In search of ambidexterity
The concept of ambidexterity and particularly the concept of exploitation are ambiguous. March (1991), a study that became the theoretical basis for several research studies, asserted that exploitation has a trade-off relationship with exploration including innovation, and on the basis of this aspec...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Global Business Research Center
2020-08-01
|
| Series: | Annals of Business Administrative Science |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/abas/19/4/19_0200621a/_pdf/-char/en |
| Summary: | The concept of ambidexterity and particularly the concept of exploitation are ambiguous. March (1991), a study that became the theoretical basis for several research studies, asserted that exploitation has a trade-off relationship with exploration including innovation, and on the basis of this aspect, Levinthal and March (1993) proposed the myopia of learning. Nevertheless, Levinthal later modeled exploitation that can be called as innovation. Some argued that exploration and exploitation are bipolar on one axis, and some argued that they are two orthogonal axes. In this study, we proposed using Lévi-Strauss’ “bricolage” instead of “exploitation.” This bricolage is a concept of making do with the tools and materials at hand (performing innovation), and bricolage and exploration are used together with ambidexterity being the normal form. We examine this aspect by using Japan’s response to the current Coronavirus disease pandemic as an example. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1347-4464 1347-4456 |