ArticlePDF Available

Abstract and Figures

Firm ambidexterity usually has been discussed as a top-down planned strategic choice. The purpose of this paper is to showcase it is not always so; it may also be emergent as well – but how? The author used an in-depth, qualitative, multiple case research method for this study, and chose four cases from different industry domains for this study. The author identified that being ambidextrous is not always planned – it may also be emergent. The emergent-strategy process of organizational ambidexterity gets initiated through ambidextrous orientation and abilities of the top management team (TMT), and their actions and behaviors influence the evolution of supporting context that promotes exploration and exploitation behavior of employees at multiple levels of hierarchy, and across different units and functions of the organization. This study contributes to the discussions in organizational ambidexterity, deliberate-emergent strategy debate and the role of TMTs in setting the strategic path of the organization. Attaining and sustaining firm ambidexterity is a managerial challenge. This challenge is addressable, by having ambidextrous TMTs – team members with complementary competencies of exploration and exploitation, with proper coordination within team members, and relatively balanced power sharing among the team members. Such a team at the top of the organization and their signaling builds the context to support increased exploration and exploitation activities at multiple levels of the organization. This study showcases the emergent process of firm ambidexterity. Very few studies so far have discussed this process of becoming ambidextrous.
Content may be subject to copyright.
The emergent-strategy
process of initiating
organizational ambidexterity
Sabyasachi Sinha
Strategic Management Area, Indian Institute of Management Lucknow,
Lucknow, India
Abstract
Purpose Firm ambidexterity usually has been discussed as a top-down planned strategic choice. The
purpose of this paper is to showcase it is not always so; it may also be emergent as well but how?
Design/methodology/approach The author used an in-depth, qualitative, multiple case research method
for this study, and chose four cases from different industry domains for this study.
Findings The author identified that being ambidextrous is not always planned it may also be emergent.
The emergent-strategy process of organizational ambidexterity gets initiated through ambidextrous
orientation and abilities of the top management team (TMT), and their actions and behaviors influence the
evolution of supporting context that promotes exploration and exploitation behavior of employees at multiple
levels of hierarchy, and across different units and functions of the organization.
Research limitations/implications This study contributes to the discussions in organizational
ambidexterity, deliberate-emergent strategy debate and the role of TMTs in setting the strategic path of
the organization.
Practical implications Attaining and sustaining firm ambidexterity is a managerial challenge. This
challenge is addressable, by having ambidextrous TMTs team members with complementary competencies
of exploration and exploitation, with proper coordination within team members, and relatively balanced
power sharing among the team members. Such a team at the top of the organization and their signaling builds
the context to support increased exploration and exploitation activities at multiple levels of the organization.
Originality/value This study showcases the emergent process of firm ambidexterity. Very few studies so
far have discussed this process of becoming ambidextrous.
Keywords Exploration-exploitation, Organizational ambidexterity, Top management teams,
Contextual ambidexterity, Emergent strategy
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
Organizations operating in uncertain external conditions need to pursue competing
objectives of efficiency and innovation simultaneously. Senior and the middle
management often struggle to seek these paradoxical, but essential goals. The theory of
organizational ambidexterity addresses this phenomenon. There are multiple ways how
firms deal with this dilemma temporal or structural separation of the two activities, and by
creating a conducive context within the organization that facilitates and promotes the
micro-level balancing of the two contrary activities (Birkinshaw and Gupta, 2013;
Zimmermann et al., 2015). Contextual solutions of organizational ambidexterity are less
costlier than structural solutions of organizational ambidexterity (Birkinshaw and Gibson,
2004). The extant literature on organizational ambidexterity has majorly assumed
ambidextrous orientation to be operating primarily as a deliberate top-down strategy choice
(Zimmermann et al., 2015). However, not all strategy choices are deliberate; they may be
emergent as well (Mintzberg and Waters, 1985). Some firms IBM, Ciba Vision, USA Today
and Zensar have achieved success by balancing exploration and exploitation; many others
have not been able to either initiate or implement this strategy (OReilly and Tushman,
2011). An understanding of organizational ambidexterity as an emergent-strategy process is
missing in the extant literature. We address this research gap in this paper. Due to
shortened technology, product and market lifecycles, there is a greater need for firms to
Journal of Strategy and
Management
© Emerald Publishing Limited
1755-425X
DOI 10.1108/JSMA-12-2018-0140
Received 9 December 2018
Revised 28 February 2019
23 April 2019
Accepted 24 April 2019
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/1755-425X.htm
Emergent-
strategy
process
become ambidextrous. So, an understanding of the phenomenon using new lenses is useful.
In this work, we investigated how organizational ambidexterity gets initiated, and how top
management actions and behaviors influence the process.
Contrary to the existing discourse on organizational ambidexterity as a deliberate
strategy process, we argue here that it can also play out as an emergent strategy process.
Based on our findings, we argue that organizational ambidexterity can be attained
serendipitously without a deliberate intention of the central management due to certain
leadership variables, and a pattern of actions inducing focus on exploration and exploitation
as and when needed, at multiple levels of the organization. This strategy formulation
process labeled as consensus strategyby Mintzberg and Waters (1985) is more emergent.
Deliberately attempting to be ambidextrous has been usually associated with managerial
tension arising from the pressure to pay attention to both activities simultaneously. We
believe when the ambidextrous positioning of the firm is pursued unconsciously, the
cognition of tension by the manager is likely to be lower than otherwise.
In this paper, we discuss how the ambidextrous orientation of a firm gets initiated and
how decision makers influence their firms to become ambidextrous unconsciously. Prior
studies have mostly focused on units of organizations to investigate the phenomenon of
ambidexterity. As we wanted to examine how this phenomenon gets initiated, we chose to
do a longitudinal study of new venture firms from their start-up to growth stage as a
context to peep into the journey of ambidextrous firms. We chose firms where the
founders and key early employees still functioned within the organizations we studied. This
context allowed us to explore the phenomenon in the entire organization over a period rather
than a part of the organization.
We found that in the chosen firms ambidexterity did not happen by design instead, it
evolved emergently. Such strategies evolved out of mutual adjustment among different
organizational actors, learning from each other and responding to environmental triggers,
unexpectedly realizing a strategic pattern that worked for them (Mintzberg and Waters,
1985). In this emergent evolution of organizational ambidexterity, top managements
orientation, team camaraderie, and signaling led to focus on both exploration (efficiency)
and exploitation (experimentation) activities. Top management-related factors also
facilitated in creating a supporting context for exploration as well as exploitation, thus
allowing ambidexterity to evolve in the firm, as a collective pattern of actions at multiple
levels of the organization, without a continued active effort to have balanced focus on the
two activities top-down.
Literature review
The emergent strategy process
The visible strategic position of an organization is not always an effect of planned
activity deliberate strategy; instead, it emerges iteratively at times without the deliberate
intentions of the top management similar to unplanned improvisations in a Jazz
performance (Meyer et al., 1998; Zack, 2000). This unintended part of the visible or realized
strategy is referred to as emergent strategy (Mintzberg, 1978; Mintzberg and Waters, 1985).
Strategic positions also result from the iterated process of resource allocation (Burgelman,
1991; Noda and Bower, 1996). Kay (1984) argued that the decision-making process in firms is
more evolutionary and emergent due to the bounded rationality of decision makers and lack
of information availability.
Porter (1996) suggested that strategizing involves deliberately choosing a set of activities
to deliver a unique mix of value, targeting a unique strategic positioning of the firm.
In contrast, Mintzberg (1978) demonstrated and argued that strategizing is also
emergent despite, or in the absence of top-management intentions (Mintzberg and
Waters, 1985). This process is similar to performing in a theatre without a pre-decided
JSMA
script, sets and roles as in improvisational theatre (Crossan, 1998), where actions are more
spontaneous and intuitive, in response to contextual triggers. Outcomes of emergent
processes are a combination of reflective and unconscious elements (Lowe and Jones, 2004).
The importance of emergent strategy is well recognized; however, limited empirical studies
have focused on understanding the emergent strategy process (Mirabeau and Maguire,
2014). In this study, we focus on exploring the evolutionary process of organizational
ambidexterity by studying how the charter to be ambidextrous gets initiated, contributing
to the deliberate-versus-emergent strategy process discourse.
The concept of organizational ambidexterity
Exploration refers to the discovery of the new products, resources, knowledge, and
opportunities and is associated with radical changes and learning through experimentation,
whereas exploitation refers to the improvement of current knowledge, resources,
competencies, products and processes, and involves incremental shifts from its previous
position (Benner and Tushman, 2003; March, 1991). These activities are also distinct from
the other in their organizational structures, processes, cultures and capabilities (Ghemawat
and RicartCosta, 1993). They also differ in timeline, risk and potential returns (Raisch and
A Zimmermann, 2017).
