Abstract

Organizational ambidexterity arises as an organization’s ability to employ efforts on contradictory goals, such as exploration and exploitation for longterm success and long-lasting performance. In addition, the organization faces risks inherent in the management of its administrative capacity. However, to date, we did not find a systematic qualitative-research review on risk and organizational ambidexterity. This paper fills this gap by systematically reviewing existing qualitative case studies on risk and organizational ambidexterity published in peer-reviewed journals. To fulfill this objective, we used a meta-synthesis of qualitative synthesis case studies in order to identify possible cause and effect relationships between the constructs and to propose a theoretical model. The results showed that risk and uncertainty influence the way the organization invests resources in exploration or in exploitation. Second, the findings indicated that risk moderates the direct effect of exploration and exploitation on performance and on decision making, amplifying or reducing their effects. Third, the framework suggests that risk has a direct effect on organizational performance, reducing it, or influencing strategic decision-making (ranging from intuitive to rational decision).

Highlights

  • There are several studies on business risk (Baird & Thomas, 1985; Power et al, 2009; Hopkin, 2018) and multiple texts dealing with the subject of exploration, exploitation, capabilities and organizational ambidexterity (March, 1991; Benner & Tushman, 2003)

  • Little is known about how risk management and organizational ambidexterity can be associated, or even as they form a scientific knowledge that can be used in administrative practice, generating a gap for research

  • With the intention of filling this gap, the objective of this article is to analyze and synthesize the causal relationships regarding the role of risk in the development of organizational ambidexterity and strategic decision-making, done via in qualitative case studies

Read more

Summary

Introduction

There are several studies on business risk (Baird & Thomas, 1985; Power et al, 2009; Hopkin, 2018) and multiple texts dealing with the subject of exploration, exploitation, capabilities and organizational ambidexterity (March, 1991; Benner & Tushman, 2003). Little is known about how risk management and organizational ambidexterity can be associated, or even as they form a scientific knowledge that can be used in administrative practice, generating a gap for research. In organizational studies, has several related definitions (Hopkin, 2018). Organizational ambidexterity, in turn, is defined as the capacity of the organization to act, with two objectives which are incompatible or contradictory (Birkinshaw & Gupta, 2013). The association between both constructs is possible since the company, having two capacities

Objectives
Methods
Results
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call