A self-regulation perspective on individual ambidexterity

This research project is set out to advance the study of individual ambidexterity through a self-regulation perspective on employees' innovative performance. Ambidexterity has been traditionally located at the organizational level of analysis, describing the ability of companies to manage the tensions that arise from leveraging existing competencies (exploitation) while experimenting with novel ones (exploration) for innovative success (Gupta et al., 2006). There is a growing recognition in the field that corporate efforts to balance exploration and exploitation play out in the daily job roles of individuals who are tasked to explore new knowledge and exploit pre-existing know-how to meet efficiency standards (Mom et al., 2015). Yet, calls for developing an understanding of exactly how individuals can excel at both activities have gone largely unheeded (Turner et al., 2013). The present research addresses this issue at contemporary workplaces that allow employees to assume greater responsibility and decision-making authority over their tasks. Employees' engagement in decision-making has been markedly associated with their intent to pursue a diverse range of goals and actively decide how to divide their time between them (Lord et al., 2010). This ability is characteristic of the behavioural ambivalence necessary for achieving individual ambidexterity (Gibson & Birkinshaw, 2004). By contextualizing the study of individual ambidexterity within the theory of self-regulation (Frayne & Latham, 1987), the project makes a novel case for ambidexterity as a learnable phenomenon. Namely, employees are recognized as active goal-setting agents who evaluate their progress towards goal achievement (i.e., exploration vs. exploitation goals) and modify their cognition or behaviours accordingly when discrepancies arise between their current and desired state (Leventhal et al., 1980).

Building on previous research in the realm of self-regulation that positions goal orientations as strong predictors of behaviour (DeShon et al., 2004), the project investigates the association between learning (LG) and prove-goal (PG) orientations as antecedents of individual ambidexterity. Specifically, the study hypothesizes that LG orientation (i.e., motivation to engage in challenging tasks for personal growth) and PG orientation (i.e., drive to prove once competence to others) positively relate to employees' explorative and exploitative activities, respectively. Furthermore, the researchers propose that ambidextrous leadership may facilitate the expression of employees' LG and PG orientations via so-called 'opening' (OLB) and 'closing' (CLB) leadership behaviours (Rosing et al., 2011). While the former describes efforts that increase variance in employee behaviours (e.g., encouraging followers to challenge the status quo), the latter antagonistically refers to initiatives that reduce variance (e.g., taking action to set guidelines). Given the matching nature of OLB and CLB functions with those of exploration and exploitation at the individual level, the present study tests for cross-level moderation effects. The project will also include a measure of employee-level innovation.

The study strives to make several contributions to innovation research. These include an elaborated understanding of how individual ambidexterity may be self-regulated via distinct goal orientations to yield innovative performance. Supported hypotheses imply at least two approaches along which practitioners may promote individual ambidexterity: Leaders are advised to develop employees' continuous learning capacities necessary for self-regulation and evolve the quality of their own OLB and CLB to facilitate the ambidextrous behaviour of their employees. These insights may translate onto human resource development practices and specific personnel selection criteria at corporations that strive to maximize their workplaces for innovative proactivity at the employee level.