textPrior studies have emphasized that structural attributes are crucial to simultaneously pursuing exploration and exploitation, yet our understanding of antecedents of ambidexterity is still limited. Structural differentiation can help ambidextrous organizations to maintain multiple inconsistent and conflicting demands; however, differentiated exploratory and exploitative activities need to mobilized, coordinated, integrated, and applied. Based on this idea, we delineate formal and informal senior team integration mechanisms (i.e. contingency rewards and social integration) and formal and informal organizational integration mechanisms (i.e. cross-functional interfaces and connectedness) and examine how they mediate the relationship between structural differentiation and ambidexterity. Overall, our findings suggest that the previously asserted direct effect of structural differentiation on ambidexterity operates through informal senior team (i.e. senior team social integration) and formal organizational (i.e. cross-functional interfaces) integration mechanisms. Through this richer explanation and empirical assessment, we contribute to a greater clarity and better understanding of how organizations may effectively pursue exploration and exploitation simultaneously to achieve ambidexterity.

/pdf/structural-differentiation-and-ambidexterity-the-mediating-4tfwksgx8f.pdf

Structural Differentiation and Ambidexterity: The Mediating Role of Integration Mechanisms

Too small to do it all? A meta-analysis on the relative relationships of exploration, exploitation, and ambidexterity with SME performance

This research contributes to the ongoing stream of research on the integration of technical and business knowledge for successful innovation, but does so with a unique focus – that of new firm founder teams. This is in contrast to much of the existing literature, which focuses on organizational units in large firms. As part of their strategy for success, new technology-based firms need to find an optimal balance between exploration and exploitation in their innovation activities. However, the resource constraints they typically face make it difficult for them to pursue both at the same time, which means that at any given point in time they are likely to opt for either exploration or exploitation rather than both. The purpose of this research is to investigate what influences new technology-based firms to select one innovation strategy over another. Data collected in 145 new technology-based firms are used to test hypotheses about how environmental conditions and founder team composition interact in their contributions to choice of innovation strategy. Based on hierarchical regression analysis of the data, the research findings suggest that teams consisting of individuals who have dissimilar backgrounds are more likely to adapt their innovation strategy to the characteristics of the environment than teams of individuals with similar backgrounds. Conversely, teams consisting of individuals with similar backgrounds are more likely to continue to follow their preferred strategy. However, as competitive intensity or environmental dynamism increases, such teams are likely to deviate from their preferred strategy.

Antecedents of Innovation Strategies in New Technology-Based Firms: Interactions between the Environment and Founder Team Composition

Building and leveraging competence exploitation and exploration for firm new product success

Both organizational and management research suggest that schools and their leaders need to be ambidextrous to secure prosperity and long-term survival in dynamic environments characterized by compe...

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1741143220945705

Principals between exploitation and exploration: Results of a nationwide study on ambidexterity of school leaders:

This study aims to fill three theoretical gaps in previous literature on exploration and exploitation: the relationship between exploration and exploitation is inconclusive; the influences of exploration and exploitation on firm performance are not consistent; and no empirical studies have integrated the antecedents of exploration and exploitation from the different research fields.,The study conducted a meta-analysis to quantitatively synthesize 143 studies with 257 independent samples to understand the relationship between exploration and exploitation and their consequences and antecedents.,The results show that exploration and exploitation are positively correlated with each other, and both of them can boost firm performance. Moreover, firm capabilities, firm size, firm age, competitive intensity, market orientation and entrepreneurial orientation positively influence exploration, and firm resources, firm capabilities, firm size, firm age, market orientation and entrepreneurial orientation positively influence exploitation. Competitive intensity negatively influences exploitation. Surprisingly, market turbulence does not significantly influence exploration or exploitation.,The results not only contribute to the theories by reconciling the inconsistent results but also provide insight for firms with guidance about under what conditions they should use what strategies.

Annie Peng Cui

Papers

A meta-analytic study on exploration and exploitation