Balancing exploitation and exploration: Organizational antecedents and performance effects of ambidexterity

Academy of Management 2008 Annual Meeting: The Questions We Ask, AOM 2008

Volumn , Issue , 2008, Pages

  Schulze, Patrick ^a   Heinemann, Florian ^a   Abedin, Annas ^a  

^a RWTH AACHEN UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

Author keywords

Ambedexterity; Exploitation; Exploration

Indexed keywords

AMBEDEXTERITY; EXPLOITATION; EXPLOITATION AND EXPLORATIONS; LARGE ORGANIZATIONS; ORGANIZATIONAL CONTEXT; ORGANIZATIONAL PERFORMANCE; PERFORMANCE EFFECT;

NATURAL RESOURCES EXPLORATION;

EID: 84858379711     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (23)

1. Adler, P. S., Goldoftas, B., & Levine, D. I. 1999. Flexibility Versus Efficiency? A Case Study of Model Changeovers in the Toyota Production System. Organization Science, 10(1): 43-68.
2. Atuahene-Gima, K. 2005. Resolving the Capability Rigidity Paradox in New Product Innovation. Journal of Marketing, 69(4): 61-83.
3. Auh, S. & Menguc, B. 2005. Balancing exploration and exploitation: The moderating role of competitive intensity. Journal of Business Research, 58(12): 1652-1661.
4. Bettis, R. A. & Hitt, M. A. 1995. The new competitive landscape. Strategic Management Journal, 16(5): 7-19.
5. Bierly III, P. E. & Daly, P. S. 2007. Alternative Knowledge Strategies, Competitive Environment, and Organizational Performance in Small Manufacturing Firms. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice, 31(4): 493-516.
6. Churchill Jr., G. A. 1979. A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of Marketing Constructs. Journal of Marketing Research JMR, 16(1): 64-73.
7. Ghemawat, P. & Costa, J. 1993. The organizational tension between static and dynamic efficiency. Strategic Management Journal, 14(8): 59-73.
8. Gibson, C. B. & Birkinshaw, J. 2004. The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. Academy of Management Journal, 47(2): 209-226.
9. Hanssen-Bauer, J. & Snow, C. 1996. Responding to Hypercompetition: The Structure and Processes of a Regional Learning Network Organization. Organization Science, 7(4): 413-427.
10. He, Z.-L. & Wong, P.-K. 2004. Exploration vs. exploitation: An empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis. Organization Science, 15(2): 481-494.
11. Jansen, J. J. P., Van den Bosch, F. A. J., & Volberda, H. W. 2006. Exploratory Innovation, Exploitative Innovation, and Performance: Effects of Organizational Antecedents and Environmental Moderators. Management Science, 52(11): 1661-1674.
12. Lubatkin, M. H., Simsek, Z., Yan, L., & 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.
13. March, J. G. 1991. Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning. Organization Science, 2(1): 71-87.
14. Nobelius, D. 2003. An Ambidextrous Organization in Practice: Strategic Actions in Ericsson's Management of Bluetooth. International Journal of Mobile Communications, 1(1-2): 57-90.
15. Powell, T. C. 1995. Total quality management as competitive advantage: A review and empirical study. Strategic Management Journal, 16(1): 15-37.
16. Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Will, S.; SmartPLS 2.0 (M3) Beta; http://www.smartpls.de.
17. Tushman, M. L. & O'Reilly III, C. A. 1996. Ambidextrous organizations: Managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. California Management Review, 38(4): 8-30.
18. Tushman, M. L. & O'Reilly III, C. A. 2004. The Ambidextrous Organization. Harvard Business Review, 82(4): 74-81.
19. Tushman, M. L., Smith, W., Wood, R. C., Westermann, G., & O'Reilly III, C. A. 2004. Innovation Streams and Ambidextrous Organizational Designs: On Building Dynamic Capabilities. Working Paper.
20. Tushman, M. L. & O'Reilly III, C. A. 2007. Ambidexterity as a Dynamic Capability: Resolving the Innovator's Dilemma. HBS Working Paper, No. 07-088: 1-62.
21. Venkatraman, N. & Ramanujam, V. 1986. Measurement of Business Performance in Strategy Research: A Comparison of Approaches. Academy of Management Review, 11(4): 801-814.
22. Volberda, H. W. 1996. Toward the Flexible Form: How to Remain Vital in Hypercompetitive Environments. Organization Science, 7(4): 359-374.
23. Zou, S. & Cavusgil, S. T. 2002. The GMS: A Broad Conceptualization of Global Marketing Strategy and Its Effect on Firm Performance. Journal of Marketing, 66(4): 40-56.