IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wsi/ijitmx/v16y2019i05ns0219877019500329.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Pathways for Balancing Exploration and Exploitation in Innovations: A Review and Expansion of Ambidexterity Theory

Author

Listed:
  • Yasser Alizadeh

    (Department of Engineering and Technology Management, Portland State University, Portland OR 97207-0751, USA)

  • Antonie J. Jetter

    (Department of Engineering and Technology Management, Portland State University, Portland OR 97207-0751, USA)

Abstract

Organizational research describes the inherent tension between innovation, as a means to adapt to environmental change, and continuing to do what one does well and what current customers appreciate. Managing this tension successfully leads to so-called ambidexterity. How to achieve it is still a matter of debate: proponents of structural approaches recommend a separation of exploration and exploitation, while proponents of so-called contextual ambidexterity suggest that contextual factors such as culture and process are equal if not more critical in leading the organization to ambidexterity. Based on the findings of empirical ambidexterity research, many more factors are suggested, though they are rarely researched in an ambidexterity context nor are the interdependencies between the factors and the known ambidexterity strategies described. To guide future research, this paper develops an expanded and system-focused framework for achieving ambidexterity. It is used to review and integrate findings from organizational theory and neighboring disciplines, including project management theories, knowledge management theories, human resource management theories, and open and distributed innovation theories. Managerial implications are discussed and illustrated with a case example. The resulting work provides the basis for explicitly modeling the drivers and inhibitors of exploration and exploitation and their interdependencies. In future research, this can be used to better understand and overcome conflicting objectives, devise new approaches for achieving ambidexterity, and ultimately design more successful organizations.

