Use of Market Research Information: A Path Analysis Journal of Marketing Research 19, 14-31.
[22]Dess, G. G., & Beard, D. W. (1984). Dimensions of Organizational Task Environments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29(1), 52-73.new window
[23]Dewar, R. D., Whetten, D. A., & Boje, D. (1980). An Examination of the Reliability and Validity of the Aiken and Hage Scales of Centralization, Formalization, and Task Routineness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25(1),new window
120-128.
[24]Dosi, G., Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (Eds.). (2002). The Nature and Dynamics of Organizational Capabilities New York Oxford University Press Inc.
[25]Doz, Y. L., Bartlett, C. A., & Prahalad, C. K. (1981). Global Competitive Pressures and Host Country Demands. California Management Review, 23(3), 63.
[26]Duncan. (1972). Characteristics of Organizational Environments and Perceived Environmental Uncertainty. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17(3), 313.
[27]Duncan. (1976). The Ambidextrous Organizations: Designing Dual Structures for Innovation. In R. H. Kilmann, L. R. Pondy & D. Slevin (Eds.), The Management
of Organizational Design (Vol. 1, pp. 167-188). North Holland, New Yorknew window
[28]Eisenhardt, K. M., & Martin, J. A. (2000). Dynamic Capabilities: What Are They? Strategic Management Journal, 21(10/11), 1105.
[29]Ettlie, J. E., Bridges, W. P., & O''Keefe, R. D. (1984). Organization Strategy and Structural Differences for Radical Versus Incremental Innovation Management
Science (pre-1986), 30(6), 682.
[30]Fosfuri, A., & Tribo, J. A. (2008). Exploring the Antecedents of Potential Absorptive Capacity and Its Impact on Innovation Performance. Omega, 36(2),
173-187.
[31]Ghoshal, S., & Bartlett, C. A. (1994). Linking Organizational Context and Managerial Action: the Dimensions of Quality of Management Strategic
Management Journal, 15, 91-112.
[32]Gibson, C. B., & Birkinshaw, J. (2004). The Antecedents, Consequences, and Mediating Role of Organizational Ambidexterity. Academy of Management Journal, 47(2), 209.
[33]Ginsberg, A., & Venkatraman, N. (1985). Contingency Perspectives of Organizational Strategy: A Critical Review of the Empirical Research. Academy of Management Review, 10(3), 421-434.
[34]Grant, R. M. (1996a). Prospering in Dynamically-competitive Environments: Organizational Capability as Knowledge Integration. Organization Science, 7(4), 375.
[35]Grant, R. M. (1996b). Toward a Knowledge-based Theory of the Firm Strategic Management Journal, 17, 109-122.
[36]Gupta, A. K., Smith, K. G., & Shalley, C. E. (2006). The Interplay between Exploration and Exploitation Academy of Management Journal, 49(4), 693.
[37]Hage, J., & Aiken, M. (1967). Relationship of Centralization to Other Structural Properties. Administrative Science Quarterly, 12(1), 72-92.new window
[38]He, Z.-L., & Wong, P.-K. (2004). Exploration vs. Exploitation: An Empirical Test of the Ambidexterity Hypothesis. Organization Science, 15(4), 481.
[39]Henderson, R., & Cockburn, I. (1994). Measuring Competence? Exploring Firm Effects in Pharmaceutical Research Strategic Management Journal, 15(8), 63-84.
[40]Henderson, R. M., & Clark, K. B. (1990). Architectural Innovation: The Reconfiguration Of Existing Product Technologies and the Failure of Established
Firms Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 9.new window
[41]Huber, G. P. (1991). Organizational Learning: the Contributing Processes and the Literatures. Organization Science, 2(1), 88-115.new window
[42]Jansen, Bosch, V. D., & Volberda. (2005a). Exploratory Innovation, Exploitative Innovation, and Ambidexterity: the Impact of Environmental and Organizational Antecedents. Schmalenbach Business Review : ZFBF, 57(4), 351.
[43]Jansen, Bosch, V. d., & Volberda. (2005b). Managing Potential and Realized Absorptive Capacity: How Do Organizational Antecedents Matter? . Academy of
Management Journal, 48(6), 999-1015.
