Search results

This study aims to explore the cross-level effect of the top management team (TMT) on group ambidextrous innovation and to analyze the mediating role of group behavioral integration and the moderating effect of group expertise heterogeneity.

We conducted a multi-source and multi-stage survey. We collected valid data from 43 companies in China, resulting in 141 samples from 43 TMTs and 462 valid responses from 111 organizational groups. The proposed theoretical model and hypotheses were tested using structural equation modeling.

The study findings demonstrated that TMT behavioral integration was positively related to group behavioral integration. Group behavioral integration mediates the relationship between TMT behavioral integration and these two types of innovations. Furthermore, we found that group expertise heterogeneity magnified the positive effect of group behavioral integration on exploratory innovation.

This study reveals the cross-level effects of TMT behavioral integration on other organizational groups and enriches the existing literature on TMT behavioral integration and ambidextrous innovation.

This study proposes low-carbon technology (LCT) solutions from the perspective of incremental cost-effectiveness and public satisfaction based on calculating carbon emissions and economic costs.

According to the citation frequency, 11 indicators of low-carbon neighborhood (LCN) were selected so as to construct the low-carbon renewal potential evaluation model. Five neighborhoods were selected to evaluate low-carbon renewal potential based on the driving-pressure-state-impact-response (DPSIR). Moreover, the neighborhoods with the highest renewal potential were selected for further analysis. Then, the feasibility decision was carried out among seven typical LCTs based on the value engineering (VE) method. Finally, the TOPSIS method was applied to calculate the public satisfaction and demand so as to get the priorities of these LCTs. Through comprehensive analysis, the final LCT solutions could be carried out.

Our practice proves that the evaluation model combined with the decision-making methods can provide scientific decision-making support for the LCT solutions. Some LCTs perform consistently across different neighborhoods by comparing VE results and TOPSIS rankings. The solar photovoltaic (PV) (T3) has high value and significant attention which gives it a top priority for development, while the energy-efficient windows and doors (T2) have relatively low value.

There is a lack of research that considers the economic cost, low-carbon efficiency and public satisfaction when proposing LCT solutions for neighborhood renewal projects. Faced with the problem, we practice the decision-making from two dimensions, that is, the “feasibility decision with VE” and the “priorities decision with TOPSIS.” In this way, a balance between incremental cost-effectiveness and public satisfaction is achieved, and LCT solutions are proposed.