Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Study 3: Lessons from Tata: How Leadership Can Drive Disruptive Innovations

  • Chapter
Frugal Innovation in Healthcare

Part of the book series: India Studies in Business and Economics ((ISBE))

Abstract

The Tata Swach case study helps unravel the role a senior leader plays in commercializing disruptive innovations from within the boundaries of an established firm. While disruptive innovation literature talks about how CEOs and top leaders have played a critical role in helping the company respond to disruptive innovations successfully, it is relatively silent on exactly what role the leader assumes.

This chapter will take a deeper look into the process of development and commercialization of the Tata Swach. It will focus on the role played by the leadership in the innovation process. This longitudinal study will also lend a perspective to understanding ambidexterity over time. Structural ambidexterity is achieved by differentiating exploitation and exploration units, yet enabling cross-fertilization between them through integration mechanisms. However, few studies have looked at these mechanisms as they evolve over time. With this perspective, this study aims to deepen understanding by taking a process view of ambidexterity and exploring how mechanisms of differentiation and integration unfold over a period of time.

The first part of the chapter sets the theoretical foundation of leadership and ambidexterity. This is embedded in the classical innovation management literature of the individual roles in the innovation process. The next section, presents the gap in literature and the research question this chapter focuses on. The empirical section that follows presents the case study and gives an overview of the Tata Swach project and other projects at Tata. Subsequently, the analysis section presents the findings from the case study, followed by concluding remarks.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 89.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Using $1 = INR 46.78 exchange rates on 30th Dec 2009.

  2. 2.

    Using $1 = INR 46.78 exchange rates on 30th Dec 2009.

  3. 3.

    http://www.tata.com/htm/Group_Investor_GroupFinancials.htm; Accessed on 15.08.2014.

  4. 4.

    http://www.tata.com/pdf/Tata_fastfacts_final.pdf; Accessed on 15.08.2014.

  5. 5.

    www.tatachemicals.com/

References

  • Benner, M. J., & Tushman, M. L. (2003). Exploitation, exploration, and process management: The productivity dilemma revisited. Academy of Management Review, 28(2), 238–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boschi-Pinto, C., Velebit, L., & ShibuyaIII, K. (2008). Estimating child mortality due to diarrhoea in developing countries. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 86(9), 710–717.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brockhoff, K., Chakrabarti, A. K., & Hauschildt, J. (1999). The dynamics of innovation: Strategic and managerial implications. Berlin: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bureau. (2013a). India’s water purifier market likely to grow 229 % by 2017, says report. Food and Beverage News.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bureau. (2013b). Tata Swach serves 5 lakh litres of water to devotees at Mahakumbh. The Hindu.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chakrabarti, A. K. (1974). The role of champion in product innovation. California Management Review, XVII(2), 58–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chakrabarti, A. K., & Hauschildt, J. (1989). The division of labour in innovation management. R&D Management, 19(2), 161–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, C. M. (1997). The innovator’s dilemma: When new technologies cause great firms to fail. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, C. M., & Bower, J. L. (1996). Customer power, strategic investment, and the failure of leading firms. Strategic Management Journal, 17(3), 197–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, C. M., & Raynor, M. (2003). The innovator’s solution: Creating and sustaining successful growth. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, R. G., & Kleinschmidt, E. J. (1995). Benchmarking the firm’s critical success factors in new product development. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 12(5), 374–391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, R. G., & Kleinschmidt, E. J. (2007). Winning businesses in product development: The critical success factors. Research-Technology Management, 50(3), 52–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crabtree, J. (2012, March 30). Blighted benevolence. Financial Times.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danneels, E. (2006). Dialogue on the effects of disruptive technology on firms and industries. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 23(1), 2–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dougherty, D. (1994). The illegitimacy of successful product innovation in established firms. Organization Science, 5(2), 200–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ernst, H. (2002). Success factors of new product development: A review of the empirical literature. International Journal of Management Reviews, 4(1), 1–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ET-Bureau. (2013, Jul 31). Best Indian Brands 2013: List of top 30. The Economic Times.