[44]Jansen, Bosch, V. D., & Volberda. (2006). Exploratory Innovation, Exploitative Innovation, and Performance: Effects of Organizational Antecedents and Environmental Moderators. Management Science, 52(11), 1661-1674.
[45]Johnson, J. J. H. (1995). An Empirical Analysis of the Integration-responsiveness Framework: U.S. Construction Equipment Industry Firms in Global Competition Journal of International Business Studies, 26(3), 621-635.
[46]Katila, R., & Ahuja, G. (2002). Something Old, Something New: A Longitudinal Study Of Search Behavior And New Product Introduction Academy of Management
Journal, 45(6), 1183-1194.
[47]Katsikeas, C. S., Samiee, S., & Theodosiou, M. (2006). Strategy Fit and Performance Consequences of International Marketing Standardization. Strategic
Management Journal, 27(9), 867-890.
[48]Keats, B. W., & Hitt, M. A. (1988). A Causal Model of Linkages Among Environmental Dimensions, Macro Organizational Characteristics, and Performance
Academy of Management Journal, 31(3), 570-598.
[49]Kogut, B., & Zander, U. (1992). Knowledge of the Firm, Combinative Capabilities, and the Replication of Technology Organization Science, 3(3), 383-397.
[50]Kogut, B., & Zander, U. (1996). What Firms Do? Coordination, Identity, and Learning. Organization Science, 7(5), 502-518.
[51]Lane, P. J., & Lubatkin, M. (1998). Relative Absorptive Capacity and Interorganizational Learning. Strategic Management Journal, 19(5), 461.
[52]Lawless, M. W., & Finch, L. K. (1989). Choice and Determinism: A Test of Hrebiniak and Joyce''s Framework of Strategy-Environment fit, Strategic Management Journal (Vol. 10, pp. 351-366).
[53]Lawrence, P. R., & Lorsch, J. W. (1967). Differentiation and Integration in Complex Organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 12(1), 1.new window
[54]Leonard-Barton, D. (1992). Core Capabilities and Core Rigidities: A Paradox in Managing New Product Development Strategic Management Journal (1986-1998), 13(SPECIAL ISSUE), 111.
[55]Levinthal, D. A., & March, J. G. (1993). The Myopia of Learning Strategic Management Journal (1986-1998), 14(SPECIAL ISSUE), 95.
[56]Lewin, A. Y., Long, C. P., & Carroll, T. N. (1999). The Coevolution of New Organizational Forms. Organization Science, 10(5), 535.
[57]Liu, W. (2006). Knowledge Exploitation, Knowledge Exploration, and Competency Trap. Knowledge and Process Management, 13(3), 144.
[58]Lukas, B. A., Tan, J. J., & Hult, G. T. M. (2001). Strategic Fit in Transitional Economies: The Case of China''s Electronics Industry. Journal of Management, 27(4), 409-429.
[59]Mar Fuentes-Fuentes, M., Albacete-Saez, C. A., & Llorens-Montes, F. J. (2004). The Impact of Environmental Characteristics on TQM Principles and Organizational
Performance. Omega, 32(6), 425-442.
[60]March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning Organization Science, 2(1), 71.new window
[61]Marsh, S. J., & Stock, G. N. (2006). Creating Dynamic Capability: The Role of Intertemporal Integration, Knowledge Retention, and Interpretation. The Journal of
Product Innovation Management, 23(5), 422.
[62]McGill, M. E., Slocum, J. W., & Lei, D. (1992). Management Practices in Learning Organizations. Organizational Dynamics, 21(1), 4-17.new window
[63]Miller, D., & Friesen, P. H. (1986). Porter''s (1980) Generic Strategies and Performance: An Empirical Examination with American Data Part I: Testing Porter.
Organization Studies (Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG.), 7(1), 37-55.new window
[64]Mintzberg, H. (1979). Patterns in Strategy Formation International Studies of Management & Organization, 9(3), 67-86.
[65]Mowery, D. C., Oxley, J. E., & Silverman, B. S. (1998). Technological Overlap and Interfirm Cooperation: Implications for the Resource-Based View of the Firm.
