Dynamic Balancing of Exploration and Exploitation: The Contingent Benefits of Ambidexterity

Johannes Luger (), Sebastian Raisch () and Markus Schimmer ()
Additional contact information
Johannes Luger: Department of Strategic Management and Globalization, Copenhagen Business School, Frederiksberg 2000, Denmark; Geneva School of Economics and Management, University of Geneva, Geneva 1211, Switzerland
Sebastian Raisch: Geneva School of Economics and Management, University of Geneva, Geneva 1211, Switzerland
Markus Schimmer: Institute of Management, University of St. Gallen, 9000 St. Gallen, Switzerland

Organization Science, 2018, vol. 29, issue 3, 449-470

Abstract: We study the evolution of firms’ exploration–exploitation allocations and their long-term performance outcomes. Extending current ambidexterity theory, we suggest that not only firms pursuing one-sided exploration or exploitation orientations show self-reinforcing tendencies but also ambidextrous firms adopting balanced exploration–exploitation orientations. Integrating formal modeling arguments, we further propose that reinforcing ambidexterity can be good or bad for firms’ long-term performance, depending on the environment they face: In contexts characterized by incremental change, firms benefit more from the learning effects of maintaining ambidexterity, which lead to superior performance. Firms in discontinuous change contexts, however, suffer more from the misalignment that reinforcement creates, which affects their performance negatively. A longitudinal data set of global insurance firms (1999–2014) supports our arguments. Building on these findings, we reconceptualize ambidexterity as the ability to dynamically balance exploration and exploitation, which emerges from combining capability-building processes (to balance exploration and exploitation) with capability-shifting processes (to adapt the exploration–exploitation balance). We contribute to the organizational literature by developing a dynamic perspective on balancing exploration and exploitation, by clarifying the contingent nature of the ambidexterity–firm performance relationship, and by integrating and extending the ambidexterity and formal modeling perspectives on exploration and exploitation.

Keywords: ambidexterity; exploitation; exploration; formal modeling; learning; organizational adaptation; paradox (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2018
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (65)

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2017.1189 (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:inm:ororsc:v:29:y:2018:i:3:p:449-470

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Organization Science from INFORMS Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Asher ().