首页> 外文期刊>Universal Journal of Management >Hybrid Strategy, Ambidexterity and Environment: toward an Integrated Typology
【24h】

Hybrid Strategy, Ambidexterity and Environment: toward an Integrated Typology

机译:混合策略,双性恋与环境:走向综合类型学

获取原文
       

摘要

Hybrid strategy, which emerged as a contingency option to Porter's generic strategies framework [1], defends that in a dynamic environment the simultaneous pursuit of "Low Cost" and "Differentiation" approaches is fundamental for the short-term performance and long-term survival of the firm. A vast amount of literature supports the benefits of adopting a mixed approach of strategy: several empirical studies have proved that a hybrid strategy establishes a firm's performance superiority over the pure strategy choice. The hybrid literature has concentrated on the performance linkage and on the debate countering the pure strategy approach, however very little attention has been paid to the challenges presented by the mixed strategy implementation. In fact, despite the rich empirical literature, it is still not clear how firms that adopt a hybrid strategy may successfully integrate the inherent contradiction of the "Low Cost" and "Differentiation" approaches, escaping from the "Stuck in The Middle" outcome. Consequently, after a careful consultation of the relevant literature, we conclude that several types of hybrid strategy implementation, which should correspond to different business environmental situations, exist. In order to study the characteristics of these different types of hybrid strategies implementations, we propose a typology comprising four types of hybrid strategy implementation, defined by two antecedents of the firm and two antecedents of the environment. As a contribution of this article, the proposed typology has the purpose to fill a methodological gap regarding the adoption of Hybrid strategies and we expect that it could be used as a framework for further studies, aiming to suggest managerial implications and further unveil characteristics of the hybrid implementation. Additionally, we align and contrast the hybrid and ambidextrous approaches, which share many similarities. Despite the fact that they have been confounded in empirical studies, we concluded that hybridity and ambidexterity are distinct and complementary concepts: while hybrid strategy defines the value proposition of the firm (a composition of "Low Cost" and "Differentiation"), ambidexterity focus on how to deliver this value with efficiency (Exploitation) and how to renew it effectively (Exploration).
机译:混合策略作为Porter通用策略框架[1]的应急选项而出现,它辩称在动态环境中同时追求“低成本”和“差异化”方法对于短期绩效和长期生存至关重要。公司的。大量文献支持采用混合策略的好处:几项实证研究证明,混合策略比纯粹的策略选择建立了企业的绩效优势。混合文献集中于绩效联系和针对纯策略方法的辩论,但是很少有人关注混合策略实施带来的挑战。实际上,尽管有丰富的经验文献,但仍不清楚采用混合策略的公司如何成功整合“低成本”和“差异化”方法的固有矛盾,从而摆脱“陷入困境”的结果。因此,在仔细查阅相关文献后,我们得出结论,存在几种类型的混合策略实施,它们应对应于不同的商业环境。为了研究这些不同类型的混合策略实施的特征,我们提出了一种类型学,该类型包括四种类型的混合策略实施,分别由公司的两个前提和环境的两个前提定义。作为本文的贡献,拟议的类型学旨在填补采用混合策略方面的方法学空白,我们希望可以将其用作进一步研究的框架,旨在提出管理方面的建议并进一步揭示该方法的特征。混合实施。此外,我们对齐并对比了混合方法和灵巧方法,它们具有许多相似之处。尽管它们已经在经验研究中混淆了,但我们得出的结论是,混合性和矛盾性是截然不同的互补概念:虽然混合策略定义了公司的价值主张(“低成本”和“差异化”的组成),但模糊性却是重点关于如何有效地交付此价值(开发)以及如何有效地更新它(开发)。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号