Sasa Baskarada

Leadership and organizational ambidexterity

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to answer calls for more research on how leaders may promote organizational ambidexterity (i.e. exploitation and exploration), and how such behaviors relate to transactional and transformational leadership styles. Design/methodology/approach – The findings presented in this paper are based on semi-structured interviews with 11 senior leaders in Australian Defence. Findings – This paper identifies three organizational mechanisms that leaders rely on to promote exploitation, and five behaviors that leaders rely on to promote exploration. These mechanisms and behaviors closely match transactional and transformational leadership styles, respectively. Originality/value – This paper provides support for the leadership ambidexterity construct, and for the thesis that transformational leadership is appropriate in the context of exploratory innovation, while transactional leadership is appropriate in the context of exploitative innovation.

Managing the exploitation-exploration tradeoff: how leaders balance incremental and discontinuous innovation

Purpose n n n n nThe purpose of this paper is to explain how leaders balance exploitation (incremental innovation) and exploration (discontinuous innovation). n n n n nDesign/methodology/approach n n n n nA qualitative study with 11 senior leaders in Australian Defence Force. n n n n nFindings n n n n nThe study identifies a number of factors that leaders take into account when deciding whether to focus on exploitation or on exploration. n n n n nOriginality/value n n n n nThe study concludes that transactional leadership is appropriate in the context of exploitation, while transformational leadership is appropriate in the context of exploration.

Corporate portfolio management in the public sector

Although corporate portfolio management (CPM) has been a popular tool for strategic management of multi-business portfolios in the private sector since the late 1960s, it has received limited attention in the public sector. Accordingly, empirical research on the use of CMP in government organizations is virtually non-existent. The purpose of this paper is to partially fill that gap in the literature by highlighting and discussing some of the key points that public sector organizations may need to consider when adopting CPM.,Rather than deductively proposing and testing narrowly specified hypotheses, this study aims to answer a broad research question, namely: What are the key points that public sector organizations may need to consider when adopting CMP? Hence, the study adopts the qualitative interpretive research paradigm. The findings are based on empirical research conducted in a large Australian publicly funded research organization. Potential application of CPM was iteratively and incrementally explored with a reference group comprising 15 middle management representatives and several members of the senior leadership group over the course of one year.,Assessment criteria traditionally used in CPM (e.g. growth potential and market share) are generally not applicable in public sector organizations. This paper suggests that government organizations should instead consider past performance and future potential of individual business units, which may be operationalized via capability (a function of human capital and associated resources/infrastructure) and delivery (a function of the demand for, and the impact of, relevant business units). The paper also highlights the importance of organization-wide consultation, evidence-based decision making, and contestability.,From a practical perspective, the paper may assist public sector organizations with adapting and applying CPM. From a theoretical perspective, the paper highlights an important and relatively neglected research problem, and suggests several avenues for future research.

Success factors for urgent technology insertion into military systems of systems

New or improved technologies are frequently inserted into existing military capabilities (socio-technical systems of systems) in order to address emerging threats or to exploit latest scientific and technological developments. Urgent technology insertion projects, which are aimed at addressing critical capability gaps, pose a particular challenge for Defence organisations as any delays and/or suboptimal execution may negatively impact on mission success, potentially resulting in the loss of life. As a result, identifying the success factors for timely and effective insertion of urgently required technologies is imperative. Based on a one-year-long ethnographic study of urgent technology insertion project strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats in the Australian Defence Organisation (ADO), this paper presents eight success factors for urgent technology insertion and uses them to evaluate a recent case study.