Research Policy, 27(5), 507-523.
[66]Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1982). An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change Cambridge:MA: Harvard University Press
[67]Nemanich, L. A., & Vera, D. (2009). Transformational Leadership and Ambidexterity in the Context of an Acquisition. Leadership Quarterly, 20(1), 19-33.new window
[68]Nerkar, A. (2003). Old Is Gold? The Value of Temporal Exploration in the Creation of New Knowledge. Management Science, 49(2), 211-229.
[69]Nerkar, A., & Roberts, P. W. (2004). Technological and Product-Market Experience and the Success of New Product Introductions in the Pharmaceutical
Industry Strategic Management Journal, 25(8/9), 779-799.
[70]Nonaka, I. (1994). A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation. Organization Science, 5(1), 14-37.new window
[71]Nonaka, I., Toyama, R., & Byosiere, P. (2001). A Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation: Understanding the Dynamic Process of Creating Knowledge. In Handbook of Organizational Learning & Knowledge (pp. 491-517): Meinolf Dierkes 2001.
[72]Nonaka, I., Toyama, R., & Konno, N. (2000). SECI, Ba and Leadership: a Unified Model of Dynamic Knowledge Creation. Long Range Planning, 33(1), 5-34.new window
[73]Penrose, E. G. (1959). The Theory of the Growth of the Firm New York: Wiley.
[74]Polanyi, M. (1962). Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-critical Philosophy Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press
[75]Poole, M. S., & Van de Ven, A. H. (1989). Using a Paradox to Build Management and Organization Theories. Academy of Management. The Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 562.
[76]Porter, M. E. (1980). Competitive Strategy New York Free Press
[77]Porter, M. E. (1996). What Is Strategy? Harvard Business Review, 74(6), 61.
[78]Prahalad, C. K., & Doz, Y. L. (1987). The Multinational Mission: Balancing Local Demands and Global Vision. New York: Free Press.
[79]Prahalad, C. K., & Hamel, G. (1990). The Core Competence of the Corporation. Harvard Business Review, 68(3), 79-91.
[80]Raisch, S., & Birkinshaw, J. (2008). Organizational Ambidexterity: Antecedents, Outcomes, and Moderators Journal of Management, 34(3), 375-409.
[81]Rosenkopf, L., & Nerkar, A. (2001). Beyond Local Search: Boundary-spanning, Exploration, and Impact in the Optical Disk Industry. Strategic Management Journal,
22(4), 287.
[82]Roth, K., & Morrison, A. J. (1990). An Empirical Analysis of the Integration-Responsiveness Framework in Global Industries Journal of International
Business Studies, 21(4), 541-564.
[83]Rothaermel, F. T., & Alexandre, M. T. (2009). Ambidexterity in Technology Sourcing: The Moderating
Role of Absorptive Capacity. Organization Science,
20(4),759-780.
[84]Schreyogg, G., & Kliesch-Eberl, M. (2007). How Dynamic Can Organizational Capabilities Be? Towards a Dual-process Model of Capability Dynamization. Strategic Management Journal, 28(9), 913-933.
[85]Schumpeter, J. A. (1942). Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy. Cambridge: MA Harvard University Press
[86]Schumpeter, J. A. (1968). The Theory of Economic Development Cambridge, MA Harvard University Press
[87]Shapiro, C., & Varian, H. R. (1998). Information Rules: A Strategic Guide to the Network Economy (Hardcover). In Harvard Business School Press Books (pp. 1).new window
[88]Sharfman, M. P., & Dean, J. W. J. (1991). Conceptualizing and Measuring the Organizational Environment: A Multidimensional Approach. Journal of Management, 17(4), 681.
[89]Sidhu, J. S., Commandeur, H. R., & Volberda, H. W. (2007). The Multifaceted Nature of Exploration and Exploitation: Value of Supply, Demand, and Spatial Search
for Innovation. Organization Science, 18(1), 20.new window
[90]Sitkin, S. B. (1992). Learning Through Failure: The Strategy of Small Losses Research in Organizational Behavior, 14, 231.
