EXPLORATION VS. EXPLOITATION AND HOW VIDEO GAME DEVELOPERS ARE ABLE TO COMBINE THE TWO

References

• Aoyama, Y and H Izushi [2003] Hardware gimmick or cultural innovation? Technological, cultural, and social foundations of the Japanese video game industry. Research Policy 32 (3), 423–444. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• Birkinshaw, J and K Gupta [2013] Clarifying the distinctive contribution of ambidexterity to the field of organization studies. The Academy of Management Perspectives 27 (4), 287–298. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• Bjelland, O and RC Wood [2008] An inside view of IBM’s ‘innovation Jam’. MIT Sloan Management Review 50 (1), 32–40. ISI, Google Scholar
• Björk, J, P Boccardelli and M Magnusson [2010] Ideation capabilities for continuous innovation. Creativity and Innovation Management 19 (4), 385–396. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• Björk, S and J Holopainen [2004] Patterns in Game Design. Hingham, MA: Charles River Media. Google Scholar
• Byrne, DE [1971] The Attraction Paradigm. New York: Academic Press. Google Scholar
• Cao, Q, E Gedajlovic and H Zhang [2009] Unpacking organizational ambidexterity: Dimensions, contingencies, and synergistic effects. Organization Science 20 (4), 781–796. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• Chandy, RK and GJ Tellis [2000] The incumbent’s curse? Incumbency, size, and radical product innovation. The Journal of Marketing 64 (3), 1–17. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• Christensen, C [1997] The Innovator’s Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Google Scholar
• Christensen, C and R Rosenbloom [1995] Explaining the attacker’s advantage: Technological paradigms, organizational dynamics, and the value network. Research Policy 24 (2), 233–257. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• Cohen, W and D Levinthal [1990] Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly 35 (1), 128–152. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• Cooper, RG [2008] Perspective: The Stage-Gate idea-to-launch process — uptade, what’s new, and NexGen systems. Journal of Product Innovation Management 25 (3), 213–232. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• Corbin, J and A Strauss [2014] Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage publications. Google Scholar
• Davis, JP, KM Eisenhardt and CB Bingham [2009] Optimal structure, market dynamism, and the strategy of simple rules. Administrative Science Quarterly 54 (3), 413–452. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• DiMaggio, PJ and WW Powell [1991] The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar
• Dosi, G [1982] Technological paradigms and technological trajectories: A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change. Research Policy 11 (3), 147–162. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• Dubois, A and M Gibbert [2010] From complexity to transparency: Managing the interplay between theory, method and empirical phenomena in IMM case studies. Industrial Marketing Management 39 (1), 129–136. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• Dunbar, C, D Rodriguez and L Parker [2003] Race, subjectivity, and the interview process, Inside Interviewing–New Lenses, New Concerns, eds. Holstein, JAJF Gubrium, London/Thousand Oaks/New Delhi: Sage, pp. 131–150. Google Scholar
• Duncan, RB [1976] The ambidextrous organization: Designing dual structures for innovation, The Management of Organization, eds. Kilmann, RLR PondyD Slevin, New York: North-Holland, pp. 167–188. Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt, K [1989] Building theory from case study research. Academy of Management Review 14 (4), 532–550. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt, K and M Graebner [2007] Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal 50 (1), 25–32. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt, KM, NR Furr and CB Bingham [2010] CROSSROADS — Microfoundations of performance: Balancing efficiency and flexibility in dynamic environments. Organization Science 21 (6), 1263–1273. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt, KM and CB Schoonhoven [1990] Organizational growth: Linking founding team, strategy, environment, and growth among US semiconductor ventures, 1978–1988. Administrative Science Quarterly 35 (3), 504–529. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• Farrell, J and G Saloner [1986] Installed base and compatibility: Innovation, product preannouncements, and predation. The American Economic Review 76 (5), 940–955. ISI, Google Scholar
• Flyvbjerg, B [2006] Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qualitative Inquiry 12 (2), 219–245. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• Gibbert, M, W Ruigrok and B Wicki [2008] What passes as a rigorous case study?. Strategic Management Journal 29 (13), 1465–1474. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• Gibson, CB and J Birkinshaw [2004] The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. The Academy of Management Journal 47 (2), 209–226. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• Gupta, AK, KG Smith and CE Shalley [2006] The interplay between exploration and exploitation. Academy of Management Journal 49 (4), 693–706. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• Jansen, JJ, G George, FA Van den Bosch and HW Volberda [2008] Senior team attributes and organizational ambidexterity: The moderating role of transformational leadership. Journal of Management Studies 45 (5), 982–1007. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• Jelinek, M and CB Schoonhoven [1990] The Innovation Marathon: Lessons from High Technology Firms. San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Google Scholar
• Junni, P, RM Sarala, V Taras and SY Tarba [2013] Organizational ambidexterity and performance: A meta-analysis. The Academy of Management Perspectives 27 (4), 299–312. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• Katz, R and TJ Allen [1982] Investigating the not invented here (NIH) syndrome: A look at the performance, tenure, and communication patterns. R&D Management 12 (1), 7–19. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• Kotter, JP [1996] Leading Change. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Google Scholar
• Kvale, S and S Brinkmann [2006] InterViews — Learning the Craft of Qualitative Research Interviewing. Thousand Oaks: Sage. Google Scholar
• Laureiro-Martínez, D, S Brusoni, N Canessa and M Zollo [2015] Understanding the exploration–exploitation dilemma: An fMRI study of attention control and decision-making performance. Strategic Management Journal 36 (3), 319–338. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• Leavitt, HJ [1965] Applied organizational change in industry: Structural, technological and humanistic approaches, Handbook of Organizations, eds. March, JG, Chicago: Rand McNally, pp. 115–123. Google Scholar
• Levinthal, DA and JG March [1993] The myopia of learning. Strategic Management Journal 14, 95–112. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• March, JG [1991] Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science 2 (1), 71–97. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• March, JG and HA Simon [1958] Organizations. New York: Wiley. Google Scholar
• Markides, CC [2013] Business model innovation: What can the ambidexterity literature teach us?. The Academy of Management Perspectives 27 (4), 313–323. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• Mayer-Schönberger, V and K Cukier [2013] Big Data: A Revolution That Will Transform How We Live, Work, and Think. Boston, New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. Google Scholar
• Meyer, JW and B Rowan [1977] Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. The American Journal of Sociology 83 (2), 340–363. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• Miles, MB and AM Huberman [1984] Qualitative Data Analysis: A Sourcebook of New Methods. Beverly Hills, California: Sage. Google Scholar
• Nosella, A, S Cantarello and R Filippini [2012] The intellectual structure of organizational ambidexterity: A bibliographic investigation into the state of the art. Strategic Organization 10 (4), 450–465. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• O’Reilly, C and M Tushman [2013] Organizational ambidexterity: Past, present and future. The Academy of Management Perspectives 27 (4), 324–338. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• O’Reilly, CA and ML Tushman [2011] Organizational ambidexterity in action: How managers explore and exploit. California Management Review 53, 5–22. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• O’Reilly, CA and ML Tushman [2008] Ambidexterity as a dynamic capability: Resolving the innovator’s dilemma. Research in Organizational Behavior 28, 185–206. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• Pache, A-C and F Santos [2013] Inside the hybrid organization: Selective coupling as a response to conflicting institutional logics. Academy of Management Journal 56 (4), 972–1001. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• Page, S [2007] The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and Societies. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press. Google Scholar
• Poland, BD [2001] Transcription quality, Handbook of Interview Research: Context and Method, eds. Gubrium, JFJA Holstein, London: Sage, pp. 629–651. Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ragin, CC and HS Becker [1992] What is a Case? Exploring the Foundations of Social Inquiry. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
• Raisch, S and J Birkinshaw [2008] Organizational ambidexterity: Antecedents, outcomes, and moderators. Journal of Management 34 (3), 375–409. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• Raisch, S, J Birkinshaw, G Probst and ML Tushman [2009] Organizational ambidexterity: Balancing exploitation and exploration for sustained performance. Organization Science 20 (4), 685–695. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• Raymond, ES [1999] The Cathedral and the Bazaar: Musings on Linux and Open Source by an Accidental Revolutionary. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly and Associates. Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ries, E [2011] The Lean Startup: How Today’s Entrepreneurs Use Continuous Innovation to Create Radically Successful Businesses. New York: Random House LLC. Google Scholar
