The overarching goal of this qualitative review study is not only to review the relevant literature, but also to organize, structure and integrate findings in order to gain a better understanding for what ambidexterity really is and ultimately to give managerial guidance. The following three research questions will be particularly addressed throughout the study:
What is the current state of the art of the ambidexterity concept?
What are the underlying problems that result in stagnation in research progress in this field?
How can managers learn from the ambidexterity research?
The study is divided in three main parts. Part I, Praeludium, gives a basic understanding for the importance of this topic (chapter 1), illustrates the general underlying concepts, and shows a short historical retrospect of the research field’s development (chapter 3). In part II, A comprehensive overview of the current ambidexterity research field, the relevant literature is reviewed and the field’s structure analyzed (chapter 4). Further, the tension of the exploration-exploitation integration will be discussed (chapter 5) and an extensive model that interconnects the most relevant influencing and moderating factors on ambidexterity and firm performance will be developed (Chapter 6).
Based on these executions, dysfunctional underlying concepts and deficits of the literature field will be outlined in chapter 7. Hereafter, in the final part III, Implications of the thesis, at first practical implications for managers (chapter 8) and implications for science (chapter 9) that prevail from the thesis, are given. At the end, limitations as well as avenues for future research (chapter 10) are outlined. These three parts are constitutive and can be logically connected as seen in figure 1.
Table of Contents
1. Relevance of the Research Objective-Organizational Pursuit of Long-Term Success
2. Assertion of the Research Objectives and Outline of the Thesis Structure
2.1. Research Objectives
2.2. Outline of the Thesis
3. The Underlying Concepts and a Historical Approach
3.1. Development of a First Understanding for Ambidexterity
3.1.1. Structural Ambidexterity
3.1.2. Contextual Ambidexterity
3.2. Ambidexterity and Firm Performance
4. Topology of the Relevant Literature
4.1. Analytical Framework
4.1.1. Paper Selection
4.1.2. Pattern of the Scientific Field
4.2. Definition Dissention
4.3. Multiple Perspectives of Ambidexterity Research
4.4. Different Level Approach of Ambidexterity
5. Tensions in the Integration of Ambidexterity
5.1. Introducing Exploration and Exploitation – Components of Ambidexterity
5.2. Challenge of Achieving a Balance
5.3. Dangers of a Disequilibrium
6. Influencing Factors of Ambidexterity – Painting a Big Picture
6.1. Resource Related Factors
6.1.1. Knowledge
6.1.2. Other Resources
6.2. Contextual Factors
6.3. Structural Factors
6.3.1. Corporate Attributes
6.3.2. Organizational Characteristics
6.4. Environmental Factors
6.5. Interpretation
7. Deficits of the Ambidexterity Research Field
7.1. Missing Definition Unity
7.1.1. Lack of Ambidexterity Definition Unity
7.1.2. Lack of Exploration and Exploitation Definition Unity
7.2. Ambidexterity is Typically Seen as an Organizational Approach
7.3. Structural and Contextual Ambidexterity are Treated Separately
7.4. Ambidexterity is Mostly Seen as a Static Model
7.5. Literature Field Lacks an International Dimension of Research
7.6. Defining Ambidexterity – Towards a Unified Understanding
8. Managerial Implications
9. Scientific Implications
10. Limitations and Avenues for Future Research
Objectives and Research Themes
This thesis examines the concept of organizational ambidexterity—the ability of an organization to simultaneously pursue exploitation of existing capabilities and exploration of new opportunities. The research aims to synthesize the fragmented literature, clarify the construct, and identify the factors that influence a firm's ability to remain ambidextrous to ensure long-term performance and sustainability.
- The theoretical foundations and historical development of the ambidexterity concept.
- A topology of the existing research field, categorizing literature by perspectives and definitions.
- An analysis of the tensions inherent in integrating exploration and exploitation activities.
- A comprehensive model of the factors influencing ambidexterity, including resource, contextual, structural, and environmental dimensions.
- The identification of current deficits and unresolved issues within the ambidexterity research field.
Extract from the Book
3.1.1 Structural Ambidexterity
In the literary field, authors usually refer to ambidexterity in structural terms (Birkinshaw and Gibson, 2004, also see chapter 4). Organizations that pursue structural ambidexterity (or “architectural ambidexterity” (Andriopoulos and Lewis, 2009, e.g. p. 696)) address the trade-off in establishing dual structures, in which certain business units focus on the execution of exploration while others focus on the execution of exploitation tasks concurrently (Duncan, 1976, Birkinshaw and Gibson, 2004, Raisch and Birkinshaw, 2008). According to the concept of structural ambidexterity, there are two different approaches to accomplish a business unit separation: Spatial separation and parallel structures.
In the spatial separation model (see figure 3), units are spatially divided into exploration and exploitation tasks by either location or function. The advantage of this concept is that every unit can be configured according to its specific requirements (Raisch and Birkinshaw, 2008). Hence, Benner and Tushman (2003) distinguish between exploratory and exploitation units as follows: “While the exploratory units are small and decentralized, with loose cultures and processes, the exploitation units are larger and more centralized, with tight cultures and processes“ (Benner and Tushman, 2003, p. 247). Although these “loosely coupled” units (Benner and Tushman, 2003, p. 247) work entirely independently, they are integrated via a mutual strategic objective, shared assets and a common set of values (Tushman and O'Reilly III, 1996, Smith and Tushman, 2005, O'Reilly and Tushman, 2008). Moreover, within subunits (See Fig 3, subunits A&B / C&D) organizational structures, business cultures or operational procedures are consistent.
In contrast, the parallel structure model provides a slightly different approach. Depending on the requirements of a specific job, the top management team (TMT) is able to switch between structures (See Figure 3). Temporary forms of organization, such as projects and teams, can be utilized and formed within one unit, pursuing an alternate structure from the remaining part of the organization (McDonough III and Leifer, 1983, Raisch and Birkinshaw, 2008). Therefore, within a single business unit, competing demands can be addressed temporarily (McDonough III and Leifer, 1983, Raisch and Birkinshaw, 2008). Although the parallel structure model can lead to an effective organizational architecture to provide a balanced situation of the exploration-exploitation tension, the spatial separation model dominates research.
Summary of Chapters
1. Relevance of the Research Objective-Organizational Pursuit of Long-Term Success: Discusses the necessity of company adaptation and defines the concept of organizational ambidexterity as a solution to long-term survival in changing environments.
2. Assertion of the Research Objectives and Outline of the Thesis Structure: Defines the core research questions regarding the current state, underlying problems, and practical application of ambidexterity research.
3. The Underlying Concepts and a Historical Approach: Explores the origins of ambidexterity, distinguishing between structural and contextual approaches, and examines the performance implications.
4. Topology of the Relevant Literature: Categorizes existing research into four groups based on their focus on antecedents, performance outcomes, core constructs, or reviews.
5. Tensions in the Integration of Ambidexterity: Analyzes the fundamental components of exploration and exploitation and the dangers of falling into success or failure traps.
6. Influencing Factors of Ambidexterity – Painting a Big Picture: Introduces a model mapping resource, contextual, structural, and environmental factors that affect ambidexterity.
7. Deficits of the Ambidexterity Research Field: Critically evaluates the lack of definition unity, the static nature of existing models, and the need for more international and multi-level research.
8. Managerial Implications: Provides actionable guidance for leaders to establish ambidextrous environments, manage performance standards, and handle leadership paradoxes.
9. Scientific Implications: Explains how the thesis contributes to the field by synthesizing existing knowledge and proposing future research paths to develop a paradigmatic model.
10. Limitations and Avenues for Future Research: Acknowledges the scope limitations of the study and highlights the need for further empirical investigation into multi-level and SME-specific ambidexterity.
Keywords
Organizational Ambidexterity, Exploration, Exploitation, Firm Performance, Structural Ambidexterity, Contextual Ambidexterity, Organizational Learning, Absorptive Capacity, Strategic Management, Innovation, Dynamic Capabilities, Resource Slack, Organizational Design, Leadership, Business Sustainability.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core subject of this thesis?
This thesis investigates the concept of organizational ambidexterity, defined as a firm's ability to simultaneously manage the refinement of current business models (exploitation) and the pursuit of new innovative possibilities (exploration) to ensure long-term success.
What are the primary thematic fields covered?
The thesis covers organizational learning, structural and contextual design, the impact of resource availability, environmental dynamism, and the influence of senior leadership on organizational strategy.
What is the main objective or research question?
The primary goals are to review the state-of-the-art of ambidexterity research, identify why progress in this field has stagnated due to definition inconsistencies, and provide clear managerial guidance for practitioners.
Which scientific methods are utilized?
The study employs a comprehensive qualitative review of 58 key scientific papers, utilizing a framework to analyze and synthesize the literature, while developing an overarching model to categorize factors influencing ambidexterity.
What does the main body address?
The main body reviews the evolution of the concept, maps the literature, highlights the tension between exploration and exploitation, and develops an integrated model to help organizations navigate these complex managerial acts of balance.
Which keywords characterize this work?
The most important keywords include Organizational Ambidexterity, Exploration, Exploitation, Organizational Design, Dynamic Capabilities, and Firm Performance.
How does the work distinguish between Structural and Contextual Ambidexterity?
Structural ambidexterity involves separating exploration and exploitation into different units by function or location. Contextual ambidexterity focuses on the individual level, where leaders create a supportive environment that enables employees to engage in both activities simultaneously.
What is the "success trap" mentioned in the research?
The success trap describes a situation where an organization overemphasizes exploitation of existing competencies, leading to high short-term performance but eventual obsolescence because the firm fails to explore and adapt to new demands.
How does the thesis define a unified understanding of ambidexterity?
The author proposes that ambidexterity is a multilevel organizational capability to balance exploration and exploitation in a way that is unique to the environmental and business-related requirements of the specific firm.
- Citar trabajo
- Jonas Hermann (Autor), 2014, Organizational Ambidexterity. A Managerial Act of Balance, Múnich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/309684