[91]Smith, W. K., & Tushman, M. L. (2005). Managing Strategic Contradictions: A Top Management Model for Managing Innovation Streams. Organization Science,
16(5), 522-536.
[92]Sorensen, J. B., & Stuart, T. E. (2000). Aging, Obsolescence, and Organizational Innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45(1), 81.new window
[93]Starbuck, W. H. (1976). Organizations and their Environments In M. D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (pp.
1069-1123). Chicago Rand McNally
[94]Stock, G. N., Greis, N. P., & Fischer, W. A. (2001). Absorptive Capacity and New Product Development. Journal of High Technology Management Research, 12(1), 77.new window
[95]Sutcliffe, K. M., & George P. Huber, G. P. (1998). Firm and Industry as Determinants of Executive Perceptions of the Environment Strategic Management Journal, 19(8), 793-807.
[96]Szulanski, G. (1996). Exploring Internal Stickiness: Impediments to the Transfer of Best Practice within Firm Strategic Management Journal, 17, 27-43.
[97]Teece, D., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management Strategic Management Journal (1986-1998), 18(7), 509.
[98]Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating Dynamic Capabilities: The Nature and Microfoundations of (Sustainable) Enterprise Performance. Strategic Management
Journal, 28(13), 1319-1350.
[99]Tilton, J. E. (1971). International Diffusion of Technology: The Case of Semiconductors Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
[100]Tsai, W. (2001). Knowledge Transfer in Intraorganizational Networks: Effects of Network Position and Absorptive Capacity on Business Unit Innovation and
Performance Academy of Management Journal, 44(5), 996-1004.
[101]Tushman, M. L., & Anderson, P. (1986). Technological Discontinuities and Organizational Environments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 31(3), 439-465.
[102]Tushman, M. L., O''Reilly, C., III, & Anderson, P. (2004). The Ambidextrous Organization: Managing Evolutionary and Revolutionary Change. In Managing
Strategic Innovation and Change: A Collection of Readings (pp. 276-291). New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[103]Tushman, M. L., & O''Reilly, C. A., III. (1996). Ambidextrous Organizations: Managing Evolutionary and Revolutionary Change. California Management Review,
38(4), 8.
[104]Tushman, M. L., & Smith, W. K. (2002). Companion to Organization In Baum (Ed.), Organizational Technology (pp. 386-414): Malden, MA: Blackwell.
[105]Van den Bosch, F. A. J., Volberda, H. W., & Boer, M. d.(1999). Coevolution of Firm Absorptive Capacity and Knowledge Environment: Organizational Forms and Combinative Capabilities. Organization Science, 10(5), 551.
[106]Venkatraman, N. (1989). The Concept Of Fit In Strategy Research: Toward Verbal And Statistical Correspondence Academy of Management. The Academy of
Management Review, 14(3), 423.
[107]von Krogh, G. (1998). Care in Knowledge Creation. California Management Review, 40(3), 133-153.
[108]Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A Resource-based View of the Firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5(2), 171-180.
[109]Winter, S. G. (2003). Understanding Dynamic Capabilities Strategic Management Journal, 24(10), 991-995.
[110]Withey, M., Daft, R. L., & Cooper, W. H. (1983). Measures of Perrow ''s Work Unit Technology: An Empirical Assessment and a New Scale. Academy of
Management Journal, 26(1), 45-63.new window
[111]Zahra, S. A. (1993). Environment, Corporate Entrepreneurship, and Financial Performance: A Taxonomic Approach. Journal of Business Venturing, 8(4), 319.
[112]Zahra, S. A., & George, G. (2002). Absorptive Capacity: A Review, Reconceptualization, and Extension. Academy of Management Review, 27(2), 185-203.
[113]Zahra, S. A., & Hayton, J. C. (2008). The Effect of International Venturing on Firm Performance: The Moderating Influence of Absorptive Capacity. Journal of
Business Venturing, 23(2), 195-220.
[114]Zajac, E. J., Kraatz, M. S., & Bresser, R. K. F. (2000). Modeling the Dynamics of Strategic Fit: A Normative Approach to Strategic Change Strategic Management Journal, 21(4), 429.
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
QR Code
QRCODE