경쟁가치 리더십과 양면성: 팀 양면성의 선행조건과 결과에 대한 실증연구 (Competing Values Leadership and Ambidexterity: An Empirical Study on the Antecedents and Outcomes of Team Ambidexterity)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국인사조직학회
· 수록지 정보 : 인사조직연구 / 22권 / 1호 / 203 ~ 242페이지
· 저자명 : 박상언, 이일우

초록

기업이 지속가능한 성과를 내기 위해서는 ‘활용’과 ‘탐험’ 활동을 모두 잘 수행할수 있는 양면적 혁신 능력이 필요하다는 주장에 대해 이견을 달긴 어렵다. 하지만이러한 양면성을 조성하고 촉진할 수 있는 선행조건에 대해서는 아직 규명되어야 할과제가 많다. 양면성을 촉진할 수 있는 경영 여건을 마련함에 있어서 조직을 이끄는리더의 역할이 중요할 수 있다는 개념적 차원의 지적은 그간 익히 있어왔지만, 지금까지이를 실제로 실증해 본 경험연구는 그리 많지 않아 왔다. 이러한 취지에서, 본 연구는경쟁가치 리더십(competing values leadership) 관점에 의거하여, 상반된 경쟁가치를동시에 강조하는 리더십이 양면성의 추구, 즉 탐험과 활용 등 구조적으로 갈등관계에있는 두 가지 혁신을 동시에 추구함에 있어서는 효과적인 맥락적 선행 조건이 될 수있음을 실증해 보고자 하였다.
이를 위해, 양면적 혁신이 긴요하다고 볼 수 있는 반도체 산업에 속한 기업의 154개팀, 1,686명에 대해 설문조사를 실시하였다. 획득된 자료를 팀 수준에서 분석한 결과에따르면, 팀 리더가 혁신 및 관계지향 리더십과 과업 및 통제지향 리더십 등 상반된가치지향성이 모두 강하게 반영되는 경쟁가치 리더십을 발휘할수록 탐험적 혁신과활용적 혁신 간의 시너지를 허용하는 팀의 결합 양면성이 더 크게 나타났다. 또 양면성은팀 성과와 팀 몰입 등 팀 효과성과도 긍정적인 영향관계에 있었다. 아울러, 양면성은팀 수준에서 팀 리더의 경쟁가치 리더십이 발휘되는 맥락적 선행조건과 팀 효과성간의 관계를 부분 매개하는 것으로 확인되었다. 이러한 분석결과가 시사해 주는 경영관리적 함의와 향후 연구과제들이 함께 토론되었다.

영어초록

Since March’s(1991) seminal work on exploration and exploitation in organizational learning,the construct of organizational ambidexterity has attracted the attention of an increasing numberof organizational theorists. An “ambidextrous” organization is one that is capable of pursuingtwo ends simultaneously: exploring new knowledge and technologies and then developing newproducts and services with the help of reconfigured resources, while exploiting existing productsand services by leveraging current competencies in a stable organizational atmosphere. Theorysuggests that achieving ambidexterity enables a firm to enhance its performance and sustainablecompetitiveness.
Thanks to the burgeoning research interest in the possible link between ambidexterity and performance,there is now convincing empirical evidence suggesting that for an organization to survive in theface of a turbulent environment, they must demonstrate the dynamic capability of ambidexterity.
Yet while the evidence for the benefits of ambidexterity is accumulating, there still exists a gapin understanding how ambidexterity is actually managed within organizations. Current researchlacks insight into the core leadership style and mechanisms that underlie how ambidexterity shouldbe managed in practice.
Scant research exists to explain the contextual antecedents that might help achieve and promoteambidexterity. In the few exceptional cases thatintroduce organizational antecedent variables intheir research models, the concept of organizational context has beenused diffusely and ambiguously.
Furthermore, ambidexterity hasfor the most part been investigated at the organization or businessunit level. There is a lack of research focused onthe individual or group level of analysis.
Finally, the construct of ambidexterity and thedifferences in its operationalizations remain conceptually unclear. Corresponding to the ‘balance’ view thatemphasizes the trade-off betweenexploration and exploitation, ambidexterity can be operationalized as the absolute differences oftwo activities. However, according to the ‘combined’ view that characterizes exploration and exploitationas independent activities, orthogonal to each other, ambidexterity can be operationalized as theproduct of two activities.
To fill these gaps in organizational research, this study examines the relationship betweenambidexterity and thecontextual antecedent of leadershipat a team level of analysis from the standpointof an individual organization. For this purpose, the leadership styles of team leaders were measuredbased on the competing values framework. In addition, this study also explores whether ambidexteritymediates the relationship between team leadership as a contextual antecedent and team effectivenessas a consequence at the team level of analysis.
Survey data from1,686 employees in a Korean semiconductor-manufacturing firm was aggregatedinto 154 teams foranalysis after several validity checks. Hierarchical regression was used to evaluatethe hypotheses. The findings were as follows. First, the more a team’s context was characterizedaccording tothe competing values leadership style of the team leader, the higher the level of teamambidexterity. Second, the higher the level of ambidexterity in a team, the higher the level of teameffectiveness that asmeasured byteam performance and team involvement. In addition, we foundthat the construct of ambidexterity operationalized as the product of exploration and exploitationpartly mediated the relationship between the contextual leadership antecedent – expressed via competingvalues leadership style – and team effectiveness.
We believe this study helps clarify the conceptual and operational understanding of ambidexterity.
In particular, it expandsthe body of research into team level analysis and contextual antecedentsof ambidexterity. The limitations of this study and the implications of these findings for substantiatingand extending future research on ambidexterity are discussed.

참고자료

· 없음