Article Preview
Top1. Introduction
One of the changes that must be addressed by organization nowadays is technological advances which may affect employee performance. The resources owned by companies such as capital, methods, and machines could not provide optimum results if not supported by workforce that have optimum performance. In this century, the digital workforce dominate the structure body of organization. We termed the digital workforce as a generation who grow in the ease of access to digital information and even has been used as one of the primary needs. According to Prensky (2001), there is two types of human relationship to technology which are digital native and digital immigrant. Digital native is persons (especially children and teenagers), which since its inception has been exposed with incessant technological developments, such as the development of computers, the internet, animation and so on associated with the technology. While digital immigrant is people (especially old) who during their lives of children and teenagers took place before the development of the computer. Digital native and digital immigrant can have a digital fluency competency that should be used to manipulate the data, creatively represent information, solve problems, and design new products or change ways of working (Colbert & Yee, 2016).
Digital fluency is expected has an impact on the employees' ability to compete and collaborate within the digital workforce. The digital workforce has developed a lot of competence in the course of their interactions with technology, they may feel comfortable with the technology-based instruction (Kraiger & Ford, 2006), provide low-cost solutions and can be replicated to help employees develop the skills they need. In addition to bringing a high level of digital fluency to the workplace, workers can respond with good digital motivational strategies similar to those used in the virtual world.
Rapid changes in external environment such as new technologies and the growing number of competitors in the world economy, causing the short product life cycle and rising tensions between exploration and exploitation (Malhotra & Hinings, 2015). Due to the rapid changes in the external environment, organizations face difficulties with long-term survival. Solis-Molina, Hernández-Espallardo, and Rodríguez-Orejuela (2018), argued that the organization has its ambidexterity. Much of the research on organizational ambidexterity showed that organizations that managed to create a balance between exploration and exploitation are performed better in the short and long term. Organizations that successfully combine both activities can be called as “ambidextrous organizational” (Benschop, Leenders, Doorewaard, & Brink, 2013). In fact, a combination of both activities resulting in a struggle organizational ambidexterity (Reyt & Wiesenfeld, 2015). The reason is that both of those capabilities need more scarce resources. Hence, some times employees have to make a choice between the two. However, Patel, Messersmith, and Lepak (2013) show that ambidexterity is not only achieved at the organizational level but can also at the individual level. Factors that affect ambidexterity at an individual level provides insights and new methods on how to develop ambidexterity into the organization. In this way, they are expected to adapt to the changing environment and technology will be more successful in the short and long term period. Organizational ambidexterity is a concept that is applied at the organizational level, however, this concept needs to be lowered to an individual level which can be termed as individual dexterity.