New ventures operate in relatively more resource constraint contexts financial
capital, time, human capital compared to established and mature firms. New ventures
also have the pressure of performing for survival in the present, and sustainably grow in
future at least for those who aspire to grow (Dopfer et al., 2017; Prashantham and Floyd,
2019). Thus, new ventures have to balance their current and future, and, therefore, needs
to have a dual-focus on exploitation and exploration activities. As the start-up firm
moves into a rapid growth phase, the leaderships ability to balance exploitation and
exploration both of which require different styles of delegation and control decides the
possibility and sustainability of the growth of the firm. It also demands changes in
organizational systems, structure, control systems, attitudes and behavior of the
organizational actors (Shane, 2008; Sinha, 2015).
Organizational ambidexterity defined here as a firms ability to simultaneously pursue
exploration and exploitation (Benner and Tushman, 2003; Gibson and Birkinshaw, 2004;
Tushman and OReilly, 1996). Extant research has highlighted the adoption of different
human resource management systems, and adoption of new tools such as Big Data shapes
ambidextrous business processes in firms attempting to be ambidextrous (Dezi et al., 2018;
Ferraris et al., 2018). Scholars have found that organizational ambidexterity is positively
associated with firm performance (Birkinshaw and Gibson, 2004; He and Wong, 2004;
Raisch et al., 2009). However, some studies have found that organizational ambidexterity
does not directly influence firm performance (Vrontis et al., 2017). Thus, there is a need to
understand this phenomenon using new lenses to explain such mixed findings.
So far, we have usually studied the phenomenon to understand how is it managed or
implemented, assuming it to be a top-down deliberate strategic choice achieved through
different mechanisms. Recent discussions in this domain reiterate that organizational
ambidexterity operates as a deliberate-planned approach (Raisch and A Zimmermann,
2017). How organizational ambidexterity gets initiated and the process through which
organizations emerge to become ambidextrous is an interesting question that remains yet to
be answered (Zimmermann et al., 2015). Review of extant literature also reveals that scant
studies so far have been pursued on ambidexterity theme in new venture firm contexts
(Beckman, 2006; Sinha, 2015). Thus, we decided to investigate this question, how
organizational ambidexterity is initiated, focusing on the role of top management in the
process. The context chosen for this study was firms that had recently been through the
journey from a new venture stage to an established firm.
Emergent-
strategy
process
Research method
We used an in-depth, qualitative, multiple case research (Yin, 2009) method for this study,
as adopted by Lavie et al. (2010), and following the tradition of using case method research
approach for new research queries (Eisenhardt, 1989; Eisenhardt and Graebner, 2007).
Most of the strategy process research has relied on qualitative case studies of single or
multiple organizations; the primary data for these case studies are interviews of relevant
key informants (Sminia, 2009). Also, the majority of the seminal works in the area of
emergent strategy processes used the case study research method (Mintzberg and Waters,
1982; Burgelman, 1996; Noda and Bower, 1996; Eisenhardt, 1989). Process research is
primarily interested in how and why questions. Ours being a how question we chose
the case study research method based on data captured through the retrospective
narratives interviews of key organizational actors. Collective narratives of
organizational events during the journey of the organization triangulated with
secondary data allowed us to document the case studies of the chosen organizations.
The time dimension and the process of the phenomenon were captured in our work
through retrospective sense making of the lived experiences of the key actors during the
event period (Pettigrew, 1990). The focus of the study was at individual and group levels
to understand the role of the top management team (TMT) members, to identify the
pattern of actions at the TMT level, and at the organizational level, to understand the
firm-level pattern of actions, events and the realized strategy.
Four cases from different industry domains consumer internet, education, electronic
and power back-up, and financial services were selected within the new venture context to
have variation among cases. We masked the firm names on their request for privacy and
named them as Betainfo, Edusigma, AlphaIndia and Global Power. The chosen firms were
theoretically relevant (Eisenhardt and Graebner, 2007; Glaser and Strauss, 1967)
representative cases from four new industry domains in their geography. Cases from
diverse settings allow generalizability (Bingham and Eisenhardt, 2011). All four firms were
technology firms market leaders in their respective domains founded by first generation
entrepreneurs around the same time in industries that were new in their markets. Thus, all
of them weathered similar conditions during their journey from new venture to an
established firm operating in fast-growing markets with limited regulation, and traversing
from no competition to increasing competition in their respective product markets. The
conditions necessitated a continued focus on efficiency and also persistent search for new
products, new markets, and new competencies at multiple levels of the organization,
providing a rich context of the focal theoretical phenomenon of this study. The cases chosen
were extreme cases as adopted in Perrini et al. (2010), which allowed the dynamics of the
phenomenon to be more visible, than otherwise.
Different types of evidence as data sources were used to address the need for
triangulation (Eisenhardt, 1989; Yin, 2009). Data sources used included secondary and
primary sources. Secondary sources of data included coverage on the case companies in
books, print media, and audio-visual media; print and television interviews of the founders
and other TMT members; information available on the company website; and company red
herring prospectus; and internal documents shared by the company PowerPoint
presentations and archived reports. Primary data sources were face-to-face interviews of
founders, TMT members and other senior executives of the case companies.
A brief write-up was prepared to introduce the purpose of the research broadly
mentioning that we are trying to understand the growth process of the organizationrather
than using terms like exploration and exploitation. The objective was to capture the
phenomenon from the narration of events through different stages of the growth process.
Such masking of the actual research question helped to restrict any retrospective biases
creeping into the discussion. The organizational actors were broadly asked to narrate their
JSMA
journey and their experiences. The issues raised during the narration were probed to push
and bound the discussion within the frame of research questions. The interview questions
unfolded as it progressed. The effort was to gather as much rich data as possible (Table I).
The total duration of interviews was over 1,600 min, with an average of 1 h. The total
number of interviews conducted was 26 with at least five interviews in each company. The
transcribed length of the interviews ran into more than 500 pages. The interviews were
audio recorded and transcribed.
The data were analyzed following the guidelines of Eisenhardt (1989) and Miles and
Hubbermann (1994). It proceeded through the following three broad stages:
(1) The interview narratives and secondary data were put together to build a sequence of
events chronological cases of the respective organizations. The case documented
was then sent to the key informants to check if we documented the organizational
journey as it occurred. On receiving the feedback from the informants, corrections
were incorporated in the case document if needed.
(2) The cases were then processed individually to identify the within-case patterns and
themes. This stage helped in gaining familiarity with the data and preliminary
theory generation.
(3) In the third stage, we searched for the cross-case patterns. This step allowed us to
find a replication of the findings across different cases or the variations across
the cases.
Multiple iterations of the last two stages and referring back to theory helped us in
constructing the process model. To find details about different concepts of the model and the
relationships between these concepts and evidence for them we iteratively refereed back
to the cases, interviews narratives and relevant secondary resources. We continued with the
iterations until no further improvement of the process model of how organizational
ambidexterity emerged was possible.
Findings
Analysis of the data indicated that the top management did not deliberately decide to build
ambidextrous orientation and design in their firms. The TMT had no prior intention to
guide or control the journey of the firm toward ambidexterity; instead, the TMT actors
naturally converged toward first attaining ambidextrous TMT and later organizational
ambidexterity. It happened due to the ambidextrous orientation and skills of the members of
the TMT.
Firm name Betainfo Edusigma Global Power AlphaIndia
Sector IT/ITES Education Power back-up
(electronics and
batteries)
Financial services
Business at
launch
Job database School
management
system
software
Inverter Equity research
Diversified
into
Consumer internet company
(recruitment, real estate,
matrimonial, education,
restaurant listing and
booking)
Educational
products and
service
provider
Inverters (several
variants); batteries;
high capacity
inverters; solar
inverters
Broking, life insurance
distribution, investment
banking, credit and
finance, wealth
management
Table I.
Profile of cases
selected
Emergent-
strategy
process
TMTs ambidextrous abilities and orientation which, in turn, influenced their actions and
behaviors led them to sense the need of exploitation as well as of exploration and act to
address them as and when they sensed the need. Rather than trying to balance, the
balancing happened due to attention on both. The explorationexploitation balancing was
operating orthogonally one was not competing with the other. Thus, the managerial
tension that one may experience while trying to balance exploration and exploitation was
not observed to be significant in this study. TMT ambidexterity further led to the evolution
of the organizational context encompassing some factors facilitating exploitation and others
facilitating exploration; it also enabled linking of the two activity domains across hierarchy,
function and business units. As a result, despite operating in a resource constraint
environment, the decision makers and implementers at multiple levels sensed the need for
both and tried to maximize both activities depending on the need of the same.
