Although past research has investigated the impact of exploration and exploitation on firm performance, there is limited research on these effects in interorganizational relationships. We examine whether the boundary condition for ambidextrous learning can be extended from firms to long-term interorganizational relationships. Specifically, we focus on a particular aspect of learning--namely, explorative and exploitative knowledge sharing--and examine its impact on the performance of long-term relationships. We also theorize how ambidextrous management of the relationship and ontological commitment to span the syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic knowledge boundaries between partners enable knowledge sharing. Our theoretical predictions are tested using data collected from both account managers at customer firms responsible for the relationship with a leading supply chain vendor and account managers at the vendor firm responsible for relationships with customers. The findings suggest that both exploratory and exploitative knowledge sharing lead to relationship performance gains, that such sharing is enabled by the ambidextrous management of the relationship, and that such sharing is facilitated by ontological commitment. Interesting differences in the enablers and consequences of both forms of knowledge sharing are detected between customers and the vendor.knowledge sharing, exploration, exploitation, learning paradox, contextual ambidexterity, digital boundary objects, ontological commitment

This paper guides the theoretical development of future research on interorganizational systems (IOS). We first assess past IOS research by reviewing and summarizing the findings of 51 empirical studies of IOS published in 11 IS journals between 1990 and 2003. This literature addresses three primary issues: (1) factors influencing organizational decisions to adopt IOS; (2) the impact of IOS on governance over economic transactions; and (3) the organizational consequences of IOS adoption. From our assessment of the findings and theoretical approaches taken in past research, we offer three recommendations for future research. First, the theoretical foundations of IOS research during this period are diverse, representing 17 different yet complementary theories. We recommend that researchers continue to diversify their theoretical approaches in order to address new research challenges. Second, we recommend that IOS researchers move beyond mere descriptions of IOS artifacts by engaging with IOS artifacts on theoretical grounds. Third, we identify and describe new theoretical directions for future IOS research in each of the main issue areas.

it-capability-profiles-and-communications-for-cocreating-relational-valueevidence-from-the-logistics-industry.html.

Contextual ambidexterity of an interorganizational relationship (IOR) is the ability of its management system to align partners' activities and resources for short-term goals and adapt partners' cognitions and actions for long-term viability. It is an alternative to structural ambidexterity in which separate units of the IOR pursue short- and long-term goals. We theorize that when utilized to coordinate the IOR, information technology (IT)-enabled operations and sensemaking, along with interdependent decision making, promote the IOR's contextual ambidexterity. We test our hypotheses on both sides of a customer-vendor relationship using data collected from (1) the account executives of one of the world's largest supply chain vendors (n = 76) and (2) its customers (n = 238). We find commonalities and differences in the influence coordination mechanisms have on contextual ambidexterity from the vendor's and the customer's perspectives. For both customers and vendors, contextual ambidexterity improves the quality and performance of the relationship, and decision interdependence promotes contextual ambidexterity. For customers, using operations support systems (OSSs) and interpretation support systems (ISSs) enhances contextual ambidexterity. For vendors, the impact of both OSS use and ISS use on contextual ambidexterity depends on the duration of the relationship. Our study shows that IT-enabled operations and sensemaking are key enablers of IOR ambidexterity and that vendors should combine these IT capabilities with relationship-specific knowledge that accumulates with relationship duration.

The mum effect-a project member's reluctance to report bad news about a troubled project-has been recognized as an important contributor to project failure. While there are many potential factors that can influence the mum effect, in this study we focus on two factors that are particularly important in today's software development environment: (1) the issue of fault responsibility that arises in the context of outsourced IT projects that involve an external vendor, and (2) the issue of time urgency, which has become more important as firms seek to compete on "Internet time," developing and delivering applications with greater speed than ever before. We draw upon the basic whistle-blowing model adapted from Dozier and Miceli (1985) to examine how fault responsibility and time urgency ultimately affect a project member's IT project reporting decision. Based on the results of a controlled laboratory experiment, we confirmed that the basic whistle-blowing model holds in an IT project context and found that both fault responsibility and time urgency can have significant effects on an individual's willingness to report bad news. Fault responsibility exerts both direct and indirect influence on willingness to report bad news, while time urgency was found only to exert an indirect influence on willingness to report bad news. One implication of our study is that when fault responsibility rests with an outside vendor, this can actually increase the probability that a client employee will report the bad news to his or her management, provided that the vendor is not able to hide the problem entirely from the client organization. With respect to time urgency, our results suggest that managers may be able to increase individuals' willingness to report by emphasizing that there is a narrow window of time to correct defects before a project is delivered and the impacts of defects start to be felt. Contributions and directions for future research are discussed.