Formal integration archetypes in ambidextrous organizations

Strategic Orientation and Ambidextrous Public Organizations

In this paper we explore some implications of the Miles and Snow (1978, 2003) typology of strategy types for public organizational adaptation and effectiveness, particularly as they are linked to organizational ambidexterity and dynamic capabilities. We see ambidexterity as referring to “the synchronous pursuit of both exploration and exploitation via loosely coupled and differentiated subunits...

Scale for classifying organizations as explorers, exploiters or ambidextrous

This paper presents a scale developed to classify organizations through cluster analysis as being exploiters, explores, ambidextrous or with no defined orientation. The theoretical framework helps identify that the concepts associated with exploration and exploitation may be classified into six practical eywords:

Building ambidextrous organizations. Forming your own "skunk works".

Towards Verified Distributed Software Through Refinement of Formal Archetypes

This paper discusses experiments with a “model-based” approach for developing verified distributed systems in which program development is carried out by stepwise refinement: we encode, specifications and algorithm archetypes in the PVS theorem prover, carry out stepwise refinement and concomitant proofs, and obtain collections of verified algorithms encoded in PVS. Finally we transform algorit...

Stimulating integration of departments within the ambidextrous organization

This article is a result of a literature study. The article first gives a small introduction to the concept of ambidextrous organizations. Then the study starts by defining main characteristics of innovating and operating departments. Next a comparison between the characteristics of both department types is made and the main differences between the two are lined out. The article is then conclud...