• Schumpeter, JA [1934] The Theory of Economic Development: An Inquiry Into Profits, Capital, Credit, Interest, and the Business Cycle. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Google Scholar
• Sherif, M, OJ Harvey, BJ White, WR Hood and CW Sherif [1961] Intergroup Conflict and Cooperation: The Robbers Cave Experiment. Norman, OK: University Book Exchange. Google Scholar
• Sidhu, JS, HW Volberda and HR Commandeur [2004] Exploring exploration orientation and its determinants: Some empirical evidence. Journal of Management Studies 41 (6), 913–932. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• Siggelkow, N [2007] Persuasion with case studies. Academy of Management Journal 50 (1), 20–24. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• Simsek, Z [2009] Organizational ambidexterity: Towards a multilevel understanding. Journal of Management Studies 46, 597–624. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• Stark, D [2011] The Sense of Dissonance: Accounts of Worth in Economic Life. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Google Scholar
• Storz, C, F Riboldazzi and M John [2015] Mobility and innovation: A cross-country comparison in the video games industry. Research Policy 44 (1), 121–137. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• Styhre, A [2002] Non-linear change in organizations: Organization change management informed by complexity theory. Leadership & Organization Development Journal 23 (6), 343–351. Crossref, Google Scholar
• Teece, DJ [2007] Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal 28 (13), 1319–1350. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• Teece, DJ, G Pisano and A Shuen [1997] Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal 18 (7), 509–533. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• The Swedish Games Industry (2014). Spelutvecklarindex 2014. Sweden. Google Scholar
• Thompson, J [1967] Organizations In Action. New York: McGraw-Hill. Google Scholar
• Turner, N, J Swart and H Maylor [2013] Mechanisms for managing ambidexterity: A review and research Agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews 15, 317–332. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• Tushman, ML and CA O’Reilly [1996] Ambidextrous organizations: Managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. California Management Review 38 (4), 8–30. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• Uotila, J, M Maula, T Keil and SA Zahra [2009] Exploration, exploitation, and financial performance: Analysis of S&P 500 corporations. Strategic Management Journal 30 (2), 221–231. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• Utterback, JM and WJ Abernathy [1975] A dynamic model of process and product innovation. Omega 3 (6), 639–656. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• Venkatraman, N, C-H Lee and B Iyer (2007). Strategic ambidexterity and sales growth: A longitudinal test in the software sector. In Unpublished Manuscript (earlier version presented at the Academy of Management Meetings, 2005). Google Scholar
• Verganti, R [2008] Design, meanings, and radical innovation: A metamodel and a research agenda. Journal of Product Innovation Management 25 (5), 436–456. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• Wang, CL and M Rafiq [2014] Ambidextrous organizational culture, contextual ambidexterity and new product innovation: A comparative study of UK and Chinese high-tech firms. British Journal of Management 25 (1), 58–76. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• Wang, H and J Li [2008] Untangling the effects of overexploration and overexploitation on organizational performance: The moderating role of environmental dynamism. Journal of Management 34(5), 925–951. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• Yin, R [1994] Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar
• Zackariasson, P, A Styhre and TL Wilson [2006a] Phronesis and creativity: Knowledge work in video game development. Creativity and Innovation Management 15 (4), 419–429. Google Scholar
• Zackariasson, P, M Walfisz and TL Wilson [2006b] Management of creativity in video game development. Services Marketing Quarterly 27 (4), 73–97. Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zackariasson, P and TL Wilson [2012] The Video Game Industry: Formation, Present State, and Future. New York: Routledge. Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zajac, EJ, MS Kraatz and RKF Bresser [2000] Modeling the dynamics of strategic fit: A normative approach to strategic change. Strategic Management Journal 21 (4), 429–453. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
• Zimmermann, A, S Raisch and J Birkinshaw [2015] How is ambidexterity initiated? The emergent charter definition process. Organization Science 26 (2), 1–21. Google Scholar