Influence of ambidextrous TMT
We found that a mix of people at the top level with predominantly exploration
orientation and having abilities for exploration activities and people with predominantly
exploitation orientation and having abilities for exploitation activities was the primary
driving factor influencing organizational ambidexterity in the firms studied. TMT members
complementarities were observed to be operating in multiple ways. We found that such a
TMT could be one person having dual-focus; a mix of exploration- or exploitation-oriented
members; or the team can also be a group of multiple ambidextrous members. An
ambidextrous team facilitated in balancing the attention between exploration and
exploitation. This concept is depicted in BOX1 in Figure 1.
In three of our case companies, the top-management executive team comprised of a two-to-
three member team; we found team members have complementary competencies exploratory
or exploitative. In some cases, we found members decided for role separation mutually
agreed upon domains of decision making. This arrangement was made either due to their
proficiency in either set of activities, or such role separation led to building proficiency in
domains in which they operated. We found the existence of such complementary team
members in three case companies Betainfo, Edusigma and AlphaIndia. Only in the case of
Global Power, we found single member top management with significantly higher orientation
for exploration rather than exploitation.
Complementary
TMT/senior-
management
abilities and
orientation
Conflicts
Team
camaraderie
Team hygiene
low egocentricity, high
mutual trust and respect,
balanced power sharing
Pro-exploration
signals
Pro-exploitation
signals
TMT actions/behavior
Ambidextrous context
Having exploration/
exploitation champions
Building structure,
systems, processes
Leaders social
interaction behavior
Multilevel
organizational
exploration
Multilevel
organizational
exploitation
Sensing need for
exploration
Sensing need for
exploitation
Organizational
ambidextrity
BOX2: process of context setting for
exploration/exploitation
BOX3: emergent outcome-
organizational ambidexterity
BOX1: primary antecedent –
ambidextrous top management team
Figure 1.
Emergent process of
organizational
ambidexterity
JSMA
Exploration-oriented TMT members were found to be visionary, charismatic, caring and
empathizing, who bets on people, who can inject feelings of ownership among rank and file,
optimistic and with an ability to take path-breaking decisions. Descriptions of them by other
TMT members and others across functions and hierarchy highlighted their panache for
experimentation and risk orientation. One of the exploration-oriented TMT members was
described as –“most open to all types of new ideas.Exploitation orientated were found to
be more skeptical, conservative, risk analyzer, rule-and-process oriented, more systematic in
approach. Such orientation was observed to have developed either due to nature or nurture
(experience). Some TMT members were found to be having an ambidextrous orientation.
Describing one such TMT member, others mentioned: a person who got lots of ideas, high
energy levels, and also having important execution skills. He was the right person to run a
profitable business. However, he was very good at managing costs, and also a year-on-year
increase in targets. He is good at multitasking.
At times, TMT members pushed for exploration or exploitation not due to their
orientation but due to how the role was shared based on the agreement between the
members. TMT member1 in Betainfo mentioned about role sharing with TMT member2
He is much more focused on what have we today; what we will do next week, and need of
the present. I am more focused on slightly more strategic issues. That is an orientation.
However, if you put him in my job and me in his job I will do more of that; that was how
the roles were divided.
Such complementary TMT mix ambidextrous team orientation resulted in a
balanced strategic orientation of the organization, as evident from the expression of a
senior manager from AlphaIndia: Usually what happens is when you get into the
operational side of things, that envelopes you, and you just go in for operational efficiency
and do not give attention to long-term. However, the beauty here was that they the
TMT never lost sight of the larger picture as well, while continuing to focus on the
results from the immediate needs of the businesses.
Differences in opinions resulted in conflicts during the decision-making process. In
Betainfo, Edusigma and AlphaIndia, we observed that such conflicts generally got resolved
due to mutual trust and respect for the other team members capability, and commitment to
the cause of the organization. At times pre-decided heuristics such as on what type of
decisions whose view was final was fixed in advancehelped in resolving the decision
deadlock. The low egocentric nature of the team members and relatively equal power status
among the team members maintained team camaraderie.
Our findings in the case of Global Power were different from the other three cases.
Founders passion and the ability for exploration was very high. The founder-CEO of this
company was a high-risk taker. He also had orientation for exploitation and pushed for
cost-efficiency. People saw the founder as someone with exceptional innovation and
marketing capabilities. However, due to the absence of any prior experience of scaled
businesses, he did not appreciate the importance of establishing rules and standardized
processes which was so emphasized by one of the TMT members in other case companies.
Also, the power balance at the top-decision making level in Global Power was tilted in favor
of the founder-CEO. It was majorly a one-person TMT. With scaling-up of the business,
people joined from diverse backgrounds but mostly as functional heads, and none in CXO
roles. Senior management turnover was high, and the integration of these managers with
the founder or others did not happen due to egoissues. There was a lack of team
decision-making and pluralistic processes. The founder-CEO alone was the key decision
maker, and, in the case of differences of opinion, people rarely confronted the CEO. Only
during the later years of the company, there was clear role separation at one level below the
founder for managing exploration new businesses and exploitation matured business.
High-risk orientation and the lack of stabilizing factors with the senior management team
Emergent-
strategy
process
caused the company to get into deep crisis twice in the journey of the company leading to
significant setback and losses. Thus, this was a case where we observed that in the early
stages there was relatively more balanced attention to exploration and exploitation.
However, as the business scaled, this balance tilted in favor of exploration due to
over-enthusiasm for innovation and experimentation, and also due to the non-existence of
any other member in the TMT having similar decision-making powers as the founder-
CEO to counter the over-focus on experimentation.
Thus, we observed that part of the top leadership was open to experimentation,
risk-taking, and futuristic, other/s being more oriented toward processes and systems
leading to focus on exploitation activities, overall resulting into attention on both
exploratory and exploitative activities. Due to this, even without a deliberate plan, one
section of the leadership kept encouraging the team to focus on future, think big and think
differently; the other pushed people to increase efficiency, being frugal and fasten the speed
of product-to-profit. However, such opposite thinking frames also resulted in conflicts of
opinion and potential for a decision deadlock. In three cases Betainfo, Edusigm and
AlphaIndia we found the conflict was avoided through predefined conflict resolution
tactics. It also required mutual trust and equal power status among the members for an
effective play out of this model. The absence of mutual trust, collective decision making, ego
conflicts and unequal power status as found in Global Power may not allow the team
composition complementarity to contribute to building an ambidextrous orientation of the
firm or may not sustain the organizational ambidexterity as the firm grows. We labeled
the factors influencing team camaraderieas team hygiene factors.Team camaraderie
positively enhanced the effect of TMT complementarity; in the absence of team camaraderie
due to the absence of team hygiene factors conflicts subdued the positive effects of TMT
complementarity.
Thus, ambidextrous TMT having appreciation, orientation and ability for exploratory and
exploitation activities, and good camaraderie among the TMT members facilitates nurturing
and building a work environment that pushes for exploitation on one side and promotes
exploration on the other. Next, we discuss how such contexts for exploration and exploitation
gets constructed through actions and behaviors of members of an ambidextrous TMT.
Supporting context for exploration or exploitation activities
TMT members actions and behaviors influenced the creation of some aspects of the context
that influenced employees toward exploitative activities, and some other aspects of the
context that influenced employees toward exploration behavior. These contextual aspects
are discussed below, and this concept is depicted in BOX2 in Figure 1.
Getting exploration/exploitation champions and nurture them.TMTs exploration abilities
created an extensive social network; this partially facilitated access to exploration or
exploitation champions in the early phases. Recruits having potential exploration capabilities
were motivated through the entrepreneurial culture in the organization. This culture in the
organization transformed those with potential, into exploration champions one who could
take risk, experiment, build new capabilities and design new products.
Getting people with the skills to exploit was also critical. Getting people usually was a
difficult task as rarely anyone was interested in joining an exploitation role in new ventures.
Some TMT membersexperience in exploitation activities reduced this challenge. They had
knowledge and network to recruit such people. They knew the process of recruiting for
these skills and retaining them. It was also crucial that the selected person not be only right
for exploitation roles but had a mindset to work in a start-up environment.
These exploration or exploitation champions transformed over time to become
ambidextrous. During times when the burden of work was high, some exploration
JSMA
champions were also assigned exploitation roles business development, expanding
the business and product refinements. Alternately exploiters getting motivated by the
entrepreneurial smell in the firm developed a penchant for exploration roles leading to the
development of ambidextrous abilities in them. These champions rewarded with fast
career growth motivated them to continue in the company signaling others the definition
of star-performers, which they may emulate. Some of the exploration or exploitation
champions continued to excel in their domain, thus contributing to the attainment of
ambidexterity at function or unit or firm level.
