Structuring Ambidextrous Organizations: Exploitation and Exploration as a Key for Long-Term Success

  • Gaëtan Devins
  • Caroline N. Kähr


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Argyris, C. 1977. Double loop learning in organizations. Harvard Business Review, 55(5): 115-125.Google Scholar
  2. Beckman, C. M. 2006. The Influence of Founding Team Company Affilations on Firm Behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4): 741-758.Google Scholar
  3. Benner, M. J., & Tushman, M. L. 2003. Eploitation, Exploration, and Process Management: The Productivity Dilemma Revisited. Academy of Management Review, 28(2): 238-256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Burns, T., & Stalker, G. 1961. The Management of Innovation. London: Tavistock.Google Scholar
  5. Bushe, G. R., & Shani, A. B. 1988. A Review of the Literature on the Use of Parallel Learning Structure Interventions in Bureaucratic Organizations. Academy of Management Best Papers Proceedings, 258-262.Google Scholar
  6. Christensen, C.M. 1997. The Innovator’s Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail illustrated edition. Mcgraw-Hill Professional, Columbus.Google Scholar
  7. Collins, J. C., & Porras, J. I. 1994. Companies need not hire outside CEOs to stimulate fundamental change. Directorship, 19(9): 8-10.Google Scholar
  8. D’Aveni, R. A. 1994. Hypercompetition. New York, Free Press.Google Scholar
  9. Dewar, R. D., & Dutton, J.E. 1986. The Adoption of Radical and Incremental Innovations: An Empirical Analysis. Management Science, 32(11): 1422-1433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Duncan, R. B. 1976. The ambidextrous organization: Designing dual structures for innovation. In R. H. Kilmann, L. R. Pondy, & D. Slevin (Eds.): The management of organization (pp. 167-188). North-Holland, New York.Google Scholar
  11. Farjaudon, A., & Saulerot, M. 2006. Les implications du dilemme exploitation / exploration sur le contrôle de gestion: le cas d’une entreprise de produits de grande consommation. Research Paper.Google Scholar
  12. Floyd, S. W., & Lane, P. J. 2000. Strategizing throughout the Organization: Managing Role Conflict in Strategic Renewals. Academy of Management Review, 25(1): 154-177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Foster, R. N., & Kaplan, S. 2001. Creative destruction. New Yersey, Financial Times Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  14. Gibson, C.B., & Birkinshaw, J. 2004. The Antecedents, Consequences, and Mediating Role of Organizational Ambidexterity. Academy of Management Journal, 47(2): 209-226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Goldstein, S. G. 1985. Organizational Dualism and Quality Circles. Academy of Management Review, 10(3): 504-517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Grant, R. M. 1996. Prospering in Dynamically-competitive Environments: Organizational Capability as Knowledge Integration. Organization Science, 7(4): 375-387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hage, J. T. 1999. Organizational Innovation and Organizational Change. Annual Review of Sociology, 25: 597-622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hambrick, D. C. 1983. Some Tests of the Effectiveness and Functional Attributes of Miles and Snow’s Strategic Types. Academy of Management Journal, 26(1): 5-26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. He, Z., Wong. 2004. Exploration vs. Exploitation: An Empirical Test of the Ambidexterity Hypothesis. Organization Science, 15(4): 481-494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jansen, J. 2005. Ambidextrous Organizations - A Multiple-level Study of Absorptive Capacity, Exploratory and Exploitative Innovation, and Performance. NL: Erasmus University Rotterdam.Google Scholar
  21. Levinthal, D. A., & March, J. G. 1993. The Myopia of Learning. Strategic Management Journal, 14: 95-112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lubatkin, M. H., Simsek, Z., Yan Ling, & Veiga, J.F. 2006. Ambidexterity and Performance in Smallto Medium-Sized Firms: The Pivotal Role of Top Management Team Behavioral Integration. Journal of Management, 32(5): 646-672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. March, J. G. 1991. Exploration and Exploitaiton in Organizational Learning. Organization Science, 2(1): 71-87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Miles, R. E., Snow, C. C., Meyer, A. D. & Coleman, J. 1978. Organizational Strategy, Structure, and Process. Academy of Management Review, 3(3): 546-562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. O’Reilly, M. L., & Tushman, C. A. 2004. The Ambidextrous Organization. Harvard Business Review, 82(4): 74-81.Google Scholar
  26. O’Reilly, M. L., & Tushman, C. A. 2007. Ambidexterity as a Dynamic Capability: Resolving the Innovator’s Dilemma. Research Paper.Google Scholar
  27. Peters, T. J., & Waterman Jr., R. H.1982. How the best-run companies turn so-so performers into big winners. Management Review, 71(11): 8-16.Google Scholar
  28. Prahalad, C. 1998. Growth strategies. Executive Excellence, 15(1): 6-7.Google Scholar
  29. Raisch, S. 2008. Balanced Structures: Designing Organizations for Profitable Growth. Long Range Planning, 41(5): 483-508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Raisch, S., & Birkinshaw, J. 2008. Organizational Ambidexterity: Antecedents, Outcomes, and Moderators. Journal of Management, 34(3): 375-409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Raisch, S., Probst, G. & Gomez, P. 2007. Wege zum Wachstum: Wie Sie nachhaltigen Unternehmenserfolg erzielen 1. Aufl. Gabler, Betriebswirt.-Vlg, Wiesbaden.Google Scholar
  33. Smith, W. K., & Tushman, M. L. 2005. Managing Strategic Contradictions: A Top Management Model for Managing Innovation Streams. Organization Science, 16(5): 522-536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Tushman, M. L., & Anderson, P. 1986. Technological Discontinuities and Organizational Environments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 31(3): 439-465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Tushman, M. L., & O’Reilly, C. A. 1996. Ambidextrous Organizations: Managing Evolutionary and Revolutionary Change. California Management Review, 38(4): 8-30.Google Scholar
  36. Tushman, M. L., Smith, W. K., Wood, R. C., Westerman, G., & O’Reilly, C. 2006. Organizational Desings and Innovation Streams. Research Paper.Google Scholar
  37. Vanhaverbeke, W., & Peeters, N. 2005. Embracing Innovation as Strategy: Corporate Venturing, Competence Building and Corporate Strategy Making. Creativity & Innovation Management, 14(3): 246-257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Volberda, H. W. 1996. Toward the Flexible Form: How to Remain Vital in Hypercompetitive Environments. Organization Science, 7(4): 359-374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wiggins, R. R., & Ruefli, T. W. 2002. Sustained Competitive Advantage: Temporal Dynamics and the Incidence and Persistence of Superior Economic Performance. Organization Science, 13(1): 82-105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Zand, D. 1974. Collateral Organization: A New Change Strategy. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 10(1): 63-89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Gabler Verlag | Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gaëtan Devins
    • 1
  • Caroline N. Kähr
    • 1
  1. 1.HECUniversity of GenevaGeneva

Personalised recommendations