Tiantian Cao , Weian Li , Yaowei Zhang , Minna Zheng
{"title":"双赢还是双输?国有企业的双重逻辑、董事会派系斗争和双向创新","authors":"Tiantian Cao , Weian Li , Yaowei Zhang , Minna Zheng","doi":"10.1016/j.technovation.2024.103099","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Previous research has largely ignored the role of internal dynamics in filtering conflicting institutional demands facing state-owned enterprises (SOEs) and in generating innovation heterogeneity. This study examines the internal dynamics within SOE boards by focusing on how directors representing different institutional logics experience and manage conflicting institutional expectations in a shared decision-making process of ambidextrous innovation. Particularly, using Chinese SOEs as samples, we determine that when faultlines between factional subgroups of directors committed to state and market logic are activated, the balance of ambidextrous innovation will increase; however, the activated faultlines simultaneously lead to declines in exploratory and exploitative innovation. Furthermore, this negative effect on ambidextrous innovation is stronger for high-tech firms but weaker for firms with substantive board independence. We extend the research on SOE innovation, organizational hybridity, and the effects of group faultlines. Additionally, the findings yield practical insights into addressing the challenges of SOE hybridity.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":49444,"journal":{"name":"Technovation","volume":"137 ","pages":"Article 103099"},"PeriodicalIF":11.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Win–win or Lose–Lose? Dual logic, board factional faultlines, and ambidextrous innovation in state-owned enterprises\",\"authors\":\"Tiantian Cao , Weian Li , Yaowei Zhang , Minna Zheng\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.technovation.2024.103099\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Previous research has largely ignored the role of internal dynamics in filtering conflicting institutional demands facing state-owned enterprises (SOEs) and in generating innovation heterogeneity. This study examines the internal dynamics within SOE boards by focusing on how directors representing different institutional logics experience and manage conflicting institutional expectations in a shared decision-making process of ambidextrous innovation. Particularly, using Chinese SOEs as samples, we determine that when faultlines between factional subgroups of directors committed to state and market logic are activated, the balance of ambidextrous innovation will increase; however, the activated faultlines simultaneously lead to declines in exploratory and exploitative innovation. Furthermore, this negative effect on ambidextrous innovation is stronger for high-tech firms but weaker for firms with substantive board independence. We extend the research on SOE innovation, organizational hybridity, and the effects of group faultlines. Additionally, the findings yield practical insights into addressing the challenges of SOE hybridity.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49444,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Technovation\",\"volume\":\"137 \",\"pages\":\"Article 103099\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":11.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Technovation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166497224001494\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Technovation","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166497224001494","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Win–win or Lose–Lose? Dual logic, board factional faultlines, and ambidextrous innovation in state-owned enterprises
Previous research has largely ignored the role of internal dynamics in filtering conflicting institutional demands facing state-owned enterprises (SOEs) and in generating innovation heterogeneity. This study examines the internal dynamics within SOE boards by focusing on how directors representing different institutional logics experience and manage conflicting institutional expectations in a shared decision-making process of ambidextrous innovation. Particularly, using Chinese SOEs as samples, we determine that when faultlines between factional subgroups of directors committed to state and market logic are activated, the balance of ambidextrous innovation will increase; however, the activated faultlines simultaneously lead to declines in exploratory and exploitative innovation. Furthermore, this negative effect on ambidextrous innovation is stronger for high-tech firms but weaker for firms with substantive board independence. We extend the research on SOE innovation, organizational hybridity, and the effects of group faultlines. Additionally, the findings yield practical insights into addressing the challenges of SOE hybridity.
期刊介绍:
The interdisciplinary journal Technovation covers various aspects of technological innovation, exploring processes, products, and social impacts. It examines innovation in both process and product realms, including social innovations like regulatory frameworks and non-economic benefits. Topics range from emerging trends and capital for development to managing technology-intensive ventures and innovation in organizations of different sizes. It also discusses organizational structures, investment strategies for science and technology enterprises, and the roles of technological innovators. Additionally, it addresses technology transfer between developing countries and innovation across enterprise, political, and economic systems.