Combining old and new tricks: ambidexterity in aerospace design and integration teams

Purpose – This paper seeks to examine how aerospace design and integration teams in a highly partnered supply chain are able to leverage extant capabilities and develop new ones when faced with the necessity to adapt to organizational change. Design/methodology/approach – Building on the concept of contextual ambidexterity (Gibson and Birkinshaw), this research uses a combination of qualitative material and objective performance data to investigate the working context of five aerospace design and integration teams, their solutions to crisis-triggering events, and their subsequent schedule adherence. Findings – Team members enacted ambidextrous roles similar to those identified by Birkinshaw and Gibson. These behaviors allowed teams to create ambidextrous solutions when faced with crisis. Teams working in a supportive context were found to produce a greater diversity of ambidextrous solutions, which was found to relate to both overall ambidexterity and schedule adherence performance. Research limitations/implications – Although the results should be interpreted with care, the research answers Raisch and Birkinshaw's call for a more precise definition of organizational ambidexterity as the paper focuses on specific roles played by team members. The findings also point to a potential link between the diversity of ambidextrous behavioral roles and their ability to craft ambidextrous solutions. Practical implications – Teams that can quickly adapt to challenge through ambidextrous solutions are particularly useful in the context of highly partnered supply chains. Managers should therefore actively promote ambidextrous behaviors to ensure that the search for ambidextrous solutions becomes a conscious and deliberate process. Originality/value – This paper substantiates the ambidexterity concept by providing concrete examples drawn from highly partnered aerospace supply chains.