4.7 Article

Strategic conformity, organizational learning ambidexterity, and corporate innovation performance: An inverted U-shaped curve?

Journal

JOURNAL OF BUSINESS RESEARCH
Volume 149, Issue -, Pages 424-433

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.05.023

Keywords

Strategic conformity; Innovation performance; Organizational learning of ambidexterity; Structure formalization

Categories

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [71802134, 71771125, 71620107004, 72173087]
  2. Major Project of Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Education Department [19KJA180002]
  3. National Social Science Foundation [17ZDA057]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study investigates how and when strategic conformity impacts corporate innovative performance by integrating the institutional and optimal conformity literature. The results show that strategic conformity has an inverted U-shaped effect on innovative performance, with the relative exploitative dimension mediating this relationship.
The mixed outcomes reported for strategic conformity confirm that there is not yet a unified understanding of how strategic conformity affects firm outcomes. By integrating the institutional and optimal conformity literature, this study investigates how and when strategic conformity impacts corporate innovative performance. Based on a survey of 291 manufacturing firms in China, the empirical results show that strategic conformity has an inverted U-shaped effect on innovative performance and that relative exploitative dimension of ambidexterity mediates the inverted U-shaped association between strategic conformity and innovative performance. Further, we find that higher levels of structural formalization strengthen the relationship between strategic conformity and the relative exploitative dimension of ambidexterity. Both theoretical and empirical contributions of the study are discussed.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available