Abstract
The purpose of this article is to suggest whether an ambidextrous organization can be created from the bottom up. This is achieved by incorporating studies on contextual ambidexterity and capacity building for individuals and organizations. The conceptualization of a capacity construction for innovation structure indicates how to maintain the equilibrium among both exploration and exploitation.This research is conceptual backed by interviews in the railway sector of Ghana, focusing on the connections between the two theoretical views, the benefits of the suggested structure for innovation and capacity building for management.The Innovation and Leadership Capacity Building Framework discusses the impact of ambidexterity on the rail sector, both positive and negative, and the interactions required, such as feedback between the management team and employees, so that they can build an ambidextrous working culture in the sector together. A culture where the individual worker is accountable for changing between exploration and exploitation operations and in which the leadership team empowers staff to be there. This research is focused on contextual ambidexterity and when to implement contextual ambidexterity as a manner of working in Ghana's rail industry. The originality resides in the suggested structure and can be enforced in the industry in the devoted focus on “how”. Keywords: Exploration-exploitation, Leadership, Organizational learning, Contextual Ambidexterity, Capacity Building, Railway Sector, Ghana DOI : 10.7176/EJBM/11-30-05 Publication date :October 31 st 2019
Highlights
By adding a perspective for capacity building into the ambidexterity literature and through the research of organizational learning, this paper provides a dual understanding of how to develop the top management team into the organization’s capacity to promote the ambidexterity context whilst inspiring individual workers simultaneously and building their capacity to process both exploratory and exploitative learning what to do (Brix 2019)
3.0 Discussion and Implications The main reason for incorporating capacity-building literature with contextual ambidexterity literature has been one of untapped interdependence: little is understood about the real procedures of generating an ambidextrous organizational culture in contextual ambidexterity literature (Wang and Rafiq 2014); (Havermans, Den Hartog et al 2015), the ambidexterity context has not been explored in person and organisational capacity building (Farazmand 2004); (Krogstrup and Brix 2019)
5.0 Conclusion This research allowed us to identify the emergent process of attaining and maintaining a contextual versatile institution with the reinterpretation of the framework for capacity building innovation. This conceptualization brings fresh theoretical perspectives to the contextual ambidexterity studies, that is hardly acknowledged in literature on institutional learning (De Clercq, Thongpapanl et al 2013); (Wang and Rafiq 2014); (Havermans, Den Hartog et al 2015)
Summary
A central concern in the study of leadership processes is to develop capabilities for being efficient as well as responsive to new changes in the environment. These processes cover three activities: Technical growth, development of systems and organization strengthening. As stated by (Choi and Chandler 2015) changes in public action can be considered if the following evidences are observed: the change in policy objectives; the modification in the tools used to make public action effective; and the modification in the institutional framework that guides development which is focused on public achievement These companies are mostly referred to as “ambidextrous”, studies reveal that, both public and private companies can identify and maintain this delicate balance (Uotila, Maula et al 2009)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
