Organization Science 
Vol. 21, No. 3, May–June 2010, pp. 593–608 

  

---

Diether Gebert 
Department of Management, Korea University Business School, Anam-dong Seongbuk-Gu, Seoul 136-701, Republic of Korea 
Sabine Boerner 
Universität Konstanz, Lehrstuhl für Management, insb. Strategie und Führung, 78457 Konstanz, Germany 
Eric Kearney 
Jacobs University Bremen, Jacobs Center on Lifelong Learning and Institutional Development, 28725 Bremen, Germany 
http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1090.0485 



Abstract 

We develop a framework that provides a general theoretical rationale for the claim made by several authors that combining opposing action strategies fosters team innovation. We distinguish between open and closed strategies and posit that these are opposing but complementary in that each fosters one of two processes necessary for team innovation: open action strategies (e.g., delegative leadership) promote knowledge generation, and closed action strategies (e.g., directive leadership) enhance knowledge integration. We argue that each pole of a pair of opposing action strategies both energizes and detracts from elements of innovation. Thus, it could be expected that combining opposing action strategies leads to an impasse, as the negative effects of each strategy might offset the positive effects of the opposite strategy. There is currently no viable explanation in the literature for why this mutual neutralization may not occur. We aim to fill this gap by explicating why and how opposing action strategies, when implemented simultaneously, do not countervail each other's positive effects, but rather yield positive synergies that fuel team innovation. 

Keywords

opposing action strategies;
team innovation;
paradox;
equilibrium of forces