Organizational Ambidexterity for Innovation in Small Businesses

Lucas Silva Silveira; Amanda Wolek Rocha; Jefferson Marlon Monticelli

doi:10.5020/2318-0722.2025.31.e16991

Authors

Lucas Silva Silveira University of Vale do Rio dos Sinos, São Leopoldo, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil https://orcid.org/0009-0000-3469-2373
Amanda Wolek Rocha University of Vale do Rio dos Sinos, São Leopoldo, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8051-261X
Jefferson Marlon Monticelli University of Vale do Rio dos Sinos, São Leopoldo, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1605-7090

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5020/2318-0722.2025.31.e16991

Keywords:

exploitation, exploration, ambidexterity, innovation, small businesses

Abstract

Organizational ambidexterity is essential for understanding how firms balance different forms of innovation, incremental and exploratory, to ensure adaptation to changing environments and maintain competitiveness. Therefore, this study seeks to understand how organizational ambidexterity manifests during organizational transition processes and how it contributes to market expansion and the strategic adaptation of small businesses operating in emerging markets. Ambidexterity, comprising exploitation and exploration, refers respectively to the continuous improvement of existing processes and the pursuit of new business opportunities, both of which are critical for addressing challenges in environments characterized by rapid change and resource constraints. Although organizational ambidexterity has been extensively studied in large corporations and high-technology sectors, its application in small businesses, particularly during periods of organizational transition, remains insufficiently understood. The analysis was conducted through focus groups involving managers and employees from two companies that share the same core competencies. The findings indicate that, despite limitations in human and financial resources, it is possible to achieve both sequential and contextual ambidexterity simultaneously, balancing operational efficiency and innovation. From a theoretical perspective, this study contributes to the understanding of how small businesses develop ambidextrous capabilities during organizational transition processes. From a practical standpoint, it provides insights for managers facing the challenge of balancing operational efficiency and innovation in contexts characterized by change and resource constraints.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Translation

This article is a translation in English of the article: Ambidestria Organizacional para Inovação em Pequenas Empresas

Author Biographies

Lucas Silva Silveira, University of Vale do Rio dos Sinos, São Leopoldo, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil

Holds a Bachelor’s degree in Business Administration from University of Vale do Rio dos Sinos (UNISINOS), Porto Alegre, Brazil. He currently serves as Director of the Instituto Empreendedorismo de Verdade and as Founder and Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Startta.

Amanda Wolek Rocha, University of Vale do Rio dos Sinos, São Leopoldo, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil

Holds a Master’s degree in Business Administration from University of Vale do Rio dos Sinos (UNISINOS) and is currently pursuing a Ph.D. in Business Administration at the same institution. Her primary research interests include institutional theory, legitimacy, and international business.

Jefferson Marlon Monticelli, University of Vale do Rio dos Sinos, São Leopoldo, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil

Assistant Professor at University of Vale do Rio dos Sinos (UNISINOS). He completed a postdoctoral fellowship at the Department of Production and Operations Management of Getulio Vargas Foundation, São Paulo School of Business Administration (FGV EAESP), São Paulo, Brazil. During his doctoral studies, he was a visiting scholar at the Department of Business Studies, Uppsala University, Sweden.

References

Aftab, J., Veneziani, M., Sarwar, H., & Ishaq, M. I. (2022). Organizational ambidexterity, firm performance, and sustainable development: Mediating role of entrepreneurial orientation in Pakistani SMEs. Journal of Cleaner Production, 367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.132956

Belik, I., & Knudsen, M. P. (2022). Data-driven management of organizational networks for ambidexterity. Journal of Business Research, 152, 113555. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.113555

Berard, C., & Fréchet, M. (2020). Organizational antecedents of exploration and exploitation in SMEs: The role of structural and resource attributes. European Business Review, 32(2), 211–226. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-12-2018-0216

Birkinshaw, J., & Gibson, C. B. (2004). Building an ambidextrous organisation. Advanced Institute of Management Research Paper, 1(3). https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1306922

Brix, J. (2020). Building capacity for sustainable innovation: A field study of the transition from exploitation to exploration and back again. Journal of Cleaner Production, 122381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122381

Clauss, T., Abebe, M., Tangpong, C., & Hock, M. (2021). Organizational ambidexterity and competitive advantage: The role of strategic agility in the exploration–exploitation paradox. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 6(4), 203–213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2020.07.001

Duncan, R. B. (1976). The ambidextrous organization: Designing dual structures for innovation. In L. R. Kilmann, L. R. Pondy, & D. P. Slevin (Eds.), The management of organization design: Strategies and implementation (pp. 167–188). North-Holland.

Dunphy, D., & Stace, D. (1993). The Strategic Management of Corporate Change. Human Relations, 46(8), 905–920. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872679304600801

Garud, R., & Van De Ven, A. H. (2002). Strategic Change Processes. In A. M. Pettigrew, H. Thomas & R. Whittington (Eds.). Handbook of Strategy and Management (Cap. 10, pp. 207–232). Sage.

Gilsing, V. (2002). Exploration, exploitation and co-evolution in innovation networks [Doctoral dissertation, Erasmus University Rotterdam]. Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM).

Ginsberg, A. (1988). Measuring and modelling changes in strategy: Theoretical foundations and empirical directions. Strategic Management Journal, 9(6), 559–575. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250090604

He, Z., & Wong, P. (2004). Exploration vs. exploitation: An empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis. Organization Science, 15(4), 481–494. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1040.0078

Jaidi, Y., Liu, Y., & Ahmad, M. I. (2022). Ambidexterity behavior of creative SMEs for disruptive flows of innovation: A cross-cultural study. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 8(3), 141. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc8030141

Jansen, J. J. P., Vera, D., & Crossan, M. (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

Kokubun, K. (2025). Ambidextrous SMEs for a sustainable society: A narrative review considering digitalization, open innovation, human resources and green innovation. Next Research, 2(4), 100839. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nexres.2025.100839

Kolster, R. (2020). Structural ambidexterity in higher education: Excellence education as a testing ground for educational innovations. European Journal of Higher Education, 11(1), 64–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/21568235.2020.1850312

Laplume, A. O., & Dass, P. (2012). Exploration and exploitation approaches for various stages of firm growth through diversification. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2012(1), 14220. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2012.11420abstract

Lavie, D., Stettner, U., & Tushman, M. L. (2010). Exploration and exploitation within and across organizations. The Academy of Management Annals 4(1), 109–155. https://doi.org/10.1080/19416521003691287

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

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

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.

O’Reilly, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2004). The ambidextrous organization. Harvard Business Review, 82(4), 74–83. http://www.iot.ntnu.no/innovation/norsi-pims-courses/tushman/O%C3%86Reilly%20&%20Tushman%20(2004).pdf

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://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191308508000105

O’Reilly, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2011). Organizational ambidexterity in action: How managers explore and exploit. California Management Review, 53(4), 5–22. https://doi.org/10.1525/cmr.2011.53.4.5

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

O’Reilly, C. A., Harreld, J. B., & Tushman, M. L. (2009). Organizational ambidexterity: IBM and emerging business opportunities. California Management Review, 51(4), 75–99. https://doi.org/10.2307/41166506

Peng, X., Lockett, M., Liu, D., & Qi, B. (2022). Building dynamic capability through sequential ambidexterity: A case study of the transformation of a latecomer firm in China. Journal of Management & Organization, 28(3), 502–521. https://doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2019.64

Pettit, K. L., Balogun, J., & Bennett, M. (2023). Transforming Visions into Actions: Strategic change as a future-making process. Organization Studies, 44(11), 1775–1799. https://doi.org/10.1177/01708406231171889

Porter, M. E. (1991). Towards a dynamic theory of strategy. Strategic Management Journal, 12(2 S), 95–117. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250121008

Rajagopalan, N., & Spreitzer, G. M. (1996). Towards A Theory Of Strategic Change: A Multi-Lens Perspective And Integrative Framework. Academy of Management Proceedings. 51-55. https://doi.org/10.5465/ambpp.1996.4978183

Reischl, A., Böhm, S., & Homburg, C. (2022). Contextual ambidexterity: Tackling the exploitation and exploration dilemma of innovation management in SMEs. International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management, 19(2). https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219877022500067

Shiu, J.-M., Dallas, M. P., Wang, Z.-R., & Lin, P.-Y. (2023). The generational transition and sequential ambidexterity in the Android ecosystem. Academy of Management Proceedings,2023(1), 12082. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMPROC.2023.12082abstract

Silva, K. A. L. da, Souza, A. P. de, Brito, R. M., Cruz, F. C., Pinheiro, K. C., & Silva, M. M. da. (2025). Ambidestria organizacional como competência estratégica: O equilíbrio entre exploração e explotação. Revista de Gestão e Secretariado, 16(6), 01–17. https://doi.org/10.7769/gesec.v16i6.4944

Smith, W. K., Binns, A., & Tushman, M. L. (2010). Complex business models: Managing strategic paradoxes simultaneously. Long Range Planning, 43(2–3), 448–461. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2009.12.003

Sun, X., Rong, N., Sun, M., & Zhu, F. (2023). Combining structural and sequential ambidexterity: A configurational approach using fsQCA. Management and Organization Review, 19(4), 803–837.

Sutcliffe, K., Sitkin, S., & Browning, L. (2000). Tailoring process management to situational requirements. In R. Cole & W. Scott (Eds.), The quality movement & organization theory, 315–330.

Taylor, A., & Helfat, C. E. (2009). Organizational linkages for surviving technological change: Complementary assets, middle management, and ambidexterity. Organization Science, 20(4), 718–739. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1090.0429

Teece, D. J., Peteraf, M., & Leih, S. (2016). Dynamic capabilities and organizational agility: Risk, uncertainty, and strategy in the innovation economy. California Management Review, 58(4), 13–35. https://doi.org/10.1525/cmr.2016.58.4.13

Tian, H., Dogbe, C. S. K., Pomegbe, W. W. K., Sarsah, S. A., & Otoo, C. O. A. (2020). Organizational learning ambidexterity and openness as determinants of SMEs’ innovation performance. European Journal of Innovation Management, 24(2), 414–438. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-05-2019-0140

Tushman, M. L., & O’Reilly, C. A. (1996). Ambidextrous organizations: Managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. California Management Review, 38(4), 8–29. https://doi.org/10.2307/41165852

Tushman, M. L., & Romanelli, E. (1985). Organizational evolution: A metamorphosis model of convergence and reorientation. Research in Organizational Behavior, 7, 171–222. https://kendlevidian.pbworks.com/f/Tushman+%26+Romanelli+1985.pdf

Úbeda-García, M., Claver-Cortés, E., Marco-Lajara, B., & Zaragoza-Sáez, P. del C. (2020). Organizational ambidexterity in subsidiaries of knowledge-intensive sectors. Estudios Gerenciales, 36(157), 473–483. https://doi.org/10.18046/j.estger.2020.157.3906

Voss, G. B., & Voss, Z. G. (2013). Strategic ambidexterity in small and medium-sized enterprises: Implementing exploration and exploitation in product and market domains. Organization Science, 24(5), 1459–1477. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1120.0790

Wójcik-Karpacz, A., Karpacz, J., & Rudawska, J. (2019). Exploration and exploitation of good practices by technology parks: Empirical findings from Poland. Managing Global Transitions, 17(4), 317–334. https://doi.org/10.26493/1854-6935.17.317-334