A Meta-Analytical Review of Antecedents of Organizational Ambidexterity

A Meta-Analytical Review of Antecedents of Organizational Ambidexterity

Ishita Batra (Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi, India), Preethi P. (Sri Venkateswara College, University of Delhi, India) and Sanjay Dhir (Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi, India)
Copyright: © 2021 |Pages: 24
DOI: 10.4018/IJKM.2021100102
OnDemand PDF Download:
Available
$37.50
No Current Special Offers
TOTAL SAVINGS: $37.50

Abstract

The aim of the study is to conduct a structured review of literature on the antecedents of organizational ambidexterity by reconciling the mixed outcomes produced by the extant literature. This study offers some theoretical insights into the divergent views of authors on these factors by analysing the empirical studies done in the literature. This paper systematically analyses the extant literature on the factors affecting organizations' ambidexterity, using meta-analysis and the theory, context, characteristics, and methodology (TCCM) framework. Forty-three research papers across various journals that discussed the correlation of the variables with organizational ambidexterity were selected. The sample size was 17,383, and 20 variables were selected for the analysis. The results revealed that two variables showed high levels of heterogeneity. The implications of this study are relevant to the present business scenario and of substantial interest to scholars, as they provide a more detailed understanding of the very foundation of organizational ambidexterity.
Article Preview
Top

2. Literature Review 

The extant literature studies the antecedents of organizational ambidexterity in diverse contexts across different industries. Organizations face the challenge of advancing a capability with the two fundamental concepts of exploration and exploitation that come from distinct knowledge-processing capabilities (Floyd and Lane, 2000; Koryak et al., 2018). Exploitation refers to the actions which refine and expand the existing setup and concentrates more on the choice and application of the available and existing knowledge while contrarily exploration refers to the process of looking for opportunities by investigation and recombination to deepen knowledge and develop better competencies compared to the existing ones (Jansen et al., 2008; Lavie et al., 2011). While the domination of exploitation leads to routines below the standards, an increased focus on exploration may increase the experimentation costs (Nielsen, B. B., & Gudergan, S., 2012). Organizations often find it difficult to efficiently take out time and pursue both explorations to take care of the present demands and exploitation to tap future potentials (March, 1994; Koryak et al., 2018). For the improvement of exploration or exploitation, some antecedents of ambidexterity must be jointly considered (March, 1994). This paper thoroughly discusses each antecedent of ambidexterity identified, and its impact on organizational ambidexterity is analysed.

Complete Article List

Search this Journal:
Reset
Volume 18: 4 Issues (2022): 1 Released, 3 Forthcoming
Volume 17: 4 Issues (2021)
Volume 16: 4 Issues (2020)
Volume 15: 4 Issues (2019)
Volume 14: 4 Issues (2018)
Volume 13: 4 Issues (2017)
Volume 12: 4 Issues (2016)
Volume 11: 4 Issues (2015)
Volume 10: 4 Issues (2014)
Volume 9: 4 Issues (2013)
Volume 8: 4 Issues (2012)
Volume 7: 4 Issues (2011)
Volume 6: 4 Issues (2010)
Volume 5: 4 Issues (2009)
Volume 4: 4 Issues (2008)
Volume 3: 4 Issues (2007)
Volume 2: 4 Issues (2006)
Volume 1: 4 Issues (2005)
View Complete Journal Contents Listing