Generate QR code
Open Access
Subscription Access
Achieving technological sovereignty through unrelated diversification of state corporations: The case of Rosatom
https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2025-3-76-96
Abstract
As companies evolve, they face the need to continuously search for new resources to create innovation — the basis for long-term competitiveness. Potential opportunities tend to lie in areas that are difficult to navigate, with high levels of ambiguity and risk. Navigating through them requires a complex cognitive quest — establishing organizational ambidexterity, which means combining two strategic actions that are difficult to combine. In addition to ensuring sustained efficiency in current operational processes, there is a need for constant exploration of valuable assets in unfamiliar dimensions. This becomes particularly relevant in a changing geopolitical context in which countries are faced with the “closure” or transformation of established resource spaces. Technological selfsufficiency acquires the status of a key priority in national strategies. The article explores the topic of building up in-country technological potential for gaining the corresponding self-sufficiency, reveals the picture of emerging cooperative configurations. It analyzes the essence of the most suitable for these purposes business model — unrelated diversification and its key tool — organizational ambidexterity. A review of initiatives of different countries and companies using these mechanisms in an effort to achieve technological leadership in the new environment is given. Special attention is paid to the analysis of the achievements of the Russian state corporation “Rosatom” in the implementation of the unrelated diversification model from the point of view of its contribution to increasing the technological sovereignty of the country.
About the Author
A. B. Antipov
HSE University; ZAES Russian Production Association
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Moscow
References
1. Faikov D. Y., Baydarov D. Y. (2020). Assessment of opportunities and prospects for diversifying the activities of state corporations in the framework of modern organizational and technological trends (in the case of the nuclear industry). MIR (Modernization. Innovation. Research), Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 179—195. (In Russian). https://doi.org/ 10.18184/2079-4665.2020.11.2.179-195
2. Andreasson M., Karabag S. F., Simonsson J., Agarwal G. (2024). Dynamics of related and unrelated digital diversification in established firms: Strategies, programs, process, and outcomes. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 202, article 123300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2024.123300
3. Andriopoulos C., Lewis M. W. (2009). Exploitation-exploration tensions and organizational ambidexterity: Managing paradoxes of innovation. Organization Science, Vol. 20, No. 4, pp. 696—717. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1080.0406
4. Arthur W. B. (2007). The structure of invention. Research Policy, Vol. 36, No. 2, pp. 274—287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2006.11.005
5. Bianconi G., Richard K., Darst R. K., Iacovacci J., Fortunato S. (2014). Triadic closure as a basic generating mechanism of communities in complex networks. Physical Review, Vol. 90, No. 4, article 042806. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.90.042806
6. Binz C., Anadon L. D. (2018). Unrelated diversification in latecomer contexts: Emergence of the Chinese solar photovoltaics industry. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, Vol. 28, pp. 14—34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist. 2018.03.005
7. Boschma R., Minondo A., Navarro M. (2013). The emergence of new industries at the regional level in Spain: A proximity approach based on product relatedness. Economic Geography, Vol. 89, No. 1, pp. 77—96. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944- 8287.2012.01170.x
8. Caliari T., Ribeiro L.C., Pietrobelli C., Vezzani A. (2023). Global value chains and sectoral innovation systems: An analysis of the aerospace industry. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Vol. 65, pp. 36—48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strueco.2023.02.004
9. Ceipek R., Hautz J., De Massis A., Matzler K., Ardito L. (2021). Digital transformation through exploratory and exploitative internet of things innovations: The impact of family management and technological diversification. Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 38, No. 1, pp. 142—165. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12551
10. Chen Y. (2017). Dynamic ambidexterity: How innovators manage exploration and exploitation. Business Horizons, Vol. 60, No. 3, pp. 385—394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2017.01.001
11. Christensen C. M., Alton R., Rising C., Waldeck A. (2011). The new M&A playbook. Harvard Business Review, Vol. 89, No. 3, pp. 48—57.
12. Crespi F., Caravella S., Menghini M., Salvatori C. (2021). European technological sovereignty: An emerging framework for policy strategy. Intereconomics, Vol. 56, No. 6, pp. 348—354. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10272-021-1013-6
13. De Lucio J., Díaz-Mora C., Mínguez R., Minondo A., Requena F. (2023). Do firms react to supply chain disruptions? Economic Analysis and Policy, Vol. 79, pp. 902—916. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eap.2023.07.004
14. Doz Y. (2011). Qualitative research for international business. Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 42, No. 5, pp. 582—590. https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2011.18
15. Eisenhardt K. M., Martin J. A. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: What are they? Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 21, No. 10—11, pp. 1105—1121. https://doi.org/ 10.1002/1097-0266(200010/11)21:10/11%3C1105::AID-SMJ133%3E3.0.CO;2-E
16. Draghi M. (2024). The future of European competitiveness. Brussels: European Commission.
17. Fischer B., Meissner D., Boschma R., Vonortas N. (2024). Global value chains and regional systems of innovation: Towards a critical juncture? Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 201, article 123245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore. 2024.123245
18. Frenken K., Van Oort F., Verburg T. (2007). Related variety, unrelated variety and regional economic growth. Regional Studies, Vol. 41, pp. 685—697. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/00343400601120296
19. Fritsch S. (2011). Technology and global affairs. International Studies Perspectives, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 27—45. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1528-3585.2010.00417.x
20. Fuest C., Gros D., Mengel P. L., Presidente G., Tirole J. (2024). EU innovation policy: How to escape the middle technology trap. EconPol Policy Report, April.
21. Garg S., Sushil S. (2022). Impact of de-globalization on development: Comparative analysis of an emerging market (India) and a developed country (USA). Journal of Policy Modeling, Vol. 44, No. 6, pp. 1179—1197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpolmod.2022.10.004
22. Gershman M., Bredikhin S., Vishnevskiy K. (2016). The role of corporate foresight and technology roadmapping in companies’ innovation development: The case of Russian state-owned enterprises. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 110, pp. 187—195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2015.11.018
23. Gopinath G., Gourinchas P. O., Presbitero A., Topalova P. B. (2024). Changing global linkages: A new cold war? IMF Working Paper, No. 2024/076. https://doi.org/ 10.5089/9798400272745.001
24. Hausmann R., Hidalgo C. A. (2011). The network structure of economic output. Journal of Economic Growth, Vol. 16, pp. 309—342. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10887-011-9071-4
25. He Z. L., Wong P. K. (2004). Exploration vs. exploitation: An empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis. Organization Science, Vol. 15, No. 4, pp. 481—494. https:// doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1040.0078
26. Irwin K., Gilstrap C., Drnevich P., Sunny M. (2022). The acquisition of capabilities: How firms use dynamic and ordinary capabilities to manage uncertainty. Journal of Management & Organization, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp. 564—586. https:// doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2022.23
27. Kim J., Lee C. Y., Cho Y. (2016). Technological diversification, core-technology competence, and firm growth. Research Policy, Vol. 45, No. 1, pp. 113—124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2015.07.005
28. Lambert L. A., Tayah J., Lee-Schmid C., Abdalla M., Abdallah I., Ali A. H., Ahmed W. (2022). The EU’s natural gas Cold War and diversification challenges. Energy Strategy Reviews, Vol. 43, article 100934. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esr.2022.100934
29. Lavie D., Stettner U., Tushman M. L. (2010). Exploration and exploitation within and across organizations. Academy of Management Annals, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 109—155. https://doi.org/10.1080/19416521003691287
30. Lee K., Qu D., Mao Z. (2021). Global value chains, industrial policy, and industrial upgrading: Automotive sectors in Malaysia, Thailand, and China in comparison with Korea. European Journal of Development Research, Vol. 33, pp. 275—303. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41287-020-00354-0
31. Lin H. E., Hsu I. C., Hsu A. W., Chung H. M. (2020a). Creating competitive advantages: Interactions between ambidextrous diversification strategy and contextual factors from a dynamic capability perspective. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 154, article 119952. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.119952
32. Lin K. J., Lu X., Zhang J., Zheng Y. (2020b). State-owned enterprises in China: A review of 40 years of research and practice. China Journal of Accounting Research, Vol. 13, No. 1, pp. 31—55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjar.2019.12.001
33. Ljubownikow G., Ang S.H. (2020). Competition, diversification and performance. Journal of Business Research, Vol. 112, pp. 81—94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.03.002
34. March C., Schieferdecker I. (2023). Technological sovereignty as ability, not autarky. International Studies Review, Vol. 25, No. 2, article viad012. https://doi.org/10.1093/isr/viad012
35. March J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 71—87. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2.1.71
36. Meyer C. B. (2001). A case in case study methodology. Field Methods, Vol. 13, No. 4, pp. 329—352. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X0101300402
37. Morris T., Wood S. (1991). Testing the survey method: Continuity and change in British industrial relations. Work, Employment and Society, Vol. 5, No. 2, pp. 259—282. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017091005002007
38. O’Reilly C. A., Tushman M. L. (2011). Organizational ambidexterity in action: How managers explore and exploit. California Management Review, Vol. 53, No. 4, pp. 5—22. https://doi.org/10.1525/cmr.2011.53.4.5
39. Park S. A. (2023). Shifted paradigm in technonationalism in the 21st century: The influence of global value chain (GVC) and US—China competition on international politics and global commerce — A case study of Japan’s semiconductor industry. Asia and the Global Economy, Vol. 3, No. 2, article 100063. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aglobe.2023.100063
40. Pidun U., Reeves M., Schüssler M. (2020). Why do most business ecosystems fail? Boston, MA: Boston Consulting Group. Piekkari R., Plakoyiannaki E., Welch C. (2010). “Good” case research in industrial marketing: Insights from research practice. Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 39, No. 1, pp. 109—117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2008.04.017
41. Pinheiro F.L., Hartmann D., Boschma R., Hidalgo C.A. (2022). The time and frequency of unrelated diversification. Research Policy, Vol. 51, No. 8, article 104323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2021.104323
42. Pohle J. (2020). Digital sovereignty. A new key concept of digital policy in Germany and Europe. Berlin: Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung.
43. Rahman M. F. B. A. (2020). The intersection of emergent technologies and geopolitics. RSIS Working Paper, No. 327-20. Singapore: Nanyang Technological University.
44. Rosing K., Frese M., Bausch A. (2011). Explaining the heterogeneity of the leadership— innovation relationship: Ambidextrous leadership. Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 22, No. 5, pp. 956—974. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.07.014
45. Saviotti P. P., Frenken K. (2008). Export variety and the economic performance of countries. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Vol. 18, pp. 201—218. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00191-007-0081-5
46. Sharma A., Adhikary A., Borah S. B. (2020). Covid-19’s impact on supply chain decisions: Strategic insights from NASDAQ 100 firms using Twitter data. Journal of Business Research, Vol. 117, pp. 443—449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.05.035
47. Teece D. J., Pisano G., Shuen A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 18, No. 7, pp. 509—533. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199708)18:73.0.CO;2-Z
Supplementary files
Review
For citations:
Antipov A.B. Achieving technological sovereignty through unrelated diversification of state corporations: The case of Rosatom. Voprosy Ekonomiki. 2025;(3):76-96. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2025-3-76-96
Views:
356
Email this article 
