Cognitive ambidexterity: Examination of the cognitive dimension in decision-making dualities
Karhu, Päivi (2017-08-25)
Väitöskirja
Karhu, Päivi
25.08.2017
Lappeenranta University of Technology
Acta Universitatis Lappeenrantaensis
Julkaisun pysyvä osoite on
https://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-335-109-7
https://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-335-109-7
Tiivistelmä
This doctoral thesis addresses the cognitive dimension of the various dualities that
especially managers confront when making decisions. The study demonstrates how
similar decision-making situations can be perceived differently: where one decisionmaker
may identify a challenge, another may find a way to channel tensions toward
creative purposes. The two distinct yet interrelated literature streams of dualities and
organizational ambidexterity have recognized the need for managers to respond to
conflicting internal and external demands, which exposes them to a myriad of cognitive
challenges. This thesis contributes to the discussion by building a framework of cognitive
ambidexterity, which is defined as the ability to engage in parallel mental processes that
are paradoxical or contradictory. Whereas duality scholars have been interested in the
relationship of the poles of the dualities calling those for instance paradoxes and
dilemmas, ambidexterity scholars have discussed the organizations’ ability to manage the
opposing demands of exploration and exploitation – which is one type of duality
discussed in this thesis – through spatial, temporal or contextual and behavioral solutions.
Thus far, little exploration has been done about micro-foundations of ambidexterity and
the cognitive processes related to dualities in decision-making. The aim of this thesis is
to understand the micro-foundations of dualities, and the strategies that enable managers
to handle the opposite demands of such decision-making pairs. To do this, the study draws
from managerial cognition literature, which helps to explain how decision-makers
identify, assess and cope with dualities and the tensions that arise from the
incompatibilities within them. Altogether this study suggests that cognitive ambidexterity
can fill a gap that is acknowledged across different research fields—namely, the lack of
understanding about the micro-foundations of dualities like paradoxes and dilemmas,
which is a limitation that may preclude the achievement of organizational ambidexterity.
In addition to providing a conceptual illustration of cognitive ambidexterity, this thesis
explores the identified research gaps empirically with qualitative and experimental
methods. The qualitative studies operationalize and extend a widely cited tension
framework, and test analogical reasoning in the context new product development,
providing insights on different types of dualities and creative ways of coping with them.
The laboratory experiment appears to be the first to explore decision-makers’
performance in facing dualities that have varying levels of cognitive complexity and their
preference regarding dilemma or paradox solutions; it also sheds light on the
opportunities and challenges related to different types of dualities. Extant literature on dualities and individual ambidexterity often highlights the superiority of simultaneous
paradoxical solutions as opposed to dilemma solutions; this study showcases the
usefulness of separate and sequential coping mechanisms in the light of cognitive
demands.
Altogether this study illuminates the cognitive dimension of decision-making by merging
knowledge from distinct literature on dualities, organizational ambidexterity and
managerial cognition; it addresses that business environments are, and will continue to
be, characterized by dualistic demands. This thesis suggests that through active awareness
of the unconscious cognitive processes that hinder or aid decision-making, managers can
break from path-dependent patterns, reframe perceived threats to potential business
opportunities and build ambidexterity into organizations in a way that prepares them to
respond optimally to the dualities that they become inevitably confronted with.
especially managers confront when making decisions. The study demonstrates how
similar decision-making situations can be perceived differently: where one decisionmaker
may identify a challenge, another may find a way to channel tensions toward
creative purposes. The two distinct yet interrelated literature streams of dualities and
organizational ambidexterity have recognized the need for managers to respond to
conflicting internal and external demands, which exposes them to a myriad of cognitive
challenges. This thesis contributes to the discussion by building a framework of cognitive
ambidexterity, which is defined as the ability to engage in parallel mental processes that
are paradoxical or contradictory. Whereas duality scholars have been interested in the
relationship of the poles of the dualities calling those for instance paradoxes and
dilemmas, ambidexterity scholars have discussed the organizations’ ability to manage the
opposing demands of exploration and exploitation – which is one type of duality
discussed in this thesis – through spatial, temporal or contextual and behavioral solutions.
Thus far, little exploration has been done about micro-foundations of ambidexterity and
the cognitive processes related to dualities in decision-making. The aim of this thesis is
to understand the micro-foundations of dualities, and the strategies that enable managers
to handle the opposite demands of such decision-making pairs. To do this, the study draws
from managerial cognition literature, which helps to explain how decision-makers
identify, assess and cope with dualities and the tensions that arise from the
incompatibilities within them. Altogether this study suggests that cognitive ambidexterity
can fill a gap that is acknowledged across different research fields—namely, the lack of
understanding about the micro-foundations of dualities like paradoxes and dilemmas,
which is a limitation that may preclude the achievement of organizational ambidexterity.
In addition to providing a conceptual illustration of cognitive ambidexterity, this thesis
explores the identified research gaps empirically with qualitative and experimental
methods. The qualitative studies operationalize and extend a widely cited tension
framework, and test analogical reasoning in the context new product development,
providing insights on different types of dualities and creative ways of coping with them.
The laboratory experiment appears to be the first to explore decision-makers’
performance in facing dualities that have varying levels of cognitive complexity and their
preference regarding dilemma or paradox solutions; it also sheds light on the
opportunities and challenges related to different types of dualities. Extant literature on dualities and individual ambidexterity often highlights the superiority of simultaneous
paradoxical solutions as opposed to dilemma solutions; this study showcases the
usefulness of separate and sequential coping mechanisms in the light of cognitive
demands.
Altogether this study illuminates the cognitive dimension of decision-making by merging
knowledge from distinct literature on dualities, organizational ambidexterity and
managerial cognition; it addresses that business environments are, and will continue to
be, characterized by dualistic demands. This thesis suggests that through active awareness
of the unconscious cognitive processes that hinder or aid decision-making, managers can
break from path-dependent patterns, reframe perceived threats to potential business
opportunities and build ambidexterity into organizations in a way that prepares them to
respond optimally to the dualities that they become inevitably confronted with.
Kokoelmat
- Väitöskirjat [1037]