Creation of structure, systems and processes. Usually, the lead for such systems and process
creation was advocated through the posture of exploitation focus within the TMT signaling
that fast commercialization and following routinized approaches were expected. TMT members
prior background in process-oriented roles strongly influenced members advocacy for systems
and processes. Such measures were more pro-active than in reaction to emergencies. As the
knowledge to create such systems already existed with the TMT member, this became more of a
replication task with the needed improvisation. This action of TMT also led to the creation of
enabling structure, systems, and processes for exploitation. Also, there were short-term rewards
for performance in the form of monetary incentives and non-monetary incentives such as a
package for a foreign holiday trip, directly linked to the achievement of revenue targets. Besides,
consistent performers were shown a career path for future growth. Meritorious employees were
groomed for future leadership positions. Processes such as performance management systems,
sales reporting, and record keeping, were standardized. Some processes were also automated to
increase efficiency. The creation of exploitation-focused departments and restructuring of roles
and processes also enabled more exploitation.
Social interaction behavior of leaders at the top. The top leaders maintained transparency
of their actions and decisions. Especially, in the early growth phase, usually, everybody was
aware of the financial position of the company. Financial status was openly shared in
meetings; the knowledge that limited cash was available influenced people in extracting as
much as possible and maintaining frugality in their spending. TMT members social
interaction capability and their ability to delegate and sacrifice give up control and abstain
from being guided by personal gains influenced how they interacted with managers and
frontline employees. We found that behaviors such as valuing people, empowering them,
encouraging independent thinking, and allowing open discussion and debates led to the
creation of an environment where employees were motivated to explore. Sharing the wealth
and maintaining transparency were two critical actions of the TMT, which reinforced the
belief and trust in TMT. These TMT actions and behavior created the essential contextual
elements, namely, mutual trust, ownership feeling, freedom to express, the opportunity to
learn new things and increased team camaraderie. Contextual elements, namely, shared
aspiration and ownership feeling, propelled people to stretch beyond what was expected of
them. In such environments, managers and employees felt they worked for themselves, in
their own company. Such a feeling motivated them to exhibit organization citizenship
behavior doing more than what is defined by their roles and people worked for day and
night without caring for any immediate goals. They did not feel that it was only the owner
who was going to be benefited in the long run, but they also felt the excitement of learning
new things, creating new things, and creating an organization that would become prominent
in the future. This working environment influenced the development of exploration
capability across multiple levels of the organization, leading to higher exploration.
Thus, the enabling context the organizational environment for exploration and
exploitation influenced the activities of exploration and exploitation. Moreover, this context
building was an organic and emergent process as a result of the specific actions and
behaviors of the TMT.
Emergent-
strategy
process
Explorationexploitation linkage at multiple levels of the organization
The context created to support exploration and exploitation activities facilitated in sensing
the need and opportunity for exploration and exploitation at different levels and led to
higher exploration and exploitation activities, respectively. Different ways of how
exploration and exploitation links worked were as follows:
(1) exploration in individual level in middle and lower hierarchies linked to
exploitation at organizational levels;
(2) feedback from people engaged in exploitation roles helped in identifying what next
opportunities or generating new ideas;
(3) exploitation provided the resource for investment in exploration;
(4) exploration led to better exploitation of existing resources;
(5) exploration created the pipeline for future exploitation;
(6) multiple job roles for individuals, and rotation of job roles between exploration- and
exploitation-focused roles; and
(7) discussion of diverse opinions in the joint decision-making process.
This concept is depicted as BOX3 in Figure 1.
The presence of reinforcing links between exploration and exploitation influenced the
maintenance of firm ambidexterity. By reinforcing links, we mean that explorations have to
be related and leveraging existing resources and exploitation should leverage the
exploration output. The sensing and seizing process was much faster and took place as a
pro-active measure rather than only as a reaction to a crisis this process of speedier
sensing and seizing enhanced the dynamic capability of the firm. As the capability to
explore and exploit was dispersed across the organization, even when the organizations
focus shifted temporarily toward exploitation in crisis the organization shifted back
swiftly to a balanced position after the crisis. This organic and emergent process of
exploration and exploitation without any noted deliberate planning and execution
efforts facilitated in maintaining ambidexterity at the firm level.
Discussion
Earlier research has argued that the upper echelons of organizations the TMT
influence strategic directions of organizations. Organizational outcomes are reflections of
the mindset of dominant actors in the organization. Managers perceive the environmental
signals based on their biases of what is more important, which guides their choices,
actions and behaviors (Hambrick and Mason, 1984). Extant research in the area of
organizational ambidexterity highlights the role of TMT in the effective management of
exploration and exploitation for sustained organizational performance (Smith and
Tushman, 2005). TMT heterogeneity or diversity has been studied as one of the critical
components of TMT-organization ambidexterity connect (Koryak et al., 2018); however,
TMT diversity has been so far primarily conceptualized as a diversity measure captured
by age and functional diversity (García-Granero et al., 2018). Our findings indicate the
need for conceptualizing the construct of TMT ambidexterity as a mix of exploration
exploitation orientation as a mindset rather than only as age or functional diversity.
Functional diversity only measures the functional background marketing, operations
and R&D of the involved CEO or the TMT members, stereotyping specific
characteristics associated with the involved background. Real-life managers are far more
complex and not so easily categorizable into exploration or exploitation type just by using
their functional specialization or even age as a proxy. Also, we found rather than focusing
JSMA
on TMT diversity the focus of future studies should be TMT ambidexterity that is more
comprehensive construct vis-à-vis TMT diversity.
We preferred using the term TMT complementarity complementarity of exploration and
exploitation orientation and abilities within the TMT instead of TMT diversity. Our findings
indicate differences in TMT members orientation results in conflict that may reduce the overall
ambidexterity behavior of the TMT; however, the presence of certain hygiene factors within the
team low egocentricity, high mutual trust and respect for each other, and balanced power
sharing leading to team camaraderie neutralizes the adverse effects of conflicts. Thus, TMT
complementarity results in TMT ambidexterity only in the presence of the mentioned team
hygiene factors. We found TMT ambidexterity as the primary driver of organizational
ambidexterity. Future studies may instead focus on a direct measure of exploratory-exploitative
orientation and capability measure of TMT ratherthantryingtomeasureitusingtheproxiesof
functional background and age of TMT members. Also, a focus on TMT ambidexterity in
future research may be a more useful construct vis-à-vis focus on TMT diversity.
Our findings suggest that the organizational ambidexterity was not triggered due to a
deliberate a priori charter of the TMT. Instead, the ambidextrous orientation of the TMT
allowed it to sense the need for exploration and exploitation. Additionally, TMT
ambidexterity led to the setting of the context to facilitate sensing the need for exploration
or exploitation in lower hierarchies in the organization. Thus, exploration and exploitation
activities were initiated as and when its need was sensed from external environmental
triggers at multiple levels of the organizations, without always as a top-down chartering
process. Thus, contrary to implicit assumption in most previous research that TMT identify
the need to become ambidextrous, and subsequently design facilitating structures and
context to implement the choice to become ambidextrous (Raisch and Birkinshaw, 2008;
Zimmermann et al., 2015), we found the process to be emergent both the context creation,
as well as post-sensing actions to initiate exploration or exploitation. TMT did act and
behave in a manner that emitted pro-exploration or pro-exploitation signals; however, this
was not the only way how exploration or exploitation was being initiated in the firms
studied. Also, the TMT did not emit such signals as part of deliberate a plan to be
ambidextrous. Such signals emitting was a natural autonomous process as a response to
need sensing which happened due to their ambidextrous orientation. The dominant
discourse in the strategy literature, including the discussions on organizational
ambidexterity, has assumed strategizing as a deliberate process. Our findings indicate
the need for rejuvenating the emergent strategiesdiscourse. We consider here
deliberate-emergent as a continuum as it should be in a real-world strategy (Mintzberg
and Waters, 1985). In the VUCA world, this is how strategy probably needs to be practiced
throughout the organization rather than initiated by god-like roles played by the TMT.
TMT may need to have the right orientation and build the context to trigger the processes in
the intended direction at multiple levels of the firm.
The emergent-strategy process observed in the cases here also influenced linking of
exploration and exploitation, ensuring one leveraged the other reinforcing each other leading
to a dynamic oscillation between exploration and exploitation at the unit level autonomously.
Ambidexterity-firm performance studies have shown mixed results positive (Gibson and
Birkinshaw, 2004; He and Wong, 2004), negative (Atuahene-Gima, 2005), curvilinear
(Rothaermel and Alexandre, 2009) and no effects (Cao et al., 2009). We found such reinforced
links got established due to the context in the firm not always due to the deliberate attempt of
TMT to have such organizational design. Our findings suggest the need for focusing on the
presence of linked explorationexploitation to explain firm performance, rather than only
exploration and exploitation.
The playing out of the three-stage process identified in this study TMT group level
ambidexterity, the context setting for exploration or exploitation, and organizational level
Emergent-
strategy
process
inter-linking of exploration and exploitation operated as a pattern of unplanned
improvisations at multiple levels without a pre-decided script (Crossan, 1998; Mintzberg and
Waters, 1985; Mirabeau and Maguire, 2014) to be ambidextrous. Thus, our findings suggest
that organizational ambidexterity can also operate as an emergent process, rather than
being only deliberate.
Conclusion
Theoretical implication
This study allowed us to identify the emergent process of attaining and maintaining
ambidexterity beyond deliberate strategic choices of becoming ambidextrous. We discuss
here how organization ambidexterity may also evolve as an emergent process, and the role
of strategic leaders founders or CEOs and CXOs is critical. Such emergent process of
organizational ambidexterity is initiated by the ambidextrous orientation and abilities of the
TMT, and their actions and behaviors influence evolution of supporting context that
promotes exploration and exploitation behavior of employees at multiple levels of hierarchy,
and across different units and functions of the organization.
In the field of Genetics research on Drosophila, the fruit fly, revealed much about human
genetics. So, even though we theorized this process theory in the context of new ventures,
the findings help us to understand organizational ambidexterity in organizations in general.
This study contributes to the ambidexterity literature by extending the boundary of the
discussion to organizational ambidexterity as an emergent strategy process and how TMT
ambidexterity influences without deliberately attempting to do so the evolution of an
ambidextrous positioning of a firm. The study also raises the need for refocusing on
emergent strategyas an essential part of the strategy formulation process. We also
contribute to the concept of TMT diversity in the context of organizational ambidexterity
and also how TMT hygiene and TMT conflicts operate in shaping the effect of
TMT ambidexterity. The concept of sensing and signaling for pro-exploration and
pro-exploitation actions, how it influences the context setting process, and how the
exploration-exploitation linkage operates provides a good ground for future work on
micro-foundations of organizational ambidexterity. This study also contributes to
entrepreneurship discourse by enhancing our understanding of the process of
organizational ambidexterity in new ventures.
This work being a qualitative limited sample study lacks the statistical generalizability
of a large sample study. Future research may focus on operationalizing some concepts of
the proposed theoretical model on large sample survey-based study. Also, an attempt to
explore if the ambidexterity process varies with variances in product-market context will
be interesting.
Managerial implication
The managerial implications that can be drawn from this study for firms, irrespective of
their size and industry, are:
(1) If senior leaders possess an ambidextrous orientation and maintain good
coordination within the team their actions and conduct signals this orientation
to hierarchies below; such signals initiates pro-exploration and pro-exploration
actions at multiple levels of the organization.
(2) Having a mix of exploration-oriented and exploitation-oriented team members at the
apex of the organization can induce ambidexterity in the firm; however, for this
operation, there is need of low egocentricity, mutual trust and respect, and balanced
power sharing between two poles of the team.
JSMA
(3) If senior leadersactions and behavior builds the supporting context for exploration
and exploitation, both activities get enhanced autonomously avoiding the
managerial tension of balancing the two.
(4) Reinforcing links between exploration and exploitation influence sustenance of
ambidexterity in the firm.
(5) In the case of new ventures, having an ambidextrous TMT enhances the success
probability of the new venture.
References
Atuahene-Gima, K. (2005), Resolving the capabilityrigidity paradox in new product innovation,
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 69 No. 4, pp. 61-83.
Beckman, C.M. (2006), The influence of founding team company affiliations on firm behavior,
Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 49 No. 4, pp. 741-758.
Benner, M.J. and Tushman, M.L. (2003), Exploitation, exploration, and process management: the
productivity dilemma revisited,Academy of Management Review, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 238-256.
Bingham, C.B. and Eisenhardt, K.M. (2011), Rational heuristics: the simple rulesthat strategists learn
from process experience,Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 32 No. 13, pp. 1437-1464.
Birkinshaw, J. and Gibson, C. (2004), Building ambidexterity into an organization,MIT Sloan
Management Review, Vol. 45 No. 4, pp. 47-55.
Birkinshaw, J. and Gupta, K. (2013), Clarifying the distinctive contribution of ambidexterity to the field
of organization studies,Academy of Management Perspectives, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 287-298.
Burgelman, R.A. (1991), Intraorganizational ecology of strategy making and organizational
adaptation: theory and field research,Organization Science, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 239-262.
Burgelman, R.A. (1996), Progress model of strategic business exit: implications for an evolutionary
perspective on strategy,Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 17, pp. 193-214.
Cao, Q., Gedajlovic, E. and Zhang, H. (2009), Unpacking organizational ambidexterity: dimensions,
contingencies, and synergistic effects,Organization Science, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 781-796.
Crossan, M. (1998), Improvisation in action,Organization Science, Vol. 9 No. 5, pp. 593-599.
Dezi, L., Santoro, G., Gabteni, H. and Pellicelli, A.C. (2018), The role of Big Data in shaping
ambidextrous business process management: case studies from the service industry,Business
Process Management Journal, Vol. 24 No. 5, pp. 1163-1175.
Dopfer, M., Fallahi, S., Kirchberger, M. and Gassmann, O. (2017), Adapt and strive: how ventures
under resource constraints create value through business model adaptations,Creativity &
Innovation Management, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 233-246.
Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989), Building theories from case study research,The Academy of Management
Review, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 532-550.
Eisenhardt, K.M. and Graebner, M.E. (2007), Theory building from cases: opportunities and
challenges,The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 50 No. 1, pp. 25-32.
Ferraris, A., Santoro, G., Bresciani, S. and Carayannis, E.G. (2018), HR practices for explorative and
exploitative alliances in smart cities: evidences from smart city managersperspective,
Management Decision, Vol. 56 No. 6, pp. 1183-1197.
García-Granero, A., Fernández-Mesa, A., Jansen, J.J.P. and Vega-Jurado, J. (2018), Top management
team diversity and ambidexterity: the contingent role of shared responsibility and CEO
cognitive trust,Long Range Planning, Vol. 51 No. 6, pp. 881-893.
Ghemawat, P. and RicartCosta, J.E.I. (1993), The organizational tension between static and dynamic
efficiency,Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 14 No. S2, pp. 59-73.
Gibson, C.B. and Birkinshaw, J. (2004), The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of
organizational ambidexterity,The Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 47 No. 2, pp. 209-226.
Emergent-
strategy
process
Glaser, B. and Strauss, A.C. (1967), The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative
Research, Aldine De Gruyter, New York, NY.
Hambrick, D.C. and Mason, P.A. (1984), Upper echelons: the organization as a reflection of its top
managers,The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 193-206.
He, Z.L. and Wong, P.K. (2004), Exploration vs. exploitation: an empirical test of the ambidexterity
hypothesis,Organization Science, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 481-494.
Kay, N.M. (1984), The Emergent Firm: Knowledge, Ignorance and Surprise in Economic Organisation,
MacMillan, Basingstoke.
Koryak, O., Lockett, A., Hayton, J., Nicolaou, N. and Mole, K. (2018), Disentangling the antecedents of
ambidexterity: exploration and exploitation,Research Policy, Vol. 47 No. 2, pp. 413-427.
Lavie, D., Stettner, U. and Tushman, M.L. (2010), Exploration and exploitation within and across
organizations,Academy of Management Annals, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 109-155.
Lowe, A. and Jones, A. (2004), Emergent strategy and the measurement of performance: the
formulation of performance indicators at the microlevel,Organization Studies, Vol. 25 No. 8,
pp. 1313-1337.
March, J.G. (1991), Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning,Organization Science,
Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 71-87.
Meyer, A., Frost, P.J. and Weick, K.E. (1998), The organization science jazz festival: improvisation as a
metaphor for organizing,Organization Science, Vol. 9 No. 5, pp. 540-542.
Miles, M.B. and Hubbermann, A.M. (1994), Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook, Sage
Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Mintzberg, H. (1978), Patterns in strategy formation,Management Science, Vol. 24 No. 9, pp. 934-948.
Mintzberg, H. and Waters, J.A. (1982), Tracking strategy in an entrepreneurial firm,Academy of
Management Journal, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 465-499.
Mintzberg, H. and Waters, J.A. (1985), Of strategies, deliberate and emergent,Strategic Management
Journal, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 257-272.
Mirabeau, L. and Maguire, S. (2014), From autonomous strategic behavior to emergent strategy,
Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 35 No. 8, pp. 1202-1229.
Noda, T. and Bower, J.L. (1996), Strategy making as iterated processes of resource allocation,
Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 17 No. S1, pp. 159-192.
OReilly, C.A. and Tushman, M.L. (2011), Organizational ambidexterity in action: how managers
explore and exploit,California Management Review, Vol. 53 No. 4, pp. 5-22.
Perrini, F., Vurro, C. and Costanzo, L.A. (2010), A process-based view of social entrepreneurship: from
opportunity identification to scaling-up social change in the case of San Patrignano,
Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, Vol. 22 No. 6, pp. 515-534.
Pettigrew, A.M. (1990), Longitudinal field research on change: theory and practice,Organization
Science, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 267-292.
Porter, M.E. (1996), What is strategy?,Harvard Business Review, Vol. 74 No. 6, pp. 61-78.
Prashantham, S. and Floyd, S.W. (2019), Navigating liminality in new venture internationalization,
Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 513-527.
Raisch, S. and Birkinshaw, J. (2008), Organizational ambidexterity: antecedents, outcomes, and
moderators,Journal of Management, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 375-409.
Raisch, S. and A Zimmermann, A. (2017), Pathways to ambidexterity: a process perspective on the
exploration-exploitation paradox, in Smith, W., Lewis, M.E., Jarzabkowski, P.E. and Langley, A.
(Eds), The Oxford Handbook of Organizational Paradox, Oxford University Press, Oxford,
pp. 315-332.
Raisch, S., Birkinshaw, J., Probst, G. and Tushman, M.L. (2009), Organizational ambidexterity:
balancing exploitation and exploration for sustained performance,Organization Science, Vol. 20
No. 4, pp. 685-695.
JSMA
Rothaermel, F.T. and Alexandre, M.T. (2009), Ambidexterity in technology sourcing: the moderating
role of absorptive capacity,Organization Science, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 759-780, 829-830.
Shane, S.A. (2008), The Illusions of Entrepreneurship: The Costly Myths That Entrepreneurs, Investors,
and Policy Makers Live By, Yale University Press, London.
Sinha, S. (2015), The explorationexploitation dilemma: a review in the context of managing growth of
new ventures,Vikalpa, Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 313-323.
Sminia, H. (2009), Process research in strategy formation: theory, methodology and relevance,
International Journal of Management Reviews, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 97-125.
Smith, W.K. and Tushman, M.L. (2005), Managing strategic contradictions: a top management model
for managing innovation streams,Organization Science, Vol. 16 No. 5, pp. 522-536.
Tushman, M.L. and OReilly, C.A. (1996), Ambidextrous organizations: managing evolutionary and
revolutionary change,California Management Review, Vol. 38 No. 4, pp. 8-30.
Vrontis, D., Thrassou, A., Santoro, G. and Papa, A. (2017), Ambidexterity, external knowledge and
performance in knowledge-intensive firms,The Journal of Technology Transfer, Vol. 42 No. 2,
pp. 374-388.
Yin, R. (2009), Case Study Research: Design and Methods, Sage Publications, Los Angeles, CA.
Zack, M.H. (2000), Jazz improvisation and organizing: once more from the top,Organization Science,
Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 227-234.
Zimmermann, A., Raisch, S. and Birkinshaw, J. (2015), How is ambidexterity initiated? The emergent
charter definition process,Organization Science, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 1119-1139.
Corresponding author
Sabyasachi Sinha can be contacted at: sabyasachi@iiml.ac.in
For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
Emergent-
strategy
process
... The capacity of a company to concurrently seek exploitation and exploration is referred to as organizational ambidexterity (Tushman and O'Reilly, 1996;Benner and Tushman, 2003;Gibson and Birkinshaw, 2004;Sinha, 2019). Exploitation refers to the improvement of existing knowledge, resources, competencies, products, and processes and involves incremental shifts from its previous position, whereas exploration refers to the discovery of new products, resources, knowledge, and opportunities and is associated with radical changes and learning through experimentation (March, 1991;Benner and Tushman, 2003;Sinha, 2019). ...
... The capacity of a company to concurrently seek exploitation and exploration is referred to as organizational ambidexterity (Tushman and O'Reilly, 1996;Benner and Tushman, 2003;Gibson and Birkinshaw, 2004;Sinha, 2019). Exploitation refers to the improvement of existing knowledge, resources, competencies, products, and processes and involves incremental shifts from its previous position, whereas exploration refers to the discovery of new products, resources, knowledge, and opportunities and is associated with radical changes and learning through experimentation (March, 1991;Benner and Tushman, 2003;Sinha, 2019). ...
Conference Paper
Full-text available
The luxury brand industry in Indonesia has experienced significant growth and transformation in recent years. As the economy has flourished, consumers' purchasing power and desire for prestigious and aspirational products have increased. The luxury brand industry in Indonesia, despite its growth, faces significant challenges when competing with overseas luxury brands. Many international luxury brands have established strong footholds and brand recognition, making it difficult for Indonesia luxury brands to gain a competitive edge. Corporate heritage identity, organizational strategy ambidexterity, brand image, and social media marketing activity have all emerged as critical factors influencing luxury brand equity. The luxury brand industry is characterized by its exclusivity, heritage, and aspirational appeal. Luxury brands must find a balance between their rich past and the requirement for strategic flexibility since the dynamic nature of the luxury market necessitates ongoing adaptation and innovation. Additionally, understanding the mediating role of brand image and the moderating effect of social media marketing activity becomes crucial for Indonesia luxury brands to enhance their competitiveness in the luxury market. This study aims to explore the impact of corporate heritage identity and organizational strategy ambidexterity on luxury brand equity for Indonesia luxury brands.
... new ideas(Pelagio Rodriguez, Hechanova, & Regina, 2014) , business benefits(Cao, Gedajlovic, & Zhang, 2009), and organizational change(Mitra, Gaur, & Giacosa, 2019) . This has resulted in the scaling up of methods(Sinha, 2019) and has become an approach for many organizations (Blarr, 2012). The organizational ambidexterity ensures a longterm success by balancing the need to innovate and the adaptation to the environmental changes(O'Reilly III, Harreld, & Tushman, 2009) and by improving and scaling the existing processes (Úbeda-García, Claver-Cortés, Marco-Lajara, García-Lillo, & Zaragoza-Sáez, 2018) and technologies (Wirtz, 2019) .How , To achieve this success, five conditions must be met, which are as follows:  Constructing a capability for resolving routines conflict management. ...
... • Zhen, j., Xie , z., & Dong, K. (2021). Impact of IT governance mechanisms on organizational agility and the role of top management support and IT ambidexterity. ...
Article
This paper focuses on highlighting the effective role played by the dimensions of organizational ambidexterity in creating a digital transformation within the company. For this purpose, we used the survey method directed at 530 workers in an organization selling agricultural equipment in Algeria, which witnessed a rapid digital transformation after the Covid-19 pandemic.
... This concept facilitates the identification and utilization of nascent prospects and optimizes existing advantages and resources (Pinheiro et al., 2019). The accumulation and dissemination of market intelligence catalyze the generation of novel ideas, forming the cornerstone of ambidexterity (Sinha, 2019). ...
Article
Full-text available
Purpose The main purpose of this study is to assess the influence of business analytics (BA) on supply chain ambidexterity (SCA) and market learning (ML) in the context of Iran as a developing country. Design/methodology/approach The study population encompasses a range of key positions such as senior managers, supply chain managers, senior IT managers and senior marketing and marketing research managers in Iran. Through a survey, a questionnaire was designed to gather data from these individuals. The data collected from a total of 214 participants underwent rigorous analysis using structural equation modeling. Findings Findings revealed BA has a positive influence on SCA and ML. Furthermore, the study found that distinct facets of ML, namely, exploratory and exploitative learning, exerted a positive influence on SCA. Additionally, the investigation uncovered that the mechanisms of exploratory ML and exploitative ML play a partially mediating role in the relationship between BA and SCA. Research limitations/implications It is prudent to acknowledge that the study’s sampled entities were exclusively Iranian companies, potentially curtailing the extent of generalizability of our findings. Originality/value This research contributes valuable theoretical insights and practical implications to policymakers and top managers of organizations, particularly the surveyed organizations to formulate and implement an appropriate strategy to avail of BA techniques toward enhancing SCA. Also, this study provides significant insights into the determinants of SCA and demonstrates how organizations can leverage data analytics and ML to attain sustained growth and ambidexterity within the supply chain context.
... First, this study addresses the gap in organizational ambidexterity literature, which has mainly been studied in the context of large incumbent firms, by examining it for start-up firms. There are limited discussions on entrepreneurial ambidexterity and how it affects start-up firm performance (Sinha, 2019). In this discussion, the authors argue that the founding team's ambidexterity leads to start-up ambidexterity, which leads to speedier attainment of start-up success milestones. ...
Article
Full-text available
Purpose Extant studies in entrepreneurship have explored factors that influence the birth and growth of start-up firms; however, there appears to be a dearth of studies examining the influence of founders' ambidextrous orientation on start-ups' success, especially their speed of attaining the coveted status of a “unicorn start-up” – which is considered a mega success in practice. This study examines whether and how founding teams’ collective ambidextrous orientation influences their respective start-ups’ pace of becoming a “unicorn”. Design/methodology/approach This study empirically analyses 220 interviews by the founders of 83 Indian unicorns in examining the influence of the founding teams’ collective exploration-exploitation capability on their firms' speed to achieve the “unicorn” status. The Cox Hazard model was used to test the hypothesized relationships, and linear ordinary least squares (OLS) regression was used to test the robustness of the results. Findings The authors find a strong positive relationship between founding teams’ ambidextrous skills and the speed of becoming a unicorn. The study results suggest that the founding teams’ collective exploratory skills may be more influential in their start-up’s speed to unicorn status vis-à-vis their exploitative skills. Originality/value This study finds that the founding teams’ ambidextrous orientation and exploratory skills accelerate their start-up’s speed to becoming a unicorn, contributing to the academic discourse on the “unicorn” phenomenon, which is widely acknowledged as a grand success status for start-ups—especially technology and venture capital funded start-ups—among the practitioners. This study contributes to the academic discourse on firm capabilities and founding-team-related antecedents of start-up success by raising a new dimension of the founding team’s ambidextrous orientation.
... Thus, ambidexterity has a significant positive moderating effect on the relationship between IC and FP. This supports the determination that the effect of a firm's resources on its performance must be orchestrated, and therefore, it depends on its management [1], [8], [56], [18], [55], [82], [61], [59], [48], [116], [9], [117]. This also supports the findings of other studies, demonstrating that managerial ambidexterity moderates the relationship between business-related variables [85], [60], [47], [48], [20]. ...
Article
Full-text available
We verify the moderating effect of managerial ambidexterity on the relationship between intellectual capital and financial performance of small manufacturing companies in Peru. The study used a quantitative, non-experimental, cross-sectional design. The sample consisted of 506 small manufacturing firms. To determine the hypothesised model’s validity and reliability, we performed an exploratory factor analysis using a rotated component matrix to group questions within their corresponding constructs. Next, we assessed convergent and discriminant validity using measures such as Cronbach’s alpha, composite reliability, and average variance extracted. Finally, we tested the model hypotheses using structural equation modelling. SPSS 27 and AMOS 24 were used for all analyses. The study showed that there is a partial moderating effect of managerial ambidexterity on the relationship between intellectual capital and financial performance of small manufacturing firms in Peru. Additionally, statistical analysis showed that managerial ambidexterity moderates the direct relationship between structural capital and relational capital with financial performance, while no moderation effect was observed for human capital. This study provides valuable information for academia and management as it is the first to analyse the relationship between intellectual capital and financial performance, considering the moderating effect of managerial ambidexterity in small manufacturing firms in Peru. This innovative approach makes a significant contribution to scientific knowledge by investigating how managerial ambidexterity affects the financial performance of businesses in emerging economies, an area that has received little prior research.
... This requires capacity modifications to ensure successful goal achievement (Tushman & O'Reilly, 1996). Organizational ambidexterity is the confident capability of an enterprise to simultaneously modify complex and conflicting components, namely exploration and exploitation (Sinha, 2019;Tariq et al., 2022). Exploration relates to creating new products, knowledge, opportunities, and resources with radical change and experimental learning. ...
Article
Full-text available
Upstream textile companies in Indonesia are the most significant contributors to environmentally hazardous production waste. Green Transformational Leadership (GTL) is critical to achieving a Green Resilient Supply Chain (GRS) to address vulnerability to supply chain disruptions while maintaining environmentally friendly practices. In addition, the mediation of Green Ambidexterity (GAM) and Green Innovation (GIN) is believed to strengthen the achievement of GRS. In line with the Indonesian government's policy to protect the environment, this study examines the direct effect of green transformational leadership variables on a green resilient supply chain. It evaluates Green Ambidexterity and Green Innovation's mediating effect on the relationship between GTL and GRS. This study analyzes the data of 50 production managers of upstream textile companies from 87 respondents collected from the survey. The analysis uses PLS-SEM based on variance to verify the relationship between variables. The research results indicate that green transformational leadership significantly influences green resilient supply chains. It was found that both Green Ambidexterity and Green Innovation significantly influence the Green Resilient Supply Chain, both directly and through mediating effects. Therefore, managers should consider implementing a Green Resilient Supply Chain, Green Ambidexterity, and Green Innovation practices to improve organizational goals while maintaining a green environment.
... The ability to simultaneously pursue explorativeinnovationand exploitativeefficiencyactivities is called organisational ambidexterity (March, 1991). For firms to attain a position of sustainable competitive advantage, efficiency and innovation capabilities are needed, as the former protects the present and the latter fuels firms' future (Sinha, 2019). Being ambidextrous enables them to reconcile the paradoxical demands of an organisation's short-and long-term needs; it helps the organisation reap the benefit of research and unpredictability, along with the benefits of exploitation and process control (Benner and Tushman, 2003;Gupta et al., 2006). ...
Article
Full-text available
Purpose This paper aims to explore the effect of gender diversity and female empowerment on a firm’s exploration and exploitation capabilities. Design/methodology/approach This is an empirical paper. This study investigated the research question in this paper using data on UK Financial Times Stock Exchange 100 firms and OLS regression analysis. Findings This study found a positive association between senior management gender diversity in the workforce and exploitation and exploration capabilities. Also, female empowerment positively moderates senior management gender diversity’s impact on exploration capability. Practical implications This study advises firms aspiring ambidextrous to establish gender diversity – especially at the senior management level – and focus on female empowerment in their organisations. Originality/value This paper argued for the role of females in making the organisations ambidextrous by impacting both exploitation and exploration capabilities, which did not receive adequate research attention to date.
Chapter
Economic sustainability has always been a major challenge for small and medium enterprises (SMEs), which intensified during the COVID-19 pandemic. We propose that the implementation of knowledge ambidexterity (KA) can be a solution for the economic sustainability for SMEs. We take a digital perspective to KA and emphasise that digitalisation efforts can achieve KA to leverage economic sustainability since SMEs face resource constraints, knowledge limitations and concentrated efforts towards exploitation processes in expense of exploration processes. We conducted an intervention-based multi-site case study research with SMEs recruited from India and the United Arab Emirates to investigate how digital technologies can support KA for SMEs. We found that SMEs that embark on digitalisation efforts can develop a strong foundation towards achieving KA. These efforts, in turn, resulted in improved market awareness, competitive advantage and innovation capacity for SMEs, thereby promoting economic sustainability.
Article
Full-text available
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to set forth a conceptual model describing the actors and roles in ecosystems created to enable productive black entrepreneurship in the USA. Design/methodology/approach This paper provides a systematic literature review of entrepreneurship ecosystems. It further leverages such literature review by using an autoethnographic approach recommended by Guyotte and Kochacka (2016), drawing on the authors’ practical experience in studying, owning, educating or consulting employer businesses owned by persons of color in the USA and abroad. Findings Each actor in the ecosystem has practical wisdom and assets that can be shared and leveraged through interacting with the other actors either as role model institutions or capacity development institutions, thus mitigating social inequalities and boosting economic progress by extending entrepreneurial opportunities beyond those that are greatly resourced. Research limitations/implications Our literature review is based on selected samples of relevant articles on entrepreneurship ecosystem research and ethnic minority entrepreneurship, and thus, is not exhaustive. The selection was partly influenced by the authors’ opinion of whether a given study was relevant or not to a black entrepreneurship ecosystem. There is the possibility that some relevant studies were excluded. Thus, other actors are encouraged to revise or adapt this model to inform their distinct roles and goals. Practical implications The proposed model can help actors involved in the operation or support of a black-owned business make optimal business decisions, enabling each actor to be instrumental in another’s understanding of how to facilitate the success of black American entrepreneurs and business owners and thus, deploy marketing campaigns to boost the visibility and role of each actor. These campaigns play a role in their entrepreneurial marketing efforts. Originality/value Responding to Gines and Sampson’s (2020) call, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper is the first to explicitly provide a comprehensive black entrepreneurship ecosystem model that identifies the actors, roles and activities that can help black Americans address social inequalities that limit their ability to become a successful employer business. The proposed model may aid in deepening the theoretical discussion on entrepreneurial ecosystems and be of inspiration for the future works of scholars and practitioners interested in the entrepreneurship and marketing interface.
Article
Full-text available
La presente investigación aplica la teoría de la complejidad para explicar el proceso de formación de estrategias complejas. Se realizó una revisión sistemática de literatura para identificar el estado del arte y se observó que el marco teórico de la teoría es disperso. En este contexto, se identificó el esquema local de comportamiento, la impredecibilidad, la auto organización, el orden emergente, y la evolución en el límite del caos como los constructos más representativos de la teoría. Sobre la base de estos conceptos se concluyó que los gerentes tienen un rol fundamental en la conducción de las organizaciones, que las estrategias deben promover la experimentación, improvisación, prueba y error, y que deben actualizarse constantemente en función a los cambios del entorno. Finalmente, se elaboró un modelo conceptual del proceso de formación de estrategias complejas y se proporcionó un conjunto de recomendaciones prácticas.
Article
Full-text available
We view ambidexterity as a paradox whereby its components, exploration and exploitation, generate persistent and conflicting demands on an organization. Drawing on the attention based view of the firm (ABV), we examine three antecedents of organizational ambidexterity that reflect ABV's three principles − the principle of focus of attention; the principle of situated attention; and the principle of structural distribution of attention. Specifically, we examine the influence of top management team (TMT) composition, whether or not the firm has a clear written vision, and the extent to which organizational attention is focused on investments in R&D, and continuous improvement. We empirically validate our model on a sample of 422 small and medium-sized enterprises in the UK and find that ambidexterity is supported by a blend of integration and differentiation approaches.
Article
Prior research describes international expansion as a series of discrete steps and notes that taking them threatens new ventures' survival, especially due to unexpected setbacks. Seen through the lens of social science, the source of such threat becomes clearer. In this paper, we argue that internationalization in new ventures involves what social anthropologists call a liminal transition – a betwixt-and-between period lying between the intent to internationalize and the realization of a stable internationalized state. The ambiguous and transitory nature of this liminal transition has the potential to increase the odds of overreach (e.g. a high-cost market entry without sufficient resources). Avoiding the negative influence of liminality – and instead harnessing its positive effect – relies on three sources of support that we refer to as opportunity scaffolding: self-reflective learning, peer learning and consultative learning. We argue that entrepreneurs with personality profiles high in levels of core self-evaluation (CSE) are more likely to utilize the scaffolding like that available in business incubators effectively. This leads to the development of a more reflective mindset, making capability learning more likely, preventing decisions that lead to overreach and reducing the threat to INV survival. However we also strike a note of caution in that at excessive (hyper) levels of CSE, the internationalizing new venture could become the victim of hubris. Emboldened with unrealistically high self-confidence, hubristic entrepreneurs are more likely to rebuff use of scaffolding, leading to a more reactive mindset, increasing the probability of liminal overreach and threatening INV survival. Executive summary Internationalization represents an important pathway to growth for new ventures. At the same time, the burden of internationalization is considerable since new ventures must learn new capabilities under severe resource constraints to succeed in international markets. Thus we have a tension: internationalization increases the odds of growing rapidly and lowers the odds of survival for new ventures. Therefore, it is important for new ventures' capability learning process to be effective through harnessing network ties and entrepreneurial cognition. However, although we know a lot about what makes international new ventures (INVs) successful, there is a surprising lack of detailed understanding of the transition that these firms make during the internationalization process. Becoming a stable INV involves making sense of new environments and improvising in the face of unexpected setbacks. Previous work has focused more on how INVs fare while pursuing identified opportunities during initial or post-entry internationalization but not as much on how they cope in the transition to becoming a stable INV over time. To address this deficiency we draw upon an underutilized theoretical lens from social anthropology: liminality. Liminality describes the “betwixt-and-between” condition that is experienced during a transition when one is no longer in the original state but hasn't quite reached the new one. This perspective draws attention to both a vulnerability and an opportunity that are simultaneously heightened during transitions: the novelty of the situation can be cognitively confounding and liberating. If a new venture's entrepreneur is overwhelmed by distorted thinking during this liminal period, he or she may lead the INV to take fatal missteps, including overreaching. On the other hand, if the confusion inherent in this process can be contained and the potential creativity of this stage harnessed, then new capabilities can be learned and the potentially treacherous liminal period successfully navigated. Thus liminality theory helps to distinguish between measured and reckless improvisation. Liminal theory also helps us to identify opportunity scaffolding as an important way of avoiding liminality's negative effects by facilitating reflective learning, peer learning and consultative learning in conjunction with mentors. A practical manifestation of such support is the use of business incubators. Where these are not available, entrepreneurs may avail of mentors and peers through other means such as advisory boards or education. Furthermore, entrepreneurial personality in influences entrepreneurs' propensity for using such scaffolding: those with high levels of core self-evaluation (CSE) – confident of their abilities – are more likely to use scaffolding whereas those with low or excessive levels of CSE will tend to rebuff the use of scaffolding. Overall, our conceptualization complements previous work on capability learning with the notion of “transitioning capability” – which is the ability to harness the creativity of liminality while avoiding its confounding potential. This is a theoretical advance over how INV research views the capability learning process. And it has strong practical implications for how international entrepreneurs can thoughtfully navigate liminality, by taking advantage of opportunity scaffolding, being self-aware of limitations and strengths and avoiding overreach.
Article
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore how big data can shape ambidextrous business process management (BPM) in terms of exploitation and exploration. Design/methodology/approach A qualitative methodology involving case studies has been chosen to explore the impact of big data deployment on exploitative and explorative business processes. Findings The results of case studies offer some opportunities and challenges for service firms related to both the exploitative and the explorative aspects of BPM driven by big data. Originality/value The deployment of big data in business processes has attracted a large amount of interest recently. However, these studies are mostly conceptual, so empirical research about this complex relationship is quite rare, especially research with specific arguments regarding exploitative and explorative activities. This paper aims to fill this gap by offering empirical evidence for big data-driven business processes.
Article
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate how multinational enterprises (MNEs) manage human resources (HR) in explorative and exploitative alliances in smart city projects (SCPs). Design/methodology/approach In this paper, the authors adopt an explorative and qualitative approach based on multiple case studies thanks to the interviews with 21 smart city managers of MNEs who are deeply involved in SCPs. Findings The authors found that MNEs use many different partnerships and “temporal separation” in many cities all around the world in order to maximize the benefits of both exploration and exploitation. According to the aim of the project, MNEs implemented different HR practices intentionally targeted toward managing social relations among internal and external employees involved in SCPs. Practical implications The authors highlighted that MNEs tend to develop different ties among employees and external partners and to use different HR practices according to the nature and to the aim of the alliances. Thus, the development of human resource management systems becomes crucial in supporting organizational ambidexterity through alliances. Social implications This paper gives useful insights in improving the effectiveness of MNEs in SCPs. Due to the business opportunities arising from the application of ICT and technological innovation to urban services, MNEs are becoming an important player in smart cities. Increasing the effectiveness of the SCPs leads faster to more economically, socially and environmentally sustainable cities. Originality/value The development of alliances has a key role in strengthening and complementing firms’ exploration and exploitation agendas in SCPs. Thus, this paper provides guidelines to MNEs in order to adapt HR practices and to rethink the role of HR within and across corporate boundaries in an emergent context of analysis.
Article
Earlier research has suggested that diversity is a double-edged sword when achieving organizational ambidexterity. While it may contribute to the development of new combinations of exploration and exploitation, it may also lead to disagreements and potential conflict within top management teams (TMTs). To improve our understanding of the effectiveness of diversity in ambidextrous organizations, we develop a synergistic perspective on TMT diversity and examine how two types of diversity - functional and age diversity - affect the achievement of organizational ambidexterity. We also identify shared responsibility and CEO cognitive trust as important contingencies that may complement the effects of diversity within TMTs in terms of resolving potential conflicts and managing tensions between exploration and exploitation effectively. Based on multisource data, our study shows that CEO cognitive trust and shared responsibility moderate the relationship between different types of diversity and ambidexterity. Our study has important implications for research on organizational ambidexterity, diversity, and senior leadership.
Chapter
The objective of this chapter is to develop a process perspective on ambidexterity that not only informs the specific research on reconciling the contradictory forces of exploration and exploitation, but also the broader theory on how organizations experience and address paradoxical tensions. We distinguish three stages of paradox management within ambidextrous organizations. During the initiation stage, organizational actors identify the paradoxical tensions and develop a strategic plan to address them. In the subsequent contextualization stage, they put the organizational structures, cultures, and processes in place, with which to address the paradox. During the implementation stage, the organizational actors manage the paradoxical tensions in their day-to-day activities. By comparing the structural, contextual, and sequential pathways that organizations take to navigate these stages, we review and expand current theorizing on exploration–exploitation tensions and derive promising avenues for future ambidexterity and paradox research.
Article
This paper looks into how new ventures organize their business models in order to meet their available resources. It employs the business model as the unit of analysis to investigate the role and nature of business model adaptation as a coping mechanism with resource constraints. By drawing on a case study with two ventures starting with different resources, the paper shows how those ventures use business model adaptation under resource constraints as a way to create comparable offerings. Business model adaptation involves a process of continuous search, selection, and improvement in value creation, value proposition, and value capture, based on the surrounding environment. For the two new ventures included in this study, early business model adaptations were related to (1) market — geography and customer, (2) strategy — marketing, sales, and growth, (3) profit — profit formula and cost structure, and (4) structures, processes, and capabilities. This paper also shows how the adaptation process is conditioned by the venture's stock and flow of resources. Bringing a resource perspective into the process of business model adaptation implies practical implications for new ventures that are developing and adapting their business models to strategically co-develop their offering with their resources such that they match required adaptations.