    Google Scholar 

  • George, G., McGahan, A. M., & Prabhu, J. (2012). Innovation for inclusive growth: Towards a theoretical framework and a research agenda. Journal of Management Studies, 49(4), 661–683.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, C., & Birkenshaw, J. (2004). The antecedents, consequences and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. Academy of Management Journal, 47(2), 209–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Govindarajan, V., & Kopalle, P. K. (2006). Disruptiveness of innovations: Measurement and an assessment of reliability and validity. Strategic Management Journal, 27(2), 189–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, A. (2010). Too good to fail. Strategy and Business (58).

    Google Scholar 

  • Group, T. (2008, June 24). Tata Salt ranked No 3 most trusted brand by Brand Equity ET Survey 2008 f. Tata Group Media Releases.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, A. K., Smith, K. G., & Shalley, C. E. (2006). The interplay between exploration and exploitation. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4), 693–706.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halme, M., Lindeman, S., & Linna, P. (2012). Innovation for inclusive business: Intrapreneurial Bricolage in multinational corporations. Journal of Management Studies, 49(4), 743–784.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamel, G., & Prahalad, C. K. (1989, May–June). Strategic intent. Harvard Business Review, 63–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamel, G., & Prahalad, C. K. (1999). Competing for the future: Breakthrough strategies for seizing control of your industry and creating the markets of tomorrow. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, S., & Christensen, C. (2002, Fall). The great leap. MIT Sloan Managment Review.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haugh, H. M., & Talwar, A. (2010). How do corporations embed sustainability across the organization? Academy of Management Learning & Education, 9(3), 384–396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hauschildt, J., & Chakrabarti, A. (1989). Division of labour in innovation management. R&D Management, 19, 161–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hauschildt, J., & Kirchmann, E. (2001). Teamwork for innovation—The ‘troika’ of promotors. R&D Management, 31(1), 41–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howell, J. M., Shea, C. M., & Higgins, C. A. (2005). Champions of product innovations: defining, developing, and validating a measure of champion behavior. Journal of Business Venturing, 20(5), 641–661.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IIPS. (2007). National Family Health Survey (NFHS-3) (Vol 2). International Institute for Population Sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jansen, J. J. P., Tempelaar, M. P., Van den Bosch, F. A. J., & Volberda, H. W. (2009). Structural differentiation and ambidexterity: The mediating role of integration mechanisms. Organization Science, 20(4), 797–811.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johne, A., & Snelson, P. (1988). Auditing product innovation activities in manufacturing firms. R&D Management, 18(3), 227–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khanna, T., Palepu, K. G., & Bullock, R. J. (2008). House of Tata: Acquiring a global footprint. Harvard Business School Case Study.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leifer, R. (2000). Radical innovation: How mature companies can outsmart upstarts. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leonard-Barton, D. (1992). Core capabilities and core rigidities: A paradox in managing new product development. Strategic Management Journal, 13(S1), 111–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levinthal, D. A., & March, J. G. (1993). The myopia of learning. Strategic Management Journal, 14(2), 95–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lubatkin, M. H., Simsek, Z., Ling, Y., & Veiga, J. F. (2006). Ambidexterity and performance in small-to medium-sized firms: The pivotal role of top management team behavioral integration. Journal of Management, 32(5), 646–672.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macher, J. T., & Richman, B. D. (2004). Organisational responses to discontinuous innovation: A case study approach. International Journal of Innovation Management, 8(01), 87–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maidique, M. (1980). Entrepreneurs, champions, and technological innovation. Sloan Management Review, 21(2), 59–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Market-Pulse. (2013). Trends and opportunities in the water purifier market. Market Pulse.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mom, T. J. M., Van Den Bosch, F. A. J., & Volberda, H. W. (2009). Understanding variation in managers’ ambidexterity: Investigating direct and interaction effects of formal structural and personal coordination mechanisms. Organization Science, 20(4), 812–828.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Reilly, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2008). Ambidexterity as a dynamic capability: Resolving the innovator’s dilemma. Research in Organizational Behavior, 28, 185–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olsen, M., & Boxenbaum, E. (2009). Bottom-of-the-Pyramid: Organizational barriers to implementation. California Management Review, 51(4), 100–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pant, K. (2002). India assessment: Water Supply and Sanitation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prahalad, C. K. (2004). The fortune at the bottom of the pyramid: Eradicating poverty through profits. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Wharton School Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prahalad, C. K. (2006). The innovation Sandbox. Strategy & Business, 44, 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raisch, S., Birkinshaw, J., Probst, G., & Tushman, M. L. (2009). Organizational ambidexterity: Balancing exploitation and exploration for sustained performance. Organization Science, 20(4), 685–695.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reddy, A. A. (2004). Consumption pattern, trade and production potential of pulses. Economic and Political Weekly, 39(44), 4854–4860.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rhoades, R. G., Roberts, E. B., & Fusfeld, A. R. (1978). A correlation of R&D laboratory performance with critical functions analysis. R&D Management, 9(1), 13–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, E. B., & Fusfeld, A. R. (1980). Critical functions: Needed roles in the innovation process. Working Paper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, E. (2003). Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rost, K., Hölzle, K., & Gemünden, H. G. (2007). Promotors or champions? Pros and Cons of role specialisation for economic process. Schmalenbach Business Review, 59, 340–363.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothwell, R., Freeman, C., Horlsey, A., Jervis, V. T. P., Robertson, A. B., & Townsend, J. (1974). SAPPHO updated-project SAPPHO phase II. Research Policy, 3(3), 258–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowe, W. G., & Guerrero, L. (2012). Cases in leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sally, M. (2012, January 25). Branded pulses being launched by Adani Wilmar, Lakshmi Energy Foods. The Economic Times.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schon, D. A. (1963). Champions for radical new inventions. Harvard Business Review, 41(2), 77–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shiferaw, B., Reddy, V. R., & Wani, S. P. (2008). Watershed externalities, shifting cropping patterns and groundwater depletion in Indian semi-arid villages: The effect of alternative water pricing policies. Ecological Economics, 67(2), 327–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siggelkow, N., & Rivkin, J. W. (2006). When exploration backfires: Unintended consequences of multilevel organizational search. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4), 779–795.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, D. J. (2007). The politics of innovation: Why innovations need a godfather. Technovation, 27(3), 95–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, W. K., & Tushman, M. L. (2005). Managing strategic contradictions: A top management model for managing innovation streams. Organization Science, 16(5), 522–536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Srikanth, R. (2009). Challenges of sustainable water quality management in rural India. Current Science, 97(3), 317–325.

    Google Scholar 

  • TCL. (2009). Tata Chemicals launches ‘Tata Swach. Tata Chemicals Media Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • TCL. (2013). Tata Swach to connect with people on safe drinking water at Pandharpur Varkari Mela. Tata Chemicals Media Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tripsas, M., & Gavetti, G. (2000). Capabilities, cognition, and inertia: Evidence from digital imaging. Strategic Management Journal, 21(10–11), 1147–1161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tushman, M. L., & Anderson, P. (1986). Technological discontinuities and organizational environments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 31(3), 439–465.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tushman, M. L., Smith, W. K., & Binns, A. (2011). The ambidextrous CEO. Harvard Buisness Review, 89(6), 74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van de Ven, A. H. (1986). Central problems in the management of innovation. Management Science, 32(5), 590–607.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westerman, G., McFarlan, F. W., & Iansiti, M. (2006). Organization design and effectiveness over the innovation life cycle. Organization Science, 17(2), 230–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Witte, E. (1973). Organisation für Innovationsentscheidungen—Das Promotorenmodell. Göttingen: Schwart.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Hamburg University of Technology, Hamburg, Germany

    Aditi Ramdorai & Cornelius Herstatt

Authors
  1. Aditi Ramdorai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Cornelius Herstatt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Ramdorai, A., Herstatt, C. (2015). Study 3: Lessons from Tata: How Leadership Can Drive Disruptive Innovations. In: Frugal Innovation in Healthcare. India Studies in Business and Economics. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16336-9_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation