Innovative SMEs in search of ambidexterity: a challenge for HRM!

Abstract

PurposeInnovative small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are key economic actors, but they are fragile. Their innovation trajectory requires an evolution in their competencies as their strategy evolves, and this is a particularly critical concern when they are engaged in both exploration and exploitation activities and want to develop organisational ambidexterity. In turn, this brings challenges for human resource management (HRM): some research studies have identified “mobilising” practices for innovation, but few authors have taken a dynamic approach. This study aims to fill this double-theoretical gap by answering the following two questions: how does HRM respond to the challenges associated with the search for ambidexterity in an innovative SME's trajectory? What HRM practices are mobilised in the innovation trajectory of SMEs?Design/methodology/approachThe authors carried out two longitudinal case studies concerning innovative SMEs in the medical equipment sector, which are now over 10 years old and seeking to stabilise an ambidextrous way of operating. The authors conducted 37 semi-structured interviews in 2018–2019 and collected public and internal documents. For each case, the authors identified sequences (Bidart et al., 2013) displaying a certain homogeneity in terms of innovation strategy. The authors then performed a cross-case analysis.FindingsThese case studies produced two main results. First, the trajectory of innovative SMEs consisted of sequences during which competency needs and HRM practices evolved. Despite their similar modes of ambidexterity, the two SMEs have mobilised different human resource (HR) practices. Second, the HRM practices implemented struggle to support the firm at key turning points in the innovation trajectories and can even hinder such changes in direction.Originality/valueThe originality of this work lies in two major dimensions. First, the authors choose to explore innovation and the search for ambidexterity, two themes that are traditionally studied in large firms, in the setting of SMEs. Second, the authors choose a longitudinal method to explore the evolution over time in modes of ambidexterity and HRM, along these SMEs' innovation trajectory. This is a departure from more traditional approaches seeking to identify which HR practices, or configurations of practices, are best able to foster ambidexterity and innovation. It leads the authors to show, in a contingent, dynamic perspective, the importance of the Human Resources Foundation’s (HRF's) positioning and attitude in supporting diversified SMEs’ innovation trajectories. This requires allocation of the necessary resources to the function, which needs time and resources to reflect on how to build the ambidextrous HRM that is essential for the firm's survival.

Diagnosing of human resource performance management based on lack of ambidextrous learning themes: a case study of public Iranian banking system

“…In learning organization, a distinction can be made between invention phases focusing on creation of scientific knowledge, a phase focusing more on taking that knowledge to the market and an industrialization phase in which the firms set up standardized production (Rossi et al , 2020). But to survive as innovative firms, organizations must be able to construct organizational ambidexterity or the capacity to exploit existing competencies as well as exploring new opportunities with equal dexterity (Buisson et al , 2021). Also, ambidextrous organizations excel at exploiting existing products to enable incremental innovation and at exploring new opportunities to foster more radical innovation (Reese, 2020).…”

Ambidexterity as the Response of Smart Industry 4.0 – Towards Better HR Practices

“…Furthermore, HRM practices should extend their traditional services with add-ons for supporting the flexible explorative working style. In a nutshell, several HR practices are highlighted to stress the necessity for HRM adaptations due to digital transformation (Buisson, Gastaldi, Geffroy, Lonceint, & Krohmer, 2021;Seeck & Diehl, 2017;Shipton, Sparrow, Budhwar, & Brown, 2017). This research field is developing right now, so our discussion is more an outlook rather than a complete summary.…”

“…In addition, HRM professionals should be endowed with a specific attitude and mindset that will allow them to boldly depart from typical traditional approaches or even remain inculcated in one approach. Therefore, preparation and the right frame of mind is required (Buisson et al, 2021). Moreover, an HRM system in an ambidextrous environment implies additional complexity, and with complexity come more uncertainties to deal with.…”

“…Many scholars have examined various challenges of human resources management regarding organizational ambidexterity, including leadership (Cunha, Fortes, Gomes, Rego, & Rodrigues, 2019;Jansen et al, 2009;Nemanich & Vera, 2009), top management characteristics (Lubatkin, Simsek, Ling, & Veiga, 2006;Simsek, 2009;Smith & Tushman, 2005;Venugopal, Krishnan, Kumar, & Upadhyayula, 2019), employee motivation (Ahammad, Glaister, & Junni, 2019) and organizational culture (Wang & Rafiq, 2014). In a situation of ambidexterity, companies need to successfully combine different activities over time and space, and this brings enormous challenges for HRM, particularly in the matters of competency management (Buisson et al, 2021). Following Pfeifer's (Pfeiffer, 2017) argumentation, there is a global work reorganization for new capabilities of the workforces, either upskilling or downsizing employees, depending on the specific job families.…”

Guest editorial

“…In the first of the articles on the sub-theme of the challenge of using HRM as a lever of innovation in SME, Buisson et al (2021) highlight the key role of HRM within two innovative SMEs that wish to become ambidextrous organisations. The results suggest that even if ambidexterity is similar in both firms studied throughout the innovation trajectory, the needs for competencies and HRM practices evolve differently between SMEs.…”