Ambidestria Dinâmica: Proposta de um Modelo Teórico e Hipotético



Artigo principal Conteúdo

Rodrigo Franklin Frogeri
Pedro dos Santos Portugal Júnior
Fabrício Pelloso Piurcosky
Victor Sanacato
Julia López de Calle
Stefano Barra Gazzola
Felipe Flausino de Oliveira

Resumo

Contexto: a ambidestria é uma capacidade dinâmica que busca equilibrar iniciativas de exploitation e exploration. O desenvolvimento conjunto de exploitation e exploration pode ser alcançado por meio da ambidestria dinâmica. As discussões teóricas envolvendo a relação entre os conceitos de ambidestria e capacidades dinâmicas (CDs) já foram desenvolvidas na literatura. Entretanto, a forma como as três abordagens ambidestras (estrutural, contextual e sequencial) são baseadas em CDs ainda precisa ser observada pelos pesquisadores. Objetivo: o objetivo do estudo é propor um modelo teórico hipotético que explique a influência dos variados tipos de ambidestria organizacional (estrutural, contextual e sequencial) no desenvolvimento das CDs e sua relação com o desempenho organizacional. Metodologia: o estudo foi desenvolvido por meio de uma ampla revisão sistemática da literatura orientada por uma lógica indutiva, epistemologia interpretativa e abordagem qualitativa. Resultados: as análises e discussões possibilitaram a apresentação de um modelo teórico hipotético de ambidestria dinâmica que envolve nove construtos e onze hipóteses. Conclusão: acreditamos que o nosso estudo contribui teoricamente para o campo das estratégias organizacionais e pode possibilitar estudos alinhados com os conceitos de ambidestria dinâmica e CDs.



Histórico de Downloads

Não há dados estatísticos.


Detalhes do artigo

Como Citar
Frogeri, R. F., Portugal Júnior, P. dos S., Piurcosky, F. P., Sanacato, V., Calle, J. L. de, Gazzola, S. B., & Oliveira, F. F. de. (2021). Ambidestria Dinâmica: Proposta de um Modelo Teórico e Hipotético. Revista De Administração Contemporânea, e210088. https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-7849rac2022210088.en
Seção
Artigos Teórico-empíricos

Referências

Andriopoulos, C., & Lewis, M. W. (2009). Exploitation-exploration tensions and organizational ambidexterity: Managing paradoxes of innovation. Organization Science, 20(4), 696–717. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1080.0406
Arend, R. J., & Chen, Y. (2012). Entrepreneurship as dynamic, complex, disequilibrious: A focus that benefits strategic organization. Strategic Organization, 10(1), 85–95. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476127011431340
Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1978). Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Assen, M. F. van. (2019). Empowering leadership and contextual ambidexterity – The mediating role of committed leadership for continuous improvement. European Management Journal, 38(3), 435–449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2019.12.002
Auh, S., & Menguc, B. (2005). Balancing exploration and exploitation: The moderating role of competitive intensity. Journal of Business Research, 58(12), 1652–1661. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2004.11.007
Avolio, B. J., Bass, B. M., & Jung, D. I. (1999). Re-examining the components of transformational and transactional leadership using the multifactor leadership questionnaire. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 72(4), 441–462. https://doi.org/10.1348/096317999166789
Banfield, R., Lombardo, C. T., & Wax, T. (2015). Design sprint: A practical guidebook for building great digital products. Boston, MA: O’Reilly Media.
Bartunek, J. M., Gordon, J. R., & Weathersby, R. P. (1983). Developing “Complicated” Understanding in Administrators. Academy of Management Review, 8(2), 273–284. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1983.4284737
Bernstein, J. H. (2014). Disciplinarity and trandisciplinarity in the study of knowledge. Informing Science, 17, 241–273. Retrieved from http://academicworks.cuny.edu/kb_pubs
Besharov, M. L., & Smith, W. K. (2014). Multiple institutional logics in organizations: Explaining their varied nature and implications. Academy of Management Review, 39(3), 364–381. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2011.0431
Bever, D. Van, & Christensen, C. M. (2014). The Capitalist’s Dilemma. Harvard Business Review, 17(June), 1–17. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2014/06/the-capitalists-dilemma
Birkinshaw, J., & Gupta, K. (2013). Clarifying the distinctive contribution of ambidexterity to the field of organization studies. Academy of Management Perspectives, 27(4), 287–298. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2012.0167
Birkinshaw, J., Zimmermann, A., & Raisch, S. (2016). How do firms adapt to discontinuous change? Bridging the dynamic capabilities and ambidexterity perspectives. California Management Review, 58(4), 36–58. https://doi.org/10.1525/cmr.2016.58.4.36
Bonesso, S., Gerli, F., & Scapolan, A. (2014). The individual side of ambidexterity: Do individuals’ perceptions match actual behaviors in reconciling the exploration and exploitation trade-off? European Management Journal, 32(3), 392–405. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2013.07.003
Boumgarden, P., Nickerson, J., & Zenger, T. R. (2012). Sailing into the wind: exploring the relationships among ambidexterity, vacillation, and organizational performance. Strategic Management Journal, 33, 587–610. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.1972
Brown, T. (2008). Design thinking. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.
Burgelman, R. A. (1991). Intraorganizational ecology of strategy making and organizational adaptation: Theory and field research. Organization Science, 2(3), 239–262. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2.3.239
Burns, T., & Stalker, G. M. (1961). The management of innovation. Tavistock, London, UK: Oxford University Press.
Cao, Q., Gedajlovic, E., & Zhang, H. (2001). Unpacking organizational ambidexterity: Dimensions, contingencies, and synergistic effects. Organization Science, 12(3), 391–392. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.12.3.391.10102
Cao, Q., Simsek, Z., & Zhang, H. (2010). Modelling the joint impact of the CEO and the TMT on organizational ambidexterity. Journal of Management Studies, 47(7), 1272–1296. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2009.00877.x
Carnahan, S., Agarwal, R., & Campbell, B. (2010). The effect of firm compensation structures on the mobility and entrepreneurship of extreme performers. Business, 1303, (December 2009), 1–43. https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1555659
Carter, W. R. (2015). Ambidexterity deconstructed: A hierarchy of capabilities perspective. Management Research Review, 38(8), 794–812. https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-05-2014-0116
Chen, Y. (2017). Dynamic ambidexterity: How innovators manage exploration and exploitation. Business Horizons, 60(3), 385–394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2017.01.001
Chou, C., Yang, K. P., & Chiu, Y. J. (2018). Managing sequential ambidexterity in the electronics industry: roles of temporal switching capability and contingent factors. Industry and Innovation, 25(8), 752–777. https://doi.org/10.1080/13662716.2017.1334538
Christensen, C. M. (1997). The innovator’s dilemma: When new technologies cause great firms to fail. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Retrieved from http://dspace.vnbrims.org:13000/jspui/bitstream/123456789/4699/1/The%20Innovator%27s%20Dilemma%20When%20New%20Technologies%20Cause%20Great%20Firms%20to%20Fail%20%28Management%20of%20Innovation%20and%20Change%20Series%29.pdf
Christensen, C. M., & Raynor, M. E. (2003). The innovator’s solution: Creating and sustaining sucessfull growth. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Collins, C. J., & Clark, K. D. (2003). Strategic human resource practices, top management team social networks, and firm performance: The role of human resource practices in creating organizational competitive advantage. Academy of Management Journal, 46(6), 740-751. https://doi.org/10.2307/30040665
Cooper, R. G. (2008). Perspective: The stage-gates® idea-to-launch process - Update, what’s new, and NexGen systems. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 25(3), 213–232. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2008.00296.x
Cooper, R. G. (2014). What’s next? After stage-gate. Research Technology Management, 57(1), 20–31. https://doi.org/10.5437/08956308X5606963
Clercq, D. D., Thongpapanl, N., & Dimov, D. (2013). Shedding new light on the relationship between contextual ambidexterity and firm performance: An investigation of internal contingencies. Technovation, 33(4–5), 119–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2012.12.002
Dranev, Y., Izosimova, A., & Meissner, D. (2020). Organizational ambidexterity and performance: Assessment approaches and empirical evidence. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 11(2), 676–691. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-018-0560-y
Ebben, J. J., & Johnson, A. C. (2005). Efficiency, flexibility, or both? Evidence linking strategy to performance in small firms. Strategic Management Journal, 26(13), 1249–1259. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.503
Ederer, F. (2013). Incentives for Parallel Innovation. SSRN. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2309664
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. The Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532–550. https://doi.org/10.2307/258557
Eisenhardt, K. M., & Graebner, M. E. (2007). Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges diverse. The Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 25–32. https://doi.org/10.1002/job
Eitan, A. T., Smolyansky, E., & Harpaz, I. K. (2021). Connected Papers. Retrieved from https://www.connectedpapers.com/about
Eriksson, P. E. (2017). Procurement strategies for enhancing exploration and exploitation in construction projects. Journal of Financial Management of Property and Construction, 22(2), 211–230. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFMPC-05-2016-0018
Fourné, S. P. L., Rosenbusch, N., Heyden, M. L. M., & Jansen, J. J. P. (2019). Structural and contextual approaches to ambidexterity: A meta-analysis of organizational and environmental contingencies. European Management Journal, 37(5), 564–576. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2019.04.002
Fu, N., Flood, P. C., & Morris, T. (2016). Organizational ambidexterity and professional firm performance: The moderating role of organizational capital. Journal of Professions and Organization, 3(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1093/jpo/jov010
Fu, N., & Morris, T. J. (2014). Organizational Ambidexterity and Firm Performance: The Moderating Role of Organizational Capital. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2014(1), 14410. https://doi.org/10.5465/ambpp.2014.22
Ghemawat, P., & Ricart Costa, J. E. I. (1993). The organizational tension between static and dynamic efficiency. Strategic Management Journal, 14(S2), 59–73. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250141007
Gibson, C. B., & Birkinshaw, J. (2004). The Antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. Academy of Management Journal, 47(2), 209–226. https://doi.org/10.5465/20159573
Govindarajan, V., & Trimble, C. (2010). The other side of innovation: Solving the execution challenge. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.
Greenhalgh, T., & Peacock, R. (2005). Effectiveness and efficiency of search methods in systematic reviews of complex evidence: Audit of primary sources. British Medical Journal, 331(7524), 1064–1065. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.38636.593461.68
Günsel, A., Altındağ, E., Kılıç Keçeli, S., Kitapçı, H., & Hızıroğlu, M. (2018). Antecedents and consequences of organizational ambidexterity: the moderating role of networking. Kybernetes, 47(1), 186–207. https://doi.org/10.1108/K-02-2017-0057
Gupta, A. K., Smith, K. E. N. G., & Shalley, C. E. (2006). The interplay between exploration and exploitation. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4), 693–706. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1479-067X20140000014020
Halevi, M. Y., Carmeli, A., & Brueller, N. N. (2015). Ambidexterity in SBUs: TMT Behavioral Integration and Environmental Dynamism. Human Resource Management, 54(May), s223–s238. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21665
Han, M., & Celly, N. (2008). Strategic ambidexterity and performance in international new ventures. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 25(4), 335-349. https://doi.org/10.1002/cjas.84
He, Z. L., & Wong, P. K. (2004). Exploration vs. exploitation: An empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis. Organization Science, 15(4), 481–495. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1040.0078
Heavey, C., & Simsek, Z. (2014). Distributed cognition in top management teams and organizational ambidexterity: The influence of transactive memory systems. Journal of Management, 43(3), 919–945. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314545652
Heracleous, L., Papachroni, A., Andriopoulos, C., & Gotsi, M. (2017). Structural ambidexterity and competency traps: Insights from Xerox PARC. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 117, 327–338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.11.014
Hippel, E. Von (1986). Lead Users: a source of novel product concepts. Management Science, 32(7), 791–805. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.32.7.791
Holland, J. H. (1975). Adaptation in Natural and Artificial System. Ann Harbor, MI: University of MIchigan Press.
Jansen, J. J. P., George, G., Bosch, F. A. J. Van Den, & Volberda, H. W. (2008). Senior team attributes and organizational ambidexterity: The moderating role of transformational leadership. Journal of Management Studies, 45(5), 982–1007. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2008.00775.x
Jansen, J. J. P., Bosch, F. A. J. Van Den, & Volberda, H. W. (2006). Exploratory innovation, exploitative innovation, and performance: Effects of organizational antecedents and environmental moderators. Management Science, 52(11), 1661–1674. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1060.0576
Johnson, N., & Phillips, M. (2018). Rayyan for systematic reviews. Journal of Electronic Resources Librarianship, 30(1), 46–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/1941126X.2018.1444339
Jung, D. I., Chow, C., & Wu, A. (2003). The role of transformational leadership in enhancing organizational innovation: Hypotheses and some preliminary findings. Leadership Quarterly, 14(4–5), 525–544. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1048-9843(03)00050-X
Junni, P., Sarala, R. M., Taras, V., & Tarba, S. Y. (2013). Organizational ambidexterity and performance: A meta-analysis. Academy of Management Perspectives, 27(4), 299–312. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2012.0015
Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1997). A estratégia em ação: Balanced scorecard (21st ed.). Rio de Janeiro: Harvard Business School Press; Elsevier do Brasil.
Kauppila, O. P. (2010). Creating ambidexterity by integrating and balancing structurally separate interorganizational partnerships. Strategic Organization, 8(4), 283–312. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476127010387409
Koryak, O., Lockett, A., Hayton, J., Nicolaou, N., & Mole, K. (2018). Disentangling the antecedents of ambidexterity: Exploration and exploitation. Research Policy, 47(2), 413–427. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.12.003
Li, C. R. (2013). How top management team diversity fosters organizational ambidexterity: The role of social capital among top executives. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 26(5), 874–896. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-06-2012-0075
Lô, A., & Fatien, P. (2018). Rethinking contextual ambidexterity through parallel structures: The case of Renault’s Fab Lab. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2018(1), 10076. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2018.10076abstract
Lubatkin, M. H., Simsek, Z., Ling, Y., & Veiga, J. F. (2006). Ambidexterity and performance in small-to medium-sized firms: The pivotal role of top management team behavioral integration. Journal of Management, 32(5), 646–672. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206306290712
Luger, J., Raisch, S., & Schimmer, M. (2013). The Paradox of Static and Dynamic Ambidexterity. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2013(1), 11466. https://doi.org/10.5465/ambpp.2013.11466abstract
Luger, J., Raisch, S., & Schimmer, M. (2018). Dynamic balancing of exploration and exploitation: The contingent benefits of ambidexterity. Organization Science, 29(3), 449–470. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2017.1189
Mammassis, C. S., & Kostopoulos, K. C. (2019). CEO goal orientations, environmental dynamism and organizational ambidexterity: An investigation in SMEs. European Management Journal, 37(5), 577–588. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2019.08.012
Manso, G. (2017). Creating incentives for innovation. California Management Review, 60(1), 18–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/0008125617725287
March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71–87. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2.1.71
Marín-Idárraga, D. A., Hurtado González, J. M., & Cabello Medina, C. (2016). The antecedents of exploitation-exploration and their relationship with innovation: A study of managers’ cognitive maps. Creativity and Innovation Management, 25(1), 18–37. https://doi.org/10.1111/caim.12139
Masood, S. A., Dani, S. S., Burns, N. D., & Backhouse, G. J. (2006). Transformational leadership and organizational culture: The situational strength perspective. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture, 220(6), 941–949. https://doi.org/10.1243/09544054JEM499
Minayo, M. C. de S., & Sanches, O. (1993). Quantitativo-qualitativo: Oposição ou complementaridade? Cadernos de Saúde Pública, 9(3), 237–248. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0102-311X1993000300002
Minayo, M. C. de S. (2012). Análise qualitativa: Teoria, passos e fidedignidade. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, 17(3), 621–626. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1413-81232012000300007
Myers, M. D. (2013). Qualitative research in business and management. London UK: SAGE Publications.
Nadkarni, S., & Chen, J. (2014). Bridging yesterday, today, and tomorrow: CEO temporal focus, environmental dynamism, and rate of new product introduction. Academy of Management Journal, 57(6), 1810–1833. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.0401
Nemanich, L. A., Keller, R. T., & Vera, D. (2007). Managing the exploration/exploitation paradox in new product development. International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management, 4(3), 351–374. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219877007001132
O’Reilly, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2008). Ambidexterity as a dynamic capability: Resolving the innovator’s dilemma. Research in Organizational Behavior, 28, 185–206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2008.06.002
O’Reilly, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2013). Organizational ambidexterity: Past, present, and future. Academy of Management Perspectives, 27(4), 324–338. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2013.0025
Ossenbrink, J., Hoppmann, J., & Hoffmann, V. H. (2019). Hybrid ambidexterity: How the environment shapes incumbents’ use of structural and contextual approaches. Organization Science, 30(6), 1125-1393. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2019.1286
Peng, M. Y. P., Lin, K. H., Peng, D. L., & Chen, P. (2019). Linking organizational ambidexterity and performance: The drivers of sustainability in high-tech firms. Sustainability, 11(14), 3931. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11143931
Perrin, B. (2002). How to — and How Not to — Evaluate innovation. Evaluation, 8(1), 13–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/1358902002008001514
Popadić, M., Černe, M., & Milohnić, I. (2015). Organizational ambidexterity, exploration, exploitation and firms innovation performance. Organizacija, 48(2), 112–119. https://doi.org/10.1515/orga-2015-0006
Popadiuk, S., Luz, A. R. S., & Kretschmer, C. (2018). Dynamic capabilities and ambidexterity: How are these concepts related? Revista de Administração Contemporânea, 22(5), 639–660. https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-7849rac2018180135
Porac, J. F., & Thomas, H. (2002). Managing cognition and strategy: Issues, trends and future directions. In Handbook of Strategy and Management (pp. 165–181). Londron, UK: Sage Publications. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781848608313.n8
Pryor, C., Holmes, R. M., Webb, J. W., & Liguori, E. W. (2019). Top executive goal orientations’ effects on environmental scanning and performance: Differences between founders and nonfounders. Journal of Management, 45(5), 1958–1986. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206317737354
Radner, R., & Rothschild, M. (1975). On the allocation of effort. Journal of Economic Theory, 10(3), 358–376. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0531(75)90006-X
Raisch, S., Birkinshaw, J., Probst, G., & Tushman, M. L. (2009). Organizational ambidexterity: Balancing exploitation and exploration for sustained performance. Organization Science, 20(4), 685–695. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1090.0428
Raisch, S., & Zimmermann, A. (2017). Pathways to ambidexterity: A process perspective on the exploration–exploitation paradox. In The Oxford Handbook of Organizational Paradox. New York, NY: Oxford Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198754428.013.17
Ries, E. (2011). The lean startup. New York, New: Crown Business.
Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The theory of economic development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Siggelkow, N., & Levinthal, D. A. (2003). Temporarily divide to conquer: Centralized, decentralized, and reintegrated organizational approaches to exploration and adaptation. Organization Science, 14(6). https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.14.6.650.24840
Smith, W. K., & Tushman, M. L. (2005). Managing strategic contradictions: A top management model for managing innovation streams. Organization Science, 16(5), 522–536. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1050.0134
Solís-Molina, M., Hernández-Espallardo, M., & Rodríguez-Orejuela, A. (2018). Performance implications of organizational ambidexterity versus specialization in exploitation or exploration: The role of absorptive capacity. Journal of Business Research, 91, 181–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.06.001
Stelzl, K., Röglinger, M., & Wyrtki, K. (2020). Building an ambidextrous organization: a maturity model for organizational ambidexterity. Business Research, 13(3), 1203–1230. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40685-020-00117-x
Stubner, S., Blarr, W. H., Brands, C., & Wulf, T. (2012). Organizational ambidexterity and family firm performance. Journal of Small Business and Entrepreneurship, 25(2), 217–229. https://doi.org/10.1080/08276331.2012.10593570
Tamayo-Torres, J., Roehrich, J. K., & Lewis, M. A. (2017). Ambidexterity, performance and environmental dynamism. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 37(3), 282–299. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-06-2015-0378
Tarba, S. Y., Jansen, J. J. P., Mom, T. J. M., Raisch, S., & Lawton, T. C. (2020). A microfoundational perspective of organizational ambidexterity: Critical review and research directions. Long Range Planning, 53(6), 102048. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2020.102048
Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(2), 1319–1350. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj
Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509–533. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199708)18:7%3C509::AID-SMJ882%3E3.0.CO;2-Z
Tian, M., Deng, P., Zhang, Y., & Salmador, M. P. (2018). How does culture influence innovation? A systematic literature review. Management Decision, 56(5), 1088–1107. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-05-2017-0462
Tikkanen, H., Lamberg, J. A., Parvinen, P., & Kallunki, J. P. (2005). Managerial cognition, action and the business model of the firm. Management Decision, 43(6), 789–809. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251740510603565
Tushman, M. L., & O’Reilly, C. A. (1996). Ambidextrous organizations: Managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. California Management Review, 38(4), 8–30. https://doi.org/10.2307/41165852
Úbeda-García, M., Claver-Cortés, E., Marco-Lajara, B., & Zaragoza-Sáez, P. (2019). Toward a dynamic construction of organizational ambidexterity: Exploring the synergies between structural differentiation, organizational context, and interorganizational relations. Journal of Business Research, 112, 363-372. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.10.051
Webster, J., & Watson, R. T. (2002). Analyzing the Past To Prepare for the Future: Writing a Review. MIS Quarterly, 26(2), xiii–xxiii. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/4132319
Wei, Z., Zhao, J., & Zhang, C. (2014). Organizational ambidexterity, market orientation, and firm performance. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 33, 134–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jengtecman.2014.06.001
Wilden, R., Hohberger, J., Devinney, T. M., & Lavie, D. (2018). Revisiting James March (1991): Whither exploration and exploitation? Strategic Organization, 16(3), 352–369. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476127018765031
Wilms, R., Winnen, L. A., & Lanwehr, R. (2019). Top Managers’ cognition facilitate organisational ambidexterity: The mediating role of cognitive processes. European Management Journal, 37(5), 589–600. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2019.03.006
Winter, S. G. (2003). Understanding dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 24(10 Spec), 991–995. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.318
Zollo, M., & Winter, S. G. (2002). Deliberate learning and the evolution of dynamic capabilities. Organization Studies, 13(3), 339–351. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.13.3.339.2780