Empowering leadership and organizational ambidexterity: a moderated mediation model
| Pages | 94-116 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/EBHRM-02-2017-0010 |
| Published date | 03 April 2018 |
| Date | 03 April 2018 |
| Author | Evangelia Siachou,Panagiotis Gkorezis |
| Subject Matter | HR & organizational behaviour,Global HRM |
Empowering leadership and
organizational ambidexterity: a
moderated mediation model
Evangelia Siachou
Business School, Hellenic American University, Nashua,
New Hampshire, USA, and
Panagiotis Gkorezis
Department of Economics, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki,
Thessaloniki, Greece
Abstract
Purpose –The purpose of this paper is to examine the effect of empowering leadership on contextual
ambidexterity. To this end, the authors underscore the underlying mechanism of perceived organizational
support (POS). Furthermore, to provide more robust insights into this indirect effect, role ambiguity was
examined as a moderator.
Design/methodology/approach –The paper is based on a questionnaire survey. Data collected from
219 employees working in three IT small-and-medium enterprises located in Greece.
Findings –The findings indicated that empowering leadership is positively related to contextual
ambidexterity through POS and, further, this indirect association is contingent on role ambiguity.
Originality/value –The study provides more insights into the important role of leadership in generating
contextual ambidexterity. Thus, moderated mediation framework that has empirically tested considers both
how and when empowering leadership affects contextual ambidexterity and provides important implications
for both theory and practice.
Keywords Role ambiguity, Empowering leadership, Moderated mediation, Contextual ambidexterity,
Perceived organizational support (POS)
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
There is a consensus among scholars and practitioners, accompanied by a plethora of
empirical evidence (O’Reilly and Tushman, 2013) that contemporary business environments
require organizations to be inter alia ambidextrous; namely, exploit existing sources, while,
at the same time, explore new opportunities to integrate the available assets (Havermans
et al., 2015; He and Wong, 2004; O’Reilly and Tushman, 2008, 2013; Papachroni et al., 2016;
Rothaermel and Deeds, 2004). In this regard, this concurrent approach of exploitation
(i.e. efficiency, control, certainty, variance reduction) and exploration (i.e. search, discovery,
autonomy, innovation) (O’Reilly and Tushman, 2013, p. 325) “with their joint impact on
performance”(Prange and Schlegelmilch, 2009, p. 218) dominates the literature and reflects
an organizational capability which enables organizations to effectively meet today’s
business demands (Tekleab et al., 2008).
However, a significant body of research recognizes that organizational ambidexterity is
perceived as a managerial activity depending on the organizational seniority aptitude to
effectivelymanage the opportunity- and advantage-seeking trade-off (Beckman,2006; Gibson
and Birkinshaw, 2004; Lubatkin et al., 2006; Turner and Lee-Kelley, 2013; Tushman and
O’Reilly,1997; Volberda et al., 2001). In thisvein, several scholars have investigatedthe impact
of contextual factors on ambidexterity. Among these, leadership is argued to play a central
role in offsetting the tensions of organizational configurations (e.g. Burgers et al., 2009;
Kleinbaum and Tushman, 2007; Hill and Birkinshaw, 2014; Jansenet al., 2009; Lubatkin et al.,
2006; Martin and Eisenhardt, 2010; O’Reilly andTushman, 2011; Smith and Tushman, 2005).
Evidence-based HRM: a Global
Forum for Empirical Scholarship
Vol. 6 No. 1, 2018
pp. 94-116
© Emerald PublishingLimited
2049-3983
DOI 10.1108/EBHRM-02-2017-0010
Received 14 February 2017
Revised 8 August 2017
Accepted 9 September 2017
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/2049-3983.htm
94
EBHRM
6,1
Allied to this, scholars have pointed to leader characteristics (such as initiative, seek out
opportunities, multi-taskers, etc.) as significant antecedents to ambidexterity (e.g. Beckman,
2006; Lubatkin et al., 2006; Smith and Tushman, 2005).
Even more, recent studies have associated different leadership styles with organizational
ambidexterity such as transformational leadership (e.g. Berson et al., 2006) and shared
management leadership (Mihalache et al., 2014). However, the impact of certain leadership
styles and behaviors on specific types of ambidexterity, as of contextual ambidexterity, has
rarely been addressed in the literature. According to Havermans et al. (2015), such
relationships have been investigated by Gibson and Birkinshaw (2004), Nemanich and
leadership behaviors in project-based organizations, concluded that leaders are likely
to enable contextual ambidexterity. However, this work does not support linkages
between a certain leadership style, as for instance empowering leadership, and contextual
ambidexterity.
Drawing on these insights, the present study attempts to extend this line of research by
examining the effect of a specific leadership style, that is, empowering leadership, on
contextual ambidexterity. Contextual ambidexterity entails a “supportive organizational
context […] encouraging individuals to make their own decisions to achieve ambidextrous
outcomes.”In such a context, individuals are also encouraged to make their own judgments
of how to best divide their time between the conflicting demands of alignment and
adaptability (Gibson and Birkinshaw, 2004, p. 211). This time management ability
differentiates contextual ambidexterity from other types of ambidexterity such as structural
or sequential ambidexterity (O’Reilly and Tushman, 2013).
Given that leaders serve as important representatives of each organization (Eisenberger
et al., 1986) and, therefore, their leadership style influences employees’attitudes toward the
organization, it is likely that they can promote the supportive organizational environment
that contextual ambidexterity necessitates. Thus, we also incorporate perceived
organizational support (POS) as an underlying mechanism in the relationship between
empowering leadership and contextual ambidexterity. Furthermore, we provide a more
nuanced understanding of this indirect effect by incorporating role ambiguity as a
moderator. Taken together, we develop and test a moderated mediation model which
elucidates how (POS) and when (role ambiguity) the relationship between empowering
leadership and contextual ambidexterity occurs (Figure 1).
Empowering
Leadership
Organizational
Ambidexterity
Perceived
Organizational Support
Role Ambiguity
H1
H2
H3
H5
H6
H4
Designates indirect effects
Figure 1.
Hypothesized model
95
Empowering
leadership
To continue reading
Request your trial