Suggested Citation

  • Yasser Alizadeh & Antonie J. Jetter, 2019. "Pathways for Balancing Exploration and Exploitation in Innovations: A Review and Expansion of Ambidexterity Theory," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(05), pages 1-33, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:wsi:ijitmx:v:16:y:2019:i:05:n:s0219877019500329
    DOI: 10.1142/S0219877019500329
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S0219877019500329
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1142/S0219877019500329?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eric von Hippel, 1986. "Lead Users: A Source of Novel Product Concepts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(7), pages 791-805, July.
    2. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    3. Wang, Chao-Hung & Hsu, Li-Chang, 2014. "Building exploration and exploitation in the high-tech industry: The role of relationship learning," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 331-340.
    4. Abebe, Michael A. & Angriawan, Arifin, 2014. "Organizational and competitive influences of exploration and exploitation activities in small firms," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(3), pages 339-345.
    5. Tom J. M. Mom & Frans A. J. Van Den Bosch & Henk W. Volberda, 2007. "Investigating Managers' Exploration and Exploitation Activities: The Influence of Top‐Down, Bottom‐Up, and Horizontal Knowledge Inflows," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(6), pages 910-931, September.
    6. Miron-Spektor, Ella & Beenen, Gerard, 2015. "Motivating creativity: The effects of sequential and simultaneous learning and performance achievement goals on product novelty and usefulness," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 53-65.
    7. Ikujiro Nonaka, 1994. "A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(1), pages 14-37, February.
    8. Samer Faraj & Yan Xiao, 2006. "Coordination in Fast-Response Organizations," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(8), pages 1155-1169, August.
    9. Justin J. P. Jansen & Frans A. J. Van Den Bosch & Henk W. Volberda, 2006. "Exploratory Innovation, Exploitative Innovation, and Performance: Effects of Organizational Antecedents and Environmental Moderators," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(11), pages 1661-1674, November.
    10. Erden, Zeynep & Klang, David & Sydler, Renato & von Krogh, Georg, 2014. "Knowledge-flows and firm performance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 2777-2785.
    11. Chang, Yi-Ying & Hughes, Mathew, 2012. "Drivers of innovation ambidexterity in small- to medium-sized firms," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 1-17.
    12. Justin J. P. Jansen & Michiel P. Tempelaar & Frans A. J. van den Bosch & Henk W. Volberda, 2009. "Structural Differentiation and Ambidexterity: The Mediating Role of Integration Mechanisms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 797-811, August.
    13. Zi-Lin He & Poh-Kam Wong, 2004. "Exploration vs. Exploitation: An Empirical Test of the Ambidexterity Hypothesis," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 481-494, August.
    14. Karim R. Lakhani & Jill A. Panetta, 2007. "The Principles of Distributed Innovation," Innovations: Technology, Governance, Globalization, MIT Press, vol. 2(3), pages 97-112, July.
    15. Ernø-kjølhede, Erik, 2000. "Project Management Theory and the Management of Research Projects," Working Papers 3/2000, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Management, Politics & Philosophy.
    16. Paul S. Adler & Barbara Goldoftas & David I. Levine, 1999. "Flexibility Versus Efficiency? A Case Study of Model Changeovers in the Toyota Production System," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(1), pages 43-68, February.
    17. O'Reilly, Charles A., III & Tushman, Michael L., 2013. "Organizational Ambidexterity: Past, Present and Future," Research Papers 2130, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    18. Will Mitchell & Kulwant Singh, 1993. "Death of the Lethargic: Effects of Expansion into New Technical Subfields on Performance in a Firm's Base Business," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 4(2), pages 152-180, May.
    19. Daniel A. Levinthal & James G. March, 1993. "The myopia of learning," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(S2), pages 95-112, December.
    20. Jongseok Lee & Jeho Lee & Habin Lee, 2003. "Exploration and Exploitation in the Presence of Network Externalities," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(4), pages 553-570, April.
    21. Auh, Seigyoung & Menguc, Bulent, 2005. "Balancing exploration and exploitation: The moderating role of competitive intensity," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 58(12), pages 1652-1661, December.
    22. Tammy L. Madsen & Elaine Mosakowski & Srilata Zaheer, 2003. "Knowledge Retention and Personnel Mobility: The Nondisruptive Effects of Inflows of Experience," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(2), pages 173-191, April.
    23. Wendy K. Smith & Michael L. Tushman, 2005. "Managing Strategic Contradictions: A Top Management Model for Managing Innovation Streams," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(5), pages 522-536, October.
    24. Georg von Krogh & Ikujiro Nonaka & Lise Rechsteiner, 2012. "Leadership in Organizational Knowledge Creation: A Review and Framework," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(1), pages 240-277, January.
    25. Remer, Donald S. & Nieto, Armando P., 1995. "A compendium and comparison of 25 project evaluation techniques. Part 2: Ratio, payback, and accounting methods," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 101-129, December.
    26. Cooper, Robert G., 1990. "Stage-gate systems: A new tool for managing new products," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 44-54.
    27. Robert M. Grant, 1996. "Prospering in Dynamically-Competitive Environments: Organizational Capability as Knowledge Integration," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(4), pages 375-387, August.
    28. Michael T. Pich & Christoph H. Loch & Arnoud De Meyer, 2002. "On Uncertainty, Ambiguity, and Complexity in Project Management," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(8), pages 1008-1023, August.
    29. Michael Lubatkin & Zeki Simsek & Yan Ling & John F. Veiga, 2006. "Ambidexterity and Performance in Small-to Medium-Sized Firms : The Pivotal Role of Top Management Team Behavioral Integration," Post-Print hal-02311781, HAL.
    30. Constantine Andriopoulos & Marianne W. Lewis, 2009. "Exploitation-Exploration Tensions and Organizational Ambidexterity: Managing Paradoxes of Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 696-717, August.
    31. Dirk Clercq & Narongsak Thongpapanl & Dimo Dimov, 2014. "Contextual ambidexterity in SMEs: the roles of internal and external rivalry," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 42(1), pages 191-205, January.
    32. Remer, Donald S. & Nieto, Armando P., 1995. "A compendium and comparison of 25 project evaluation techniques. Part 1: Net present value and rate of return methods," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 79-96, November.
    33. Mikael Holmqvist, 2004. "Experiential Learning Processes of Exploitation and Exploration Within and Between Organizations: An Empirical Study of Product Development," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(1), pages 70-81, February.
    34. Tamayo-Torres, Javier & Gutierrez-Gutierrez, Leopoldo & Ruiz-Moreno, Antonia, 2014. "The relationship between exploration and exploitation strategies, manufacturing flexibility and organizational learning: An empirical comparison between Non-ISO and ISO certified firms," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 232(1), pages 72-86.
    35. Yamakawa, Yasuhiro & Yang, Haibin & Lin, Zhiang (John), 2011. "Exploration versus exploitation in alliance portfolio: Performance implications of organizational, strategic, and environmental fit," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 287-296, March.
    36. Tom Cottrell & Barrie R. Nault, 2004. "Product variety and firm survival in the microcomputer software industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(10), pages 1005-1025, October.
    37. Sebastian Raisch & Julian Birkinshaw & Gilbert Probst & Michael L. Tushman, 2009. "Organizational Ambidexterity: Balancing Exploitation and Exploration for Sustained Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 685-695, August.
    38. Kathleen R. Conner & C. K. Prahalad, 1996. "A Resource-Based Theory of the Firm: Knowledge Versus Opportunism," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(5), pages 477-501, October.
    39. Massimo Colombo & Liliana Doganova & Evila Piva & Diego D’Adda & Philippe Mustar, 2015. "Hybrid alliances and radical innovation: the performance implications of integrating exploration and exploitation," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(4), pages 696-722, August.
    40. Juha Uotila & Markku Maula & Thomas Keil & Shaker A. Zahra, 2009. "Exploration, exploitation, and financial performance: analysis of S&P 500 corporations," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(2), pages 221-231, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Chieh-Peng Lin & Yuen-Kwan Cheung, 2023. "Developing learning ambidexterity and job performance: training and educational implications across the cultural divide," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 17(5), pages 1595-1614, July.
    2. Xihua Yu & Ning Cao & Hao Ren, 2023. "The Impact of Entrepreneurial Orientation on the Sustainable Innovation Capabilities of New Ventures: From the Perspective of Ambidextrous Learning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-19, June.
    3. Rosangela Feola & Valentina Cucino & Roberto Parente, 2021. "How to Develop Collaboration in Drug Development Process: The Role of Professional Service Firms," International Business Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 14(4), pages 114-114, April.
    4. Ana María Serrano-Bedia & Marta Pérez-Pérez, 2021. "Knowledge Ambidexterity within a Business Context: Taking Stock and Moving Forward," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-21, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Úbeda-García, Mercedes & Claver-Cortés, Enrique & Marco-Lajara, Bartolomé & Zaragoza-Sáez, Patrocinio, 2020. "Toward a dynamic construction of organizational ambidexterity: Exploring the synergies between structural differentiation, organizational context, and interorganizational relations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 363-372.
    2. Olga Kassotaki, 2022. "Review of Organizational Ambidexterity Research," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(1), pages 21582440221, March.
    3. Jan Ossenbrink & Joern Hoppmann, 2019. "Polytope Conditioning and Linear Convergence of the Frank–Wolfe Algorithm," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 44(1), pages 1319-1348, February.
    4. O'Reilly, Charles A., III & Tushman, Michael L., 2013. "Organizational Ambidexterity: Past, Present and Future," Research Papers 2130, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    5. Jensen, Are & Clausen, Tommy H., 2017. "Origins and emergence of exploration and exploitation capabilities in new technology-based firms," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 163-175.
    6. Sebastian Raisch & Julian Birkinshaw & Gilbert Probst & Michael L. Tushman, 2009. "Organizational Ambidexterity: Balancing Exploitation and Exploration for Sustained Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 685-695, August.
    7. Carolina Rojas-Córdova & Amanda J. Williamson & Julio A. Pertuze & Gustavo Calvo, 2023. "Why one strategy does not fit all: a systematic review on exploration–exploitation in different organizational archetypes," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 17(7), pages 2251-2295, October.
    8. Jan Ossenbrink & Joern Hoppmann & Volker H. Hoffmann, 2019. "Hybrid Ambidexterity: How the Environment Shapes Incumbents’ Use of Structural and Contextual Approaches," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(6), pages 1319-1348, November.
    9. Andreea N. Kiss & Dirk Libaers & Pamela S. Barr & Tang Wang & Miles A. Zachary, 2020. "CEO cognitive flexibility, information search, and organizational ambidexterity," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(12), pages 2200-2233, December.
    10. Jorge Ferreira & Sofia Cardim & Arnaldo Coelho, 2021. "Dynamic Capabilities and Mediating Effects of Innovation on the Competitive Advantage and Firm’s Performance: the Moderating Role of Organizational Learning Capability," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 12(2), pages 620-644, June.
    11. Gayoung Kim & Woo Jin Lee & Hoshik Shim, 2022. "Managerial Dilemmas and Entrepreneurial Challenges in the Ambidexterity of SMEs: A Systematic Review for Execution System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-22, December.
    12. Guktae Kim & Moon-Goo Huh, 2015. "Exploration and organizational longevity: The moderating role of strategy and environment," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 32(2), pages 389-414, June.
    13. Veider, Viktoria & Matzler, Kurt, 2016. "The ability and willingness of family-controlled firms to arrive at organizational ambidexterity," Journal of Family Business Strategy, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 105-116.
    14. Martin Owusu Ansah & Nicholas Addai-Boamah & Abeeku Bylon Bamfo & Lucy Afeafa Ry-Kottoh, 2022. "Organizational ambidexterity and financial performance in the banking industry: evidence from a developing economy," Journal of Financial Services Marketing, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 27(3), pages 250-263, September.
    15. José Andrade & Mário Franco & Luis Mendes, 2021. "Technological capacity and organisational ambidexterity: the moderating role of environmental dynamism on Portuguese technological SMEs," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 15(7), pages 2111-2136, October.
    16. Wenke, Kathrin & Zapkau, Florian B. & Schwens, Christian, 2021. "Too small to do it all? A meta-analysis on the relative relationships of exploration, exploitation, and ambidexterity with SME performance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 653-665.
    17. Karl Aschenbrücker & Tobias Kretschmer, 2022. "Performance-based incentives and innovative activity in small firms: evidence from German manufacturing," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 11(2), pages 47-64, June.
    18. Marina Estrada-Cruz & Noelia Rodriguez-Hernández & Antonio J. Verdú-Jover & Jose Maria Gómez-Gras, 2022. "The effect of competitive intensity on the relationship between strategic entrepreneurship and organizational results," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 1-24, March.
    19. Alexander Zimmermann & Sebastian Raisch & Julian Birkinshaw, 2015. "How Is Ambidexterity Initiated? The Emergent Charter Definition Process," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(4), pages 1119-1139, August.
    20. Marina Estrada-Cruz & Noelia Rodriguez-Hernández & Antonio J. Verdú-Jover & Jose Maria Gómez-Gras, 0. "The effect of competitive intensity on the relationship between strategic entrepreneurship and organizational results," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-24.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wsi:ijitmx:v:16:y:2019:i:05:n:s0219877019500329. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Tai Tone Lim (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.worldscinet.com/ijitm/ijitm.shtml .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.