Justin Jansen

Justin Jansen is associate professor of Strategic Management at the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University. He received his PhD Cum Laude from the Erasmus University in 2005. His research addresses leadership, organizational learning, ambidexterity, and corporate entrepreneurship and has appeared in the Academy of Management Journal, Journal of Business Venturing, Journal of Management Studies, Leadership Quarterly, Management Science and Organization Science. Moreover, his research has received several awards and recognitions such as the ERIM Top Article Award, ERIM Impact Award, ERIM Best Dissertation Award, and the SAP Best Paper Award. Justin Jansen is managing director of INSCOPE: Research for Innovation and editorial board member of the Journal of Management Studies.

Research interest:

  • Strategic Renewal and Ambidextrous Organizations
  • Organizational Learning and Absorptive Capacity
  • Strategic Management of Innovation
  • Corporate Entrepreneurship and New Venturing

Selected publications:

  • Jansen (2009), J.J.P., Tempelaar, M., Van den Bosch, F.A.J., & Volberda, H.W. Structural Differentiation and Organizational Ambidexterity: The Mediating Role of Integration Mechanisms. Organization Science . forthcoming
  • Jansen (2009), J.J.P., Vera, D., & Crossan, M.A. Strategic Leadership for Exploration and Exploitation: The Moderating Role of Environmental Dynamism. Leadership Quarterly . forthcoming.
  • Burgers (2009), H., Jansen, J.J.P., Van den Bosch, F.A.J., & Volberda, H.W. Structural Differentiation and Corporate Venturing: The Moderating Role of Formal and Informal Integration Mechanisms. Journal of Business Venturing forthcoming.
  • Jansen (2008), J.J.P., George, G., Van den Bosch, F.A.J., Volberda, H.W., Senior Team Attributes and Organizational Ambidexterity: The Role of Transformational Leadership. Journal of Management Studies. 45, 5: 982-1007
  • Wijk (2008), R.A.J., Jansen, J.J.P., & Lyles, M.A. Organizational Knowledge Transfer: A Meta-analytic Review and Assessment of its Antecedents and Consequences. Journal of Management Studies , 45, 4: 830-853
  • Jansen (2006), J.J.P., Van den Bosch, F.A.J., & Volberda, H.W. Exploratory Innovation, Exploitative Innovation, and Performance: Effects of Organizational Antecedents and Environmental Moderators. Management Science , 52: 1661-1674
  • Jansen (2005), J.J.P., Van den Bosch, F.A.J., & Volberda, H.W. Managing Potential and Realized Absorptive Capacity: How do Organizational Antecedents Matter? Academy of Management Journal , 48: 999-1015
  • Jansen (2005), J.J.P. Exploration and Exploitation in Technology Marketing: Building the Ambidextrous Organization. International Journal of Technology Marketing , 1: 5-6 (editorial)
  • Jansen (2005), J.J.P., Van den Bosch, F.A.J., & Volberda, H.W. Exploratory Innovation, Exploitative Innovation, and Ambidexterity: The Impact of Environmental and Organizational Antecedents. Schmalenbach Business Review , 57: 351-363

Books or contributions to books:

  • Jansen (2007), J.J.P. Combining Competence building and Leveraging: Managing Paradoxes in Ambidextrous Organizations. In: Sanchez, R. & Heene, A. (eds). Advances in Applied Business Strategy. forthcoming.
  • Volberda (2006), H.W., Van den Bosch, F.A.J., & Jansen, J.J.P. Slimmer Managen en Innovatiever Organiseren: In: Slimmer Managen en Innovatiever Organiseren, EIFFEL
  • Jansen (2005), J.J.P. Ambidextrous Organizations: A Multiple-level Study of Absorptive Capacity, Exploratory and Exploitative Innovation, and Performance. Unpublished dissertation, ERIM https://ep.eur.nl/handle/1765/6774

 

Works on:

  • Structural Differentiation and Ambidexterity
    28 January 2009, Article

    Prior studies have emphasized that structural attributes are crucial to simultaneously pursuing exploration and exploitation, yet our understanding of antecedents of ambidexterity is still limited. Structural differentation can help ambidextrous organizations to maintain multiple inconsistent and conflicting demands; however, differentiated exploratory and exploitative activities need to be mobilized, coordinated, integrated, and applied. Based on this idea, we delineate formal and informal senior team integration mechanisms (e.g. contingency rewards and social integration) and formal and informal organizational integration mechanisms (e.g. cross-functional interfaces and connectedness) and examine  how they mediate the relationship between structural differentiation and ambidexterity. Overall, our findings suggest that the previously asserted direct effect of structural differentation on ambidexterity operates through informal senior team (i.e., senior team social integration) and formal organizational (i.e., cross-functional interfaces) integration mechanisms. Through this richer explanation and empirical assessment, we contribute to a greater clarity and better understanding of how organizations may effectively pursue exploration and exploitation simultaneously to achieve ambidexterity.

  • Structural differentiation and corporate venturing
    9 April 2009, Article

    Research has suggested that corporate venturing is crucial to strategic renewal and firm performance, yet scholars still debate the appropiate organizational configurations to facilitate the creation of new business in existing organizations. Our study investigates the effectiveness of combining structural differentiation with formal and informal organizational as well as top management team integration mechanisms in establishing an appropiate context for venturing activities. Our findings suggest that structural differentiation has a positive effect on corporate venturing. In addition, our study indicates that a shared vision has a positive effect on venturing in a structurally differentiated context. Socially integrated senior teams and cross-functional interfaces, however, are ineffective integration mechanisms for establishing linkages across differentiated units and for successfully pursuing corportate venturing.

  • 'Meer rendement uit R&D'
    9 April 2009, Report

    In Nederland zijn ongeveer 1200 bedrijven actief binnen de Life Sciences en Medische Technologie. Het grootste gedeelte daarvan, ongeveer 700 bedrijven en organisaties, is actief binnen de biotechnologie, 157 bedrijven zijn actief binnen de farmaceutische industrie en ongeveer 380 bedrijven zijn actief binnen de medische technologie. Gezamenlijk heeft de Nederlandse Life Sciences en Medische Technologie een jaarlijkse omzet van meer dan 8 miljard euro. De afgelopen twee jaar heeft de sector een groeiversnelling doorgemaakt en een gemiddelde groei laten zien van ongeveer 12-14%.
    De kennisbasis op het gebied van Life Sciences en Medische Technologie is relatief hoog binnen Nederland. Universiteiten en onderzoeksinstellingen behoren tot de kopgroep binnen Europa. Ondanks deze goede uitgangspositie is de mate waarin deze hoogwaardige kennis wordt toegepast onder druk komen te staan. De Nederlandse Life Sciences en Medische Technologie zal meer moeten investeren in kennistoepassing om diverse ontwikkelingen binnen verscheidene technologische gebieden te kunnen integreren. De discrepantie tussen kennisontwikkeling enerzijds en kennistoepassing anderzijds ondermijnt dan ook het succes van de Nederlandse biotechnologie, faramaceutische industrie